Editorial»
The Saudi dilemma
NOV 19 - At around mid-night on 9-10 November, a suicide car bombing at a housing complex in Riyadh left 17 dead and more than 120 wounded. The terror attack in the holy Islamic month of Ramadan was described by officials as similar to the series of May 12 car bombings in Riyadh compounds housing foreigners that were blamed on the Al Qaeda terror network.
RAMADAN OUTRAGE
Most victims of the Ramadan outrage were Muslims, innocent families of middle-class professionals from Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and the Palestinian territories. Predictably, it provoked widespread condemnation in the Islamic world and beyond.
The Gulf Cooperation Council – whose membership is composed of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia – condemned the “cowardly and terrorist” bombing that “targeted innocent civilians” and reiterated its determination to pursue its efforts to counter and eradicate terrorism.
Jordan’s King Abdullah II expressed his “categorical and strong condemnation”, while Abdel Wahid Balqziz, secretary-general of the Organisation of Islamic Conference, denounced the bombing as a “horrendous terrorist act.” UN’s Kofi Annan condemned the attack in the strongest possible terms.
The Saudi Ambassador in London, Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former chief of intelligence, disclosed that the kingdom had had successes against militants in the last six months. “There were many arrests, many discoveries or arms caches, munitions and explosives.”
Notably, Riyadh newspapers that normally reflect official thinking said the suicide attacks that killed mostly Arabs had robbed militants of their claim to fight against the “infidel” presence in the cradle of Islam. The Al Qeada, as per the London-based Arab weekly Al-Majalla quoting e-mail from a purported operative explained that “working with Americans and mixing with them” was forbidden.
Significantly, the latest terror attacks in Riyadh came a day after all US missions in Saudia were closed for a security review in the light of a serious threat of terrorist attacks in the kingdom. Indeed, the US media had reported that Al Qaeda operatives might be planning to hijack cargo jets in Saudi Arabia, Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean and use them to attack power plants and other critical infrastructure.
US RESPONSE
The American response was immediate and entirely predictable. President George W Bush assured the de facto ruler, Crown Prince Abdullah, that the United States stood with his country in the wake of the latest deadly attack.
As a White House spokesman put it, “the president also told the crown prince that the United States stands with Saudi Arabia in the war against terrorism.” A month ago, a US official had disclosed that US-Saudi cooperation in the fight against terrorism had improved exponentially since attack on expatriate compounds in Riyadh on May 12.
Be that as it may, Joseph Biden, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he hoped the attack would serve as a wake-up call for the Saudis, making them “stop building those madrassas and get serious” about the war on terrorism.
Biden’s blunt comments are related to the general American perception in the United States that Saudi rulers are not doing enough to tackle the Al Qaeda scourge in the kingdom, although it has to be admitted that such a seemingly nonchalant attitude underwent a sea change in the aftermath of the May 12 bombings.
It is also connected to the revealing fact that of the 19 hijackers of the 9/11 outrage that resulted in the deaths of over 3,000 individuals in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania 15 were Saudi nationals.
Against the backdrop of the two horrendous terror attacks in Riyadh this year, the latest brazenly during Ramadan, the Saudis have no doubt become serious.
As much is reflected in Interior Minister Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz’s insistence that the kingdom would not be destabilised, vowing that “we will get them, (the perpetrators), God willing, no matter how long it takes. This will be a job for all the sons of this homeland, chiefly security forces, until we can rest assured that our country is free of devils and wicked people.” Nayef also suggested that the bombers were Islamic radicals. Hundreds had been rounded up by the security forces after May 12.
Equally evocative of the Saudi determination not to go soft on the Al Qeada is that Riyadh has pledged to take on Islamic militants fighting to overthrow the regime only “with guns and swords”, spurning a move of Muslim clerics to mediate in a bid to stop further suicide bombings.
It is, of course, the general perception that Al Qaeda chief, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, plans to “bring down the Saudi government and to create fear and spread terror”, as visiting US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage put it.
DILEMMA
Till May this year, the Saudi authorities had been pursuing a delicate balancing act between cooperating with the Americans in the “war against terror” with a determination not to upset Saudi radicals who have sympathies with Al Qaeda.
Such a policy is understandable given that there is a latent reservoir of support for Islamic radicalism in the land of Mecca and Medina, possessor not only of one fourth of the world’s total reserves of petroleum but also the home of Wahhabiism, an Islamic puritanical doctrine preached by Mohammad bin Abn al-Wahhab in the 18th century.
Now, however, Riyadh has, willy nilly, to make a choice and join with the international forces, led by the United States, fighting international terrorism, including that of the sort perpetrated by the Al Qaeda terror network across the globe, the latest example of which were lethal suicide attacks against two synagogues in Istanbul just the other day.
While, on the one hand, there is little doubt that the US in particular, and the West more generally, must be pleased (although it would be the height of political incorrectness to admit as much publicly), there is the danger that increased closeness with the American “infidel” will turn off the Saudis and perhaps even encourage them to work towards the toppling of the House of Saud.
Who knows, it could be precisely on such cynical calculations that the terror attacks in Saudi Arabia have been planned and executed by Al Qaeda with such terrible ferocity and ruthlessness?
Hitherto, in an effort to stem the rising tide of political demands for reforms, the Saudis had begun a reforms programme. Here it will be germane to recall that not too long ago, the Saudis announced that some municipal councils would be elected rather than appointed, beginning in a year or two. They also say that this time the polls are a constituent of a reform package in response to the country’s exploding population, declining oil wealth – and the growing terrorist problem.
However, as Mai Yamani, a Saudi Arabian research fellow at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London says, as per the Guardian, “ they talk about reform but they (the rulers) have done nothing.” She added, “since May, several of my colleagues in Saudi Arabia have lost their jobs because they criticised the religious establishment.”
The Saudi dilemma is an acute one. The world, including the Al Qaeda, will closely watch how that nettle is grasped by Riyadh.
Posted on: 2003-11-18 10:06
Headlines
Advertisements
