Back to: Evert's homepage.
Back to: Menu

Saudi Arabia and the second "back door" towards Kyoto. In my small article on NG and power in the USA I stated that a combined shortage of NG and power might push President Bush back on the trail towards Kyoto. There is also a second "back door": The political situation in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi connection ... On the video tape of Osama bin Laden which was released by the US authorities the Saudi sheikh thanked Bin Laden: "You have given us weapons, you have given us hope and we thank Allah." He was referring to "the brothers". One could ask: Where? Within Saudi Arabia? It should be borne in mind that the way the Wahabites (an ultra orthodox Islamic sect which is very influential in Saudi Arabia) look upon the world isn't differing very much from the views of the Taliban. It is widely known that Bin Laden's Al Qaida network is being supplied from Saudi Arabia over the years with money, religious ideology and followers.(•) The Madrassas in Pakistan, the breeding grounds of the Taliban, are supported from Saudi Arabia. Extreme anti USA sentiment, e.g. the approval of the September 11th assaults, has been condemned by the majority of Islamic scholars. ... the clerics ... However, a number of prominent Saudi clerics expressed different views. The former lecturer Suleiman Alwan said "this was jihad and those people [killed in America] were not innocent." Sheikh Hamoud bin-Uqla al-Shuaibi, from the city of Buraydah, when asked about the September 11th attacks said America was "an enemy of the Muslim nations and at war with them". Many clerics also urged support for the Taliban to come from the Saudi religious establishment. They include Sheikh Abdullah bin Jibreen, once of the department of religious research and guidance and Sheikh Abdullah al-Ghunayman, a former head of higher studies at Medina University. In an open letter to President Bush published in October by Sheikh Safar al-Hawali, a controversial Saudi preacher, was written that "Muslims felt a 'wave of joy' as well as shock at the events of September 11th. Whoever tells you otherwise is avoiding the truth." (•)  Postscript 23/9/2007: Finally Osama Bin Laden has been berated by a man of unimpeachable authority, Salman al-Oadah, a well known Salafist scholar, as can be read in this article in IHT. As this criticism comes from an ultra orthodox man, who is regarded as the mentor of Osama Bin Laden, this might be of considerable significance within the islamic world.. ... and the odds of the present regime. The income inequality among the population of Saudi Arabia is quite large. On the one hand there are the approximately 20.000 members of the Royal Family, who are extremely rich. They collect most of the Oil revenues. On the other hand there are many people living under much less confortable conditions. We see a combination of effluent people with a lot of free time, while the range of acceptable careers available to them is very limited on the one hand, and a lot of guest workers doing the work on the other hand. A peculiar combination. Add to this the fact that the ruling class in Saudi Arabia is often in the news in a rather negative way (corruption), and one obtains an explosive mixture. If the Saudi Royal Family is thrown out of office, the end result might be an ultra orthodox Islamic regime which is much less friendly to the USA (to say the least ...). If such a government decides to cut back the oil export towards the USA the Americans will have a problem. "Solving it the Irak way", by means of massive (and excessive) violence, won't be feasible. Then the whole Islamic world will turn itself against the USA. And secondly, unlike in the case of the September 11th assaults, they will stand alone. Only Israel and maybe - reluctantly - the UK will support them in such a war. Oil from elsewhere? How far the USA is willing to go to get its hands on oil fields all over the world is shown in a book "The Forbidden Truth", written by two French intelligence analysts, Jean Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquié. It highlighted the role of the USA and its oil corporations in Afghanistan, stating that weeks before the New York Terrorist Attack the USA was attempting to swap the delivery of Bin Laden for aid and political recognition, with its oil companies eyeing up the fields of Turkmenistan. At that point the Taliban were still largely thought of as a useful group of allies to have in Afghanistan. The book also confirms that John O'Neill, former head of the FBI's counter-terrorismoffice in New York handed in his notice after his investigations into Al Qaida had been obstructed. He stated that, "the main obstacles to investigating Islamic terrorism were US corporate oil interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia". Now the Taliban has been removed from office the Turkmenistan oil fields might become within reach of the USA. However: Oil from there reaching the USA will take at least some 5 years. Thousands of miles of pipeline are not constructed overnight. The same holds for oil from Alaska. Even if the controversial drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge gets a "go ahead" it will take at least another 5 years before the oil starts flowing. And will it be enough to make the imports from e.g. Saudi Arabia redundant? This is highly questionable if the USA goes on "doing business as usual". The second back door towards Kyoto Condoleezza Rice, national security advisor in the Bush administration, once stated that the Kyoto protocol was a threat to the security of the USA. It may well be the opposite. What is the most secure way to evade crippling oil shortages (e.g. a Saudi worst case scenario)? Going for energy efficiency doesn't require (possibly highly counterproductive) wars in the Middle East. The Americans have that entirely in their own hands. It is up to them to seize this opportunity ... Amsterdam, December 20th 2001, Mazzel & broge / kind regards, Evert Wesker

Back to: Evert's homepage.
Back to: Menu