Kingdom denies deal with US on bases

Arab News ^ | 31 December 2002

[Lessismore]

RIYADH, 31 December 2002 — Saudi Arabia denied yesterday reports of a secret promise by Riyadh to make its airspace and bases available for use by the United States in the event of war against Iraq.

“This report is untrue. The Kingdom’s position on this issue has been very clear from the start,” Prince Abdul Rahman, deputy minister for defense and aviation told Okaz daily.

Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal told reporters during a visit to Sudan: “The truth is what I said, not what the newspaper reported.” Prince Saud was shown making the remarks on Al-Jazeera television while referring to a report in The New York Times on Sunday. The report quoted a top US military official as saying Saudi Arabia would cooperate with the United States in a war against Iraq by making its airspace, air bases and an important operations center available to the US.

“Even if the Security Council issues a unanimous decision to attack Iraq, we hope a chance will be given to the Arab states to find a political solution to this issue,” Prince Saud said.

Prince Abdul Rahman reiterated Saudi commitment to supporting the “UN decision regarding the imposition of the no-fly zone over southern Iraq.”

“This is well-known to all ... The Kingdom is committed to the UN resolutions like all other countries (but) we are not concerned with anything else,” he said in reference to the Times report.

Prince Saud last Tuesday renewed the Kingdom’s rejection of a threatened US war against neighboring Iraq, saying Riyadh would not take part in any military action. “If the UN Security Council sanctions war against Iraq, this requires cooperation by all countries ... But this does not mean all countries must take part in military action. Obviously, we will not take part in military actions,” Prince Saud said. “There has been no change in the duties of foreign troops in the Kingdom since the end of the 1991 Gulf War.” (Agencies)

[My2Cents]

You're either with us, or you're against us.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

We'll find out soon enough. Saudi is saying this to keep the peace with their allies. They'll cooperate with us because they don't want to lose their business deals and other goodies with us.

[Leisler]

Prince Saud. Oh, really? Well prince this, you camel doink sucking limp wrist human smudge stain. Your women are ugly, and smelly to boot. Your males are wimps, wooses, braggart strutting lightweights that couldn’t fight their way out of bar at Burning Tree golf course filled with 70 year old drunk bypass survivors. Your Navy can’t cast off from the docks without foreign advisors. Your Air Force would be little more than drone target for any of our states Air Guard. We have police departments that would beat your army. Your nation, such that it is, is noted for oil found by American and Brits, drilled and pumped by them, and worked by Koreans and Philippineoes all and any of which are worth more than a thousand hand out, check begging Saudi losers. Before 9/11 we thought of you as drunk, low watt, creepy, oily suck up and pathetic wanna be’s. Now we just hate you, you slimy two faced babble merchant.

[Shermy]

Saudi has been against any change in Iraq because increased oil production by Iraq with the removal of sanctions will cost the Saudis billions. The Saudis "generously" made up the difference between pre-war and sanction regime Iraqi production levels. They profit from sanctions, to wit, keeping Saddam in place, and will fight for this until the end. If hopeless, they will "join" us to salvage something, and spend much PR money telling the sheep how much Saudi is the US' friend.

Here's a quote from an OPEC analyst, effectively urging Russia to oppose liberation of Iraq:

The ideal outcome for Russia is exactly the same as that for Saudi Arabia and OPEC, i.e. maintenance of the status quo and the sanctions regime on Iraqi oil. Thus, Russia's opposition to a U.S. invasion of Iraq is completely rational.

Opposition to a war to rid Hussein is mostly about oil- the production interests of the producers, and the development interests of France, Russia and others.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

Good stuff!

[Eaker]

I was able to discern your displease with the Saudis; by reading between the lines of course!!

;>)

Stay safe; stay armed.

[PsyOp]

Beautiful rant!

[Momaw Nadon]

We'll find out soon enough.

Attack on Iraq Betting Pool

[Prodigal Son]

This is the Arab News. Of course Saudi has to say this. Even in the reports from yesterday they were saying the Saudis were "quietly allowing" the Americans to use the bases. This denial is just for show on the Saudi home front.

[marron]

increased oil production by Iraq with the removal of sanctions will cost the Saudis billions.

This is true, and yet I am surprised just the same. Obviously the sanctions serve Saudi interests, as it tends to keep a portion of Iraqi oil off the market. It serves EU interests, as it makes their sanctions-busting deals that much more profitable, while keeping the US from competing. It appears to serve Russia's interest, although I would assert the contrary, in that Russia has influence in the region and fears the further loss of prestige in the face of an ascendant US.

It is also in Saudi Arabia's interest to avoid a regime change in Baghdad, if that regime change could possibly lead to a secular quasi-democracy, as the presence of such a regime would de-stabilize their own rule.

Turkey has a strong interest in seeing the continuation of fascist, nationalist, rule in Baghdad, as any regime that does not oppress the Kurds is a threat to its own rule in Turkish Kurdistan.

But all of them, the Saudis, the Turks, the Russians and the French, must factor into their calculations the following:

What will the world look like if the US goes ahead with its plans in the region, without their aid and support? What will the world look like if the US has to carry out its operations in the face of their obstructionism, and has no incentive to consider their interests in the aftermath?

The fall of Saddam opens the door to instability. The fall of Saddam, and a hostile US could seal the fate of some of Itaq's neighbors. Those countries that actively, and enthusiastically assist in the work ahead will be in a position to mold the outcome. Those who do not simply become part of the problem, and will lose all of their influence the very moment the troops roll.

[ROKGRUNT]

Some people are throwing down on the R.O.Korea because of a few knuclehead protesters.Eventhough the R.O.K. have been true and loyal allys for over half a century,I wonder if these are the same people who would have us believe the saudis are our friends or that this is a war against terrorism but not a war against islam.