SAUDI ARABIA: ISLAMIC THREAT, POLITICAL REFORM, AND THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR Sherifa Zuhur March 2005 Visit our website for other free publication downloads http://www.carlisle.army.mil/ssi To rate this publication click here. ***** The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. ***** I would like to thank C. Beau Daane, Colonel James Allen, Dr. W. Andrew Terrill, Ms. Kay Campbell, Dr. David Commins, Dr. Steven Metz, the friends and colleagues in Saudi Arabia for their suggestions and assistance, and my contacts in the democracy movement in other Arab states for improving my understanding of the arduous process of political change. ***** Comments pertaining to this report are invited and should be forwarded to: Director, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 122 Forbes Ave, Carlisle, PA 17013-5244. ***** All Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) monographs are available on the SSI Homepage for electronic dissemination. Hard copies of this report may also be ordered from our homepage. SSI’s Homepage address is: http://www.carlisle.army. mil/ssi/ ***** The Strategic Studies Institute publishes a monthly e-mail newsletter to update the national security community on the research of our analysts, recent and forthcoming publications, and upcoming conferences sponsored by the Institute. Each newsletter also provides a strategic commentary by one of our research analysts. If you are interested in receiving this newsletter, please let us know by e-mail at [email protected] or by calling (717) 245-3133. ISBN 1-58487-189-X ii FOREWORD U.S. foreign policy and the domestic concerns of Middle Eastern states are influencing the pursuit of the global war on terror in the Middle East. A close view of Saudi Arabia reveals the complex interaction of these forces. The U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia and the global war on terror are important challenges to the U.S. administration that have region-wide ramifications. Saudi Arabia has been facing down Islamist insurgency along with other challenges since September 11, 2001, and with even more urgency since May 2003. The Kingdom clearly remains a major political and economic force in the region. The income from its vast oil resources primarily has funded its strong influence, and the Kingdom has, in turn, sponsored poorer developing Arab nations. Furthermore, its Islamic influence has been apparent in the broader Muslim world, and the United States has maintained a strong relationship with the Kingdom for many decades. The current war on terror is testing the U.S. ability to craft and implement sound policy in the region and predict future strategic needs. Untended, Saudi-American antipathies might jeopardize an effective pursuit of counter- and antiterrorist strategies for the future. The Strategic Studies Institute is pleased to offer this monograph which examines the emergence and progress of an Islamist threat in Saudi Arabia and the simultaneous development of other forces for political change, and assesses the strategic situation in the Kingdom in light of the regional war on terrorism. DOUGLAS C. LOVELACE, JR. Director Strategic Studies Institute iii BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE AUTHOR SHERIFA ZUHUR is a Distinguished Visiting Research Professor of National Security Affairs at the Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College. She has been a faculty member or researcher at various universities including MIT; the University of California, Berkeley; and the American University in Cairo. Dr. Zuhur has lectured internationally, appeared on National Public Radio, television, and provided congressional briefings. Her research includes Islamic movements and insurgencies, modern Middle Eastern politics, war and peace in the Middle East, and social and cultural developments in the region. Dr. Zuhur has published 7 books and more than 27 monographs, articles, and chapters in edited books. Her most recent book is The Middle East: Politics, History, and Neonationalism in the Middle East (Institute of Middle Eastern, Islamic, and Diasporic Studies, 2005). She recently co-authored Islamic Rulings on Warfare, an SSI monograph, with Youssef El-Enein. Dr. Zuhur holds a B.A. in Political Science and Arabic, a Master’s in Islamic Studies, and a Ph.D. in Middle Eastern History, all from the University of California, Los Angeles. iv SUMMARY The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United States have been allies for more than half a century. In the wake of the terrible events of September 11, 2001, and in the midst of a Saudi battle against a wave of Islamist terrorism on their own soil, the two nations are drawing apart. This monograph questions this unfortunate advent in the context of Islamist challenges and the growth of forces for reform in the Kingdom. The Saudi government has been strongly criticized for setting too narrow an agenda and too slow a pace for change. External sources also debate the efficacy of measures taken to control Islamic terror cells, in particular those associated with al-Qa’ida on the Arabian Peninsula (QAP), and to rein in those who provide ideological support to extremism. Sources internal to Saudi Arabia argue that, as their entire state structure and society is founded on religious principles, they must move cautiously. As similar battles against Islamist extremists are being waged in Iraq today, it seems clear that the future of U.S.-Saudi relations is contingent on a redefinition of the two countries’ interests. Both have high stakes in the future of the war on terror in the region. American policymakers and military leadership urgently need to comprehend clearly the nature and interests of the “Islamic threat” in Saudi Arabia, as well as other broadly defined arguments swirling around the war on terror. Some have accused the Kingdom of gross sponsorship of terrorism. Yet they should distinguish the sectarian origins of Wahhabism from the new Islamic and Islamist discourses emerging in that country. As the U.S. policy for the global war on terror recommends the “forwarding of freedom” and prevention of “failed states,” Saudi Arabia’s reform movement has assumed new importance as well. U.S. policymakers should determine future courses of action in light of the various pitfalls inherent in bolstering authoritarianism, empowering reform, treating the Kingdom as an essentially unwelcome ex-ally, or abandoning it in the event of a serious challenge. The future of security in Saudi Arabia is related to the future of political, educational, administrative, and social reforms. Current U.S. strategy calls for the attainment of both aims. v Principal recommendations for U.S. policymakers include: 1. Developing a well-established plan in the event of catastrophic events in the Kingdom. 2. Creating, facilitating, and participating in ad hoc and formal multination discussions of antiterrorism and its relationship to democratic or other reforms. 3. Responding to Saudi conventional military and security needs and proposals regarding Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) force or multinational Muslim force creation. 4. Encouraging Saudi improvement and modernization of the General Intelligence Presidency, the Saudi intelligence service, including the areas of research, human intelligence, and strategic thinking. 5. Urging Saudi responsiveness to international efforts to improve human, legal, and workers’ (international) rights. This might be bolstered by the development of a Bill of Rights. 6. Examining and more carefully analyzing the influence of Saudi `ulama and Islamic institutions in the Kingdom and upon the progress of reform and democratization in neighboring countries. 7. Monitoring the impact on Saudi Arabia of the security situation in Iraq, and eliciting allies’ cooperation in monitoring travel for religious purposes in the Kingdom and regionally. 8. Encouraging the Saudi government in its efforts to increase political participation and administrative transparency. More detailed recommendations may be found on pages 48-50. vi SAUDI ARABIA: ISLAMIC THREAT, POLITICAL REFORM, AND THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR Introduction. Saudi Arabia has been under more U.S. scrutiny since the events of September 11, 2001 (9/11), than ever before. Both Saudis and Americans were shaken by the fact that 15 of the 19 jihadists who committed the crimes of 9/11 were Saudis. Had Saudi Arabia’s pan- Islamic policies, its global mission (da`wa) to foster Islam and Islamic knowledge, charities, and causes, licensed or nurtured Tanzim al- qa’ida fi jazirat al-`arab (al-Qa’ida on the Arabian Peninsula) and the subsequent hydra-like emergence of al-Qa’ida franchises? Saudis were even more disturbed by the May 6, 2003, discovery of a huge arms cache in Riyadh; followed by two major attacks on residential compounds there on May 12 and in November; further discoveries of arms; and by shootings, skirmishes with extremists, bombings, a beheading, drive-by killings, and an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah since, claiming the lives of over 176 policemen and civilians by December of 2004, many of whom were foreigners. That violence convinced Saudis that al-Qa’ida on the Arabian Peninsula (hereafter QAP) specifically, and Islamist extremism in general, pose a threat to their homeland, and not merely to the United States. Despite cooperation between counterterrorism agencies, that violence has threatened and negatively recast the shared interests of Saudi Arabia and America with regard to oil policy, the containment of Islamic threats, management of regional security, and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) state interactions. Fear, new impediments to dialogue, and acrimonious perceptions also have diminished the American share in the currently expanding Saudi economy, and discouraged travel on both sides. Thus, the QAP has been able to further one of its goals: attacking and wounding the relationship between America and the government of Saudi Arabia. QAP and other jihadist violence, and Saudi responses to it, coincided with the emergence of a multistranded Islamic opposition and calls for political reform from the 1990s to the present. The Awakening Shaykhs (clerics who represented rising Islamist 1 consciousness in the country), Saudi opposition groups, and liberal petitioners have effected to some degree a new method for engaging the government. They anticipate minor reforms and dream of major ones. The internal debate on the Islamist threat and the future of Islam is important, especially in view of concerns about succession and the economy. Both internally and externally, it has touched on the present and future role of religion in Saudi politics, and the Kingdom’s international endeavors in the service of Islam. The Saudis have taken numerous actions to confront the radicals. They have cooperated with other governments in this regard, including the United States, and are simultaneously waging an internal and external public relations campaign. All the same, Saudi self-scrutiny and U.S. condemnations of the country have not produced well-iterated policies or recommendations that will enhance strategies for the global war on terror (GWOT). This shortcoming is understandable because compelling questions about the undergirding and future of the Islamic threat are more perplexing than a simple query about the stability of the House of al-Saud. Saudis, unlike much of the Western world, are aware of the compelling nature of the Islamist phenomenon. They know that it transcends violent expressions, forcing liberal elites to accommodate a new discourse. In addition, observers are asking about the nature of the Saudi government, its contract with its citizens, and its future role in a Middle East that is to feature democratization alongside a war on terror. What impact will the GWOT as fought in the Kingdom have on any potential democratization, or on other regional actors? One could argue the stability of the Saudi royal family, the al- Saud, is reasonably secure. It is important that the family leadership determine succession without external pressure. Certain aspects of political struggle might emerge between the next King and his Crown Prince, and that prospect has not yet been factored into strategy for a war on terror. Previous crises have been managed successfully; for example, the transfer in 1958 of King Saud’s statutory powers to Prince Faisal,1 the assassination of King Faysal ibn `Abd al-`Aziz in 1975 by a nephew, and Juhayman al-`Utaybi’s 1979 uprising and take-over of the grand mosque in Mecca. However, some sources suggest that, as conflicts within the royal family might prove destabilizing or since other Gulf countries 2 also anticipate changes at the helm, potential Islamist strategies should be considered.2 An alternative to the Saudi royal family has not been the subject of any careful brainstorming by the political opposition, except for the extremists who call for the establishment of a caliphate. While the current form of Saudi monarchy may have no satisfactory alternative, uncritical U.S. support of authoritarian and repressive practices because of our commitment to the GWOT may belie our stated preference for democratization and human rights in the region. Saudi Arabia has been the subject of serious charges by Amnesty International, the Human Rights Watch Organization, the Commission on International Religious Freedom, women’s rights advocates, and a host of other critics who call for reform in the Kingdom. The government has reacted negatively or claimed that the consequences of such reforms are too politically risky. After many decades of suppressing internal expressions of dissent ranging from the late author `Abd al-Rahman Munif, who sharply criticized the Kingdom in his fictive portrayal of the “sultanate of Mooran” in Mudun al-Milh (Cities of Salt),3 to dissatisfied members of the elite or middle classes, Saudi rulers experienced new, collective demonstrations of discontent. The nature and effects of Wahhabism’s linkage with the state have been called into question, along with that ideology’s elements of extremist, or salafi (purist)-jihadist thought.4 It is the confusion between salafism and Wahhabism, or between versions of Wahhabism, and possibly the supporters of the clash of civilizations theory that fuel irresponsible, damaging critiques of the Kingdom. Introspection is taking place from Riyadh to the Hijaz, but if the U.S.-Saudi rift deepens, and if any of a number of other destabilizing factors take place, then some believe that the consequences will be dire. Saudis expressed concerns about a destabilized Lebanon and Syria, a weak Iraq, a threatened Iran, and U.S. establishment of “democracy hubs” via the McCain Act.5 Optimists think that anti-Americanism in Saudi Arabia may have peaked in 2003 and could be ebbing today. Pessimists warn that as the two nations retreat from each other, anti-Americanism will increase.6 Terrorist actions seen through the lens of anti-Saudi sentiment in the United States, stoked by the film, “Farenheit 9/11” 3 and books attacking politicians’ connections to the oil industry, evangelical preachers7 prejudice, and good old fashioned ignorance, were sufficient to argue for a retreat from Saudi Arabia. Let the Kingdom sort out its own problems. Americans could stage military actions from Qatar, and U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia have been reduced to 400. However, that withdrawal may have aggrandized Iraqi jihadist claims that Americans are wrongfully engaged on Muslim soil (dar al-Islam). Also, the uncontrolled Iraqi environment may represent the site for future organized campaigns against Saudi Arabia, or other neighbors of Iraq. The GWOT thus requires Saudi cooperation; otherwise, it will remain vaguely interpreted and unrealized. Eliciting Saudi cooperation, in the context of heightened anxieties about the “reshaping of the region,” would benefit from a theoretically sound policy. The most obviously applicable portions of U.S. policy on the GWOT are its stated aims of 1) eliminating terrorist sanctuaries— whether physical, ideological or cyber-sanctuaries—and 2) prevent- ing the growth of terrorism through a “forward strategy of freedom” that will support the rule of law, tolerance, openness, and progress toward democracy.8 The U.S. characterization of the causes of terror also suggests that actions should be taken to prevent Saudi Arabia from becoming a “failed state.” Here, the notion is that a successful state, one where freedom is present, is less likely to foster terrorism, although as we know, terrorists have managed to operate in the United States and in Europe. President Bush more explicitly related this trajectory to the Middle East: As long as the Middle East remains a place of tyranny and despair and anger, it will continue to produce men and movements that threaten the safety of America and our friends. So America is pursuing a forward strategy of freedom in the greater Middle East. We will challenge the enemies of reform, confront the allies of terror, and expect a higher standard from our friend. He also spoke of new media efforts and the encouragement of free elections, markets, press, and labor unions.9 Scholars of Islamic radicalism are highly divided on the causes of that phenomenon, though few would dispute the presence of 4