Pro-Israel Senators Call For Sanctions Against Saudis

by Emad Mekay

But some observers say the bill might not pass because of the longtime economic and strategic ties between Washington and the oil-rich Arab kingdom.

The Saudi Arabia Accountability Act for 2003 was sponsored late last week by a group led by hawkish Republican senator Arlen Specter, a senior member of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.

Two other members of President George W. Bush's Republican Party and four opposition Democrats also sponsored the bill, which has been referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and the administration.

Following the introduction of the bill, another ardent pro-Israel congressman, Representative Anthony Weiner, a Democrat from New York State, announced he intends to introduce the House version of the act. At least 18 representatives responded to his call for co-sponsors.

The legislation follows a "template" of sorts that appears to have been developed by pro-Israel senators and representatives.

It includes the Arafat Accountability Act, introduced earlier this year, which calls on Washington to seize the assets of the Palestinian Authority and its leader in the United States, among other measures designed to penalize Arafat for his alleged abetting of terrorism against Israel.

The act was shelved after the administration said it could be counter-productive to its plans in the Middle East.

It was followed by the Syria Accountability Act, which was passed two weeks ago. It imposes economic and diplomatic sanctions to punish Damascus, which Washington accuses of allowing Arab fighters access Iraq to attack U.S. forces there.

Washington also says Damascus supports Palestinian groups fighting Israel.

The Saudi Accountability Act bill would require the president to certify annually that Riyadh, a veteran Washington ally, has met an extensive list of strict conditions related to fighting terror and cooperating with the United States in related investigations.

Washington would impose sanctions, including prohibiting the export of any defense articles to Saudi Arabia, barring export of materials that could be used for both military and civilian use, and restricting travel of Saudi diplomats to a 40-km radius of the city in which their offices are located.

The travel restrictions would apply to the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C., the Saudi United Nations mission in New York and consulates located in Houston and Los Angeles.

"Evidence has come to light that there has been enormous financing of al-Qaeda, Hamas and other terrorist organizations by the Saudis," Specter said introducing the bill on the Senate floor.

"Anybody who contributes to an organization knowing that it is a terrorist organization is really an accessory before-the-fact to murder."

Riyadh denies links to terrorist groups, saying that it is also a target of terrorist attacks, including a bombing earlier this month that left 17 people dead in a compound housing mainly Arab foreign workers. Officials vowed to use an "iron fist" against the militants responsible.

But the Senate bill, seen by IPS, refers only once to al-Qaeda, yet talks repeatedly of alleged Saudi support to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), suggesting that the real aim of the bill is further Arab guarantees of Israel's security.

The bill quotes The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), a staunchly pro-Israel organization founded by former officers of the Israeli intelligence apparatus and U.S. Jewish right-wing scholars, saying that the Arab country gave four billion dollars to Hamas since the Palestinians started their uprising, or Intifada, against the Israeli occupation in September 2000.

The draft bill also uses the rhetoric often directed against Arab nations by Israeli right-wing politicians -- that their schoolbooks teach hatred towards the Jewish state.

The bill is not the only current initiative here against Saudi Arabia.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has also recommended that Congress authorize and fund a public study to determine whether the Saudi government is directly or indirectly funding efforts to propagate globally an ideology that promotes hate, intolerance and other human rights violations.

At a Nov. 18 hearing the commission heard from witnesses including Martin Indyk, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel and a Democratic veteran of the Clinton administration who is allied with neo-conservatives hawks that take a tough stance against Arab nations.

Analysts following U.S.-Saudi Arabia relations say regardless of the Specter bill's target and its weighty Republican sponsors, it is unlikely to pass for several reasons.

Saudi Arabia has one-fourth of the world's proven oil reserves, according to industry figures. The United States bought 18 percent of its foreign oil last year from Saudi Arabia, or nearly one-fourth of Saudi exports.

"For that reason, there are important actors in the U.S. who are likely to oppose the legislation," said Nathan Brown, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University in Washington.

Also impeding the bill is the close security relationship between the two countries.

A State Department spokesman told IPS the administration is "pleased" with Saudi security cooperation. Greg Sullivan said the administration's view has been that measures like the Specter bill could be counter- productive.

Others say that even if the bill did pass, it might never be implemented. The bill also has an unqualified waiver provision, meaning that sanctions could be suspended by the president for any reason, added Brown.

"Therefore it seems likely that the intention on the part of the sponsors is to take a symbolic rather than a practical step."

"The Democratic sponsors might also wish to embarrass the Bush administration, which has kept some of the disputes with Saudi Arabia out of public view."

Tamara Cofeman Wittes, a Middle East specialist at the United States Institute of Peace, said the bill sends a strong message to Saudi Arabia -- but it is unlikely to go far because it is too limited.

"The bill is too narrowly focused," she said, adding that it overlooks many other concerns with Riyadh that could have brought more senators on board, including human rights and religious freedom.

Analysts note that one major problem with the U.S.-Saudi relationship is that the governments of the two countries have always valued it more than their populations. Public pressure on both administrations hinders them from making public moves towards each other.

Brown said while Washington recognizes, for example, that certain Saudi initiatives -- like the Middle East peace plan announced last year to strike peace deals between Israel and all of the Arab countries -- are positive steps, the U.S. public did not appreciate the overture.

"Saudi Arabia is not popular among the U.S. public at large, just as the U.S. is not popular among the Saudi public," Brown said. "For the first time, public opinion is deeply disrupting what had been a very close relationship for over half a century."