26 April 2002
Senator Biden Asks Saudis to Show Leadership in Peace Effort
(Compares Saudi and American responses to terrorism) (3850)
Senator Joseph Biden (Democrat of Delaware), the chairman of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called on Saudi Arabia to show
leadership in seeking peace for the Middle East, and compared the
actions and responses of Saudis and Americans to terrorism in an April
25 speech before the Senate.
Biden called a recent Saudi peace initiative on the conflict between
Israel and the Palestinians a "breakthrough that I publicly stated
several times in recent weeks has not been fully appreciated by the
world."
The Delaware Democrat noted that the Saudis "had endorsed unanimously
at the Arab League meeting last month in Beirut a plan that holds out
hope for normal peaceful relations between Arab States and Israel."
However, Biden said, "laying down that plan is not enough. It is time
for more mature leadership."
Biden asked what concrete steps Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah
would take on his return from meeting President Bush "to move the
process forward, to create a new environment that builds trust and
hope for a political settlement."
Biden, who as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, is the
Democratic party's chief spokesman on national security and foreign
policy issues, said he was "troubled" by the "apparent disconnect
between the initiatives for peace taken by the Crown Prince and his
nation, and the contradictory behavior that is prevalent in Saudi
Arabia and its policies."
Biden noted how in March the Saudi newspaper, Al-Riyadh, "carried a
vile, anti-Semitic article by someone claiming to be a professor."
The article describing preparations for the Jewish holidays said,
"Blood must be taken from a non-Jew, dried, and mixed with dough to
make pastries."
The article, he noted, goes on to say that using human blood in
pastries was a "'well-established fact historically and legally
throughout the history of mankind and that this was one of the main
reasons for the persecution of Jews and the exile of Jews in Europe
and Asia at different times.'"
Biden said, "Forgive me if I have a hard time believing that the
article simply slipped through the cracks and that it was a fluke,"
adding, "I can believe many things about Saudi Arabia, but freedom of
the press is not one of them."
The article, which talked of "Jewish vampires," was published "because
no one who saw it believed that it contained anything offensive or
untrue," said Biden.
Turning the tables, Biden said, "Imagine the outrage in Riyadh, in
Cairo, in Amman, in the United Nations, and elsewhere if a Jewish
professor published an article in an American paper saying that Muslim
holiday feasts were prepared with the blood of ritualistically
sacrificed Jews."
Biden then spoke of the terror attacks of September 11 when a group of
Islamic terrorists killed 3,000 people on American soil, "What did
people expect of us, and what did our President do, when a group of
mostly Saudi citizens killed thousands of Americans on the 11th? The
President did the right thing. He stood up and he said: This is not
about Saudi Arabia, this is not about Muslims. He did the right
thing."
Biden added, "I wonder what would have happened had it been the
reverse. I wonder what would happen."
Biden went on to suggest there exists a "disconnect" between actions
and declarations of the Saudis that baffled him.
He cited the telethon, "ordered by King Fahd," which raised "over $85
million for families of so-called Palestinian martyrs. According to
the Saudi Government, these people are defined as people 'victimized
by Israeli terror and violence.'"
But, he noted, "In the common parlance of the region, this term often
refers to suicide bombers."
In the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks, Biden said, "in
which 15 Saudis engaged in the most deadly suicide attacks in history,
one would hope the Saudi Government might think twice before offering
financial incentives for so-called martyrdom."
He went on, "Imagine if the President of the United States and the
Members of the Congress contributed to a telethon for someone who
walked into a hotel in Riyadh and killed 100 Muslims.
"What would happen if the President of the United States said: We
condemn it, but we understand the frustration of the Saudi people, in
having no democracy?" Biden asked.
"It would be an outrage, an outrage. And the whole world would say:
Where is the moral leadership of the United States?" Biden said.
The Delaware Democrat said Saudi support for "the cult of martyrdom is
not restricted to offering financial incentives."
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman brought up a poem
entitled "The Martyrs," in which the Saudi Ambassador to the United
Kingdom extolled a female Palestinian suicide bomber.
When given the opportunity to renounce this poem, a Saudi spokesman
said on United States television that the ambassador is a very well
known poet who was expressing the anger and frustration people feel,
Biden said.
"That is not good enough," Biden said, "If an American diplomat wrote
a poem -- if the Ambassador from the United States to England wrote a
poem extolling terrorism and attacking the leader of an ally, the
President of the United States would have his or her head on a platter
the next day.
"What would happen if an ambassador of the United States to another
great country wrote a poem that extolled the virtues of some Saudi
citizen who -- like bin Laden -- attempted to assassinate or was
engaged in a plot to do harm to the royal family? What would the
Saudis expect of us? What would the Saudis, or any civilized nation,
expect the United States President to do? They would expect him to do
exactly what he would do: Fire the person on the spot, and vocally, in
more than one language, disavow the poetry," said Biden.
He went on to describe 10th grade textbooks in Saudi Arabia that warn
students to "consider the infidel their enemy."
Saudi officials, Biden said, "claim such quotes are taken out of
context, but in what context is religious prejudice acceptable?"
The same problem exists in textbooks used by the Palestinian
Authority, he added, "While Arafat is talking about peace in Oslo, the
textbooks in the West Bank talk about "the hated Jew."
He noted how Palestinian schoolroom maps do not show the state of
Israel.
Such examples illustrate why there is "a disconnect when we hear Saudi
leaders talk of making peace with Israel," Biden said.
Peace "will not happen by itself," he said.
Moderate Arab nations "ought to prepare their people for the 'normal,
peaceful relations' they espoused in Beirut," Biden said.
"If the Crown Prince means what he says about normal, peaceful
relations with Israel -- and I believe he does -- then it is time for
his government to prepare Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab world
for this new day," he said.
"The Arab world must demonstrate mature leadership," along with the
United States, Biden said, "It cannot simply demand that the United
States abandon Israel, something we will never do."
While the United States supports Israel, he added, that "does not mean
we believe everything Israel does is right."
It does mean, Biden said, "We will fight for Israel's right to exist
within secure borders."
Biden, who was elected to the Senate in 1972, is the third most senior
Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, the chairman of the Subcommittee
on Crime and Drugs, and a member of the Subcommittee on Technology,
Terrorism and Government Information.
He is also a member of the Senate Democratic Steering and Coordination
Committee, co-chairman of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics
Control, co-chairman of the Senate NATO Observer Group, co-chairman of
the Senate National Security Working Group, vice chairman of the
Senate Delegation to the North Atlantic Assembly, and one of two U.S.
congressional representatives to the United Nations.
Following is the text of Biden's April 25 speech from the
Congressional Record:
(begin text)
SAUDI ARABIA
Senate
April 25, 2002
Mr. BIDEN. Madam President, today the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia,
Prince Abdullah, met with President Bush in Crawford, TX. Based on the
reports from that meeting, there were several items on the agenda, one
of which was the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, and
the other was the nature of the Saudi-U.S. bilateral relationship.
A report this morning in the New York Times said that the Crown Prince
intended to deliver a "blunt message" to President Bush. Apparently, a
Saudi official indicated after that meeting that oil would not be used
as a weapon. Earlier, an unnamed Saudi official said that we, the
United States, may face a "strategic debacle" unless we alter our
relationship with Israel.
There is nothing wrong with blunt messages and blunt talk between
friends. I am confident the President of the United States was equally
blunt in the message he delivered. No doubt the Crown Prince discussed
ways to advance his initiative with regard to Israel, a breakthrough
that I publicly stated several times in recent weeks has not been
fully appreciated by the world.
The Saudis had endorsed unanimously at the Arab League meeting last
month in Beirut a plan that holds out hope for normal peaceful
relations between Arab States and Israel. However, laying down that
plan is not enough. It is time for more mature leadership.
We have been asked by the rest of the world and the Crown Prince to
take an active role in supporting this plan. That is fine. However, I
add, I hope the President discussed what active role the Saudis should
take in dealing with peace in the Middle East. When the Crown Prince
goes home, what concrete steps will he take to move the process
forward, to create a new environment that builds trust and hope for a
political settlement?
I am troubled by the apparent disconnect between the initiatives for
peace taken by the Crown Prince and his nation and the contradictory
behavior that is prevalent in Saudi Arabia and its policies. For
example, in March the Saudi newspaper, Al-Riyadh, carried a vile,
anti-Semitic article by someone claiming to be a professor. The
article resurrected the centuries-old blood libel that civilized
people would have thought was a thing of the past. This Saudi
professor, in a leading Saudi newspaper, wrote for the Jewish
holidays: ``Blood must be taken from a non-Jew, dried, and mixed with
dough to make pastries.'' It goes on to say that using human blood in
pastries was a ``well-established fact historically and legally
throughout the history of mankind and that this was one of the main
reasons for the persecution of Jews and the exile of Jews in Europe
and Asia at different times.''
Finally, the article says: ``The needles enter the body extremely
slowly causing immense pain that gives the Jewish vampires extreme
pleasure and they closely monitor this bloodletting in detail with
pleasure and enjoyment that is beyond comprehension.''
That is printed in a leading Saudi newspaper. The editor of that paper
says that he was out of town when this article appeared, and later
wrote that it was unworthy of publication.
Forgive me if I have a hard time believing that the article simply
slipped through the cracks and that it was a fluke. I can believe many
things about Saudi Arabia, but freedom of the press is not one of
them. This article was published because no one who saw it believed
that it contained anything offensive or untrue.
Imagine the outrage in Riyadh, in Cairo, in Amman, in the United
Nations, and elsewhere if a Jewish professor published an article in
an American paper saying that Muslim holiday feasts were prepared with
the blood of ritualistically sacrificed Jews? Can anyone imagine what
the Saudis would expect of the President of the United States, what
the Saudis and the rest of the civilized world would rightly expect of
all United States Senators who had nothing to do with it being
published, but saw it published?
The civilized world would demand of us, as they would have a right to,
that we, the leaders of this country, stand up one at a time and
disavow these vile, vile, vile diatribes.
What did people expect of us, and what did our President do, when a
group of mostly Saudi citizens killed thousands of Americans on the
11th? The President did the right thing. He stood up and he said: This
is not about Saudi Arabia, this is not about Muslims. He did the right
thing.
I wonder what would have happened had it been the reverse. I wonder
what would happen.
It is time for some mature leadership here. It is not enough just to
lay down a good plan--and it is a good plan the Saudi Crown Prince
laid down and which was adopted in Beirut. What would the Saudis
expect us to say, though, were the roles reversed? What action would
they demand of the President if in fact such vile lies were printed
about Muslims and Saudis in an American paper? And what would the rest
of the world have us say about such slander, in a country where there
is freedom of the press, the United States?
Another example of this disconnect that baffles me is the recent
telethon, ordered by King Fahd, which, according to press reports,
raised over $85 million for families of so-called Palestinian martyrs.
According to the Saudi Government, these people are defined as people
``victimized by Israeli terror and violence.'' But in the common
parlance of the region, this term often refers to suicide bombers.
In the aftermath of September 11, in which 15 Saudis engaged in the
most deadly suicide attacks in history, one would hope the Saudi
Government might think twice before offering financial incentives for
so-called martyrdom.
Imagine if the President of the United States and the Members of the
Congress contributed to a telethon for someone who walked into a hotel
in Riyadh and killed 100 Muslims. What would we say? What would we be
expected to say? What would we think? What would happen if the
President of the United States said: We condemn it, but we understand
the frustration of the Saudi people, in having no democracy? We
understand the frustration of the Jewish people, being victims of
suicide bombing? It would be an outrage, an outrage. And the whole
world would say: Where is the moral leadership of the United States?
But the Saudi support for the cult of martyrdom is not restricted to
offering financial incentives. Recently the Saudi Ambassador to the
United Kingdom wrote a poem entitled ``The Martyrs.'' The poem
appeared in Arabic language newspapers and praised Palestinian suicide
bombers, particularly a young deranged Palestinian woman from a
refugee camp who killed herself and two Israelis on March 29. The
Ambassador refers to her as ``the bride of loftiness.''
This is written by the Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom.
She embraces death with a smile while the leaders are running away
from death . . .
He goes on to say:
We complained to the idols of a white house whose heart is filled with
darkness.
Given the opportunity to renounce this poem, a Saudi spokesman said on
United States television:
The ambassador is a very well known poet ..... he was expressing the
anger and frustration people feel.
Give me a break. That is not good enough. I personally met with this
spokesman, who is a fine man. I expected more from a man as educated
and sophisticated as Mr. Al-Jubeir. If an American diplomat wrote a
poem -- if the Ambassador from the United States to England wrote a
poem extolling terrorism and attacking the leader of an ally, the
President of the United States would have his or her head on a platter
the next day. They would be fired.
What would happen if an ambassador of the United States to another
great country wrote a poem that extolled the virtues of some Saudi
citizen who -- like bin Laden -- attempted to assassinate or was
engaged in a plot to do harm to the royal family? What would the
Saudis expect of us? What would the Saudis, or any civilized nation,
expect the United States President to do? They would expect him to do
exactly what he would do: Fire the person on the spot, and vocally, in
more than one language, disavow the poetry.
Since September 11, we have become all too familiar with the term
``madrassa,'' a term probably few had ever heard of in the United
States. We have learned that madrassas are religious schools. We have
learned the extent to which funds from Saudi Arabia have supported
madrassas, over 7,000 of them in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. We have
learned that many madrassas indoctrinate children with distorted and
hateful ideas.
But now we have learned that the problem with education is not simply
outside of Saudi Arabian borders, but within the kingdom itself.
According to an article in last October's New York Times, 10th grade
textbooks in Saudi Arabia warn students to ``consider the infidel
their enemy.''
Saudis claim such quotes are taken out of context, but in what context
is religious prejudice acceptable?
Of course, hateful diatribes and words of incitement also are found in
Palestinian textbooks.
While Arafat is talking about peace in Oslo, the textbooks in the West
Bank talk about ``the hated Jew.'' And they have long been accompanied
by schoolroom maps in the Middle East that pointedly do not show, even
on a map, Israel as a state. When our Saudi friends argue their
support and funding for Palestinian causes is for humanitarian and
educational purposes, I think it is fair to ask why they continue to
turn a blind eye toward this fomenting of hate that exists in their
region and their country.
I mention these examples to illustrate why there is a disconnect when
we hear Saudi leaders talk of making peace with Israel.
Peace will not happen by itself. It has to be nurtured. Certainly
those Arab nations we put in the moderate camp ought to prepare their
people for the ``normal, peaceful relations'' they espoused in Beirut.
If the Crown Prince means what he says about normal, peaceful
relations with Israel--and I believe he does--then it is time for his
government to prepare Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab world for
this new day. No responsible leaders want to see bloodshed continue in
the Middle East. We all want for it to end immediately. All of us
would like to see a peaceful settlement. To make it happen,
everyone--everyone--must shoulder responsibility.
It is time for big nations and serious leaders to stand up, to stand
up and speak the truth. It is time for nations with the ability to
directly influence events to exercise simply mature leadership.
I am not expecting the Saudis to all of a sudden take a pro-Israeli
position. But I am expecting, I do demand of them as a civilized
nation and a mature country, to do the right thing.
The United States must do its part, too. I have urged the
administration to increase its involvement, not only in resolving the
current crisis but also convening an international peace conference
that would move the parties quickly to a political solution or at
least provide a political horizon.
The Arab world must demonstrate mature leadership as well. It cannot
simply demand that the United States abandon Israel, something we will
never do.
Let me say that again: Something we will never do. Over my dead
physical political body will we ever abandon Israel. But that does not
mean we believe everything Israel does is right. It does mean, though,
we will fight for Israel's right to exist within secure borders.
Mature leadership means taking risks and confronting those forces that
hinder progress--not abetting those forces.
Mature leadership means condemning terrorism--not extolling the
virtues of ``martyrdom.''
Mature leadership means halting the flow of funds to terrorists--not
providing financial incentives for more terror.
Mature leadership means creating an educational system that provides
the foundation for future progress--not text and textbooks that
promote religious bigotry.
Mature leadership means being responsive to the legitimate demands of
one's citizen for political openness and transparency--not stifling
dissent and exporting your problems elsewhere.
Mature leadership means sitting down with the Israelis and talking
peace--not treating them as pariahs.
I find it fascinating that the President was criticized for
authorizing and directing the Secretary of State to sit down with the
person who many Israelis consider a pariah and who many of us consider
a pariah -- Yasser Arafat. The Saudis thought that was essential. Why
will they not sit down? Why will they not sit down with a man who is
the elected leader of Israel, regardless of whether or not they think
on the West Bank he is a pariah as many Israelis and Americans think
is the case with Mr. Arafat?
The President has shown mature leadership. I may disagree with his
approach, but why is it expected of us and not of them?
As the birthplace of Islam and the land of the holiest Muslim sites,
Saudi Arabia has a critical role to play in resolving one of the most
intractable conflicts of our time.
This is an opportunity for the Saudi Royal Family to make a real
contribution to peace. They have taken the first steps with bold
action that holds out hope for peace as they presented their peace
plan.
Now let them take the next step of mature, consistent leadership. Let
them denounce the Palestinian leadership that uses terror to gain
political leverage. Let them denounce hateful language. Let them
denounce the incitement to violence in textbooks and in the media.
I hope they will take the next step so the Saudi initiative will not
become just another missed opportunity--an interesting footnote in
history.
I hope our relationship with the Saudis can improve. I hope the Saudi
Arabian citizens can begin to enjoy the freedom they deserve.
But these things can only occur with farsighted, mature leadership.
There has never been a time when we have needed such leadership more
than it is needed now. I hope that kind of leadership will enable our
two countries to move forward together to achieve progress and
peace--not just for the Israelis and Palestinians but for all the
people of the Middle East.
I urge the administration to increase its involvement--not only in the
present circumstance but beyond.
Let us be honest. This is a historic opportunity. The Saudis have made
a significant proposal. I beg them, do not squander the opportunity to
be remembered for the century as the party and the force that was the
catalyst for bringing an end to the suffering of the people in the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
