Hello Keith, A chilling scenario. I read something recently that argued that a major reason for bombing Afghanistan into the stone age and bringing Pakistan to heel was to provide a safe and secure route for an American funded oil pipeline from the former Soviet republics north of Afghanistan to the Arabian Sea. That would make good sense if, as you suggest, Saudi Arabia is in for trouble. I suppose it would all fit within the general concept of "defending freedom".
Regards, Ed Weick > I don't think ordinary Americans (or the ordinary English or Europeans for > that matter) realise the importance of Saudi Arabia for the immediate > future of their economy. America imports half its oil from abroad and a > third of that from Saudi Arabia -- still the biggest (and cheapest) source > of oil in the world. Any diminution in supplies for more than a few weeks > would bring America to its knees more effectively than any further acts of > terrorism, even multiplied way beyond those of 11 September. > > A TV documentary on Channel 4 last night by a brave English journalist, > Deborah Davies, who disguised herself as a German tourist a couple of > months ago and was able to travel around Saudi Arabia somewhat and film a > few short interviews at great risk, confirmed once again in my mind that > the country is a powder keg that is bound to explode sometime soon. > > The further news last night that Bush has decided to raise tariffs on > imported steel from between 8% and 30% was further confirmation that > something serious is afoot. On the face of it, there is little sense in > raising tariffs because it will set off the most acrimonious dispute > between America and Europe, and perhaps the beginning of a world-wide trade > war. It also makes little sense to look after about 13,000 American steel > workers and yet prejudice the future of a far larger number of American car > workers whose output is bound to be affected because of higher steel costs > (not to mention the higher costs of cars being passed on to American > customers -- now probably at the limit of their spending capacity). The > implication of this is that Bush wants to retain a large steel industry, > even if it is inefficient, for armament purposes. > > The Americans are doing nothing to stop the increasing Israeli savagery > against the Palestinians (one of our own doctors temporarily volunteering > over there was killed last night in a tank action against a Palestinian > ambulance). The Americans are stepping up the ferocity of attacks against > Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, but this time blanking-out any information about > it. Bush has lately spoken of the "axis of evil" countries, raised the > defence budget by 30% and is doing nothing to dampen the increasing > speculation that an attack on Iraq is being planned. > > Why Iraq? Saddam Hussein has not been implicated in the 11 September > attacks (though most Americans, I imagine, could be easily persuaded to > think so, given Bush's popularity). Since the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein may > well have been secretly continuing to develop missiles and biochemical > warfare, perhaps even a nuclear bomb, but he cannot be contemplating action > against America. He's not quite that mad. But he might well be planning for > future action against Israel, Kuwait and -- this is the crunch, in my > opinion -- Saudi Arabia. > > Saddam Hussein must know as well as the Americans that Saudi Arabia is on > the point of collapse. Out of a population of 20-odd million there are at > least a million young Saudi males without work (whose parents are now > subsisting on a third of the state hand-outs of a few years ago) who > haven't a hope of saving a dowry so they can get married, and who are being > stirred up increasingly by the fundamentalist mullahs to hate America but > also -- and more to the point -- the Saudi royal family. > > A new phenomenon which Deborah Davies reported is the spread of all-night > coffee shops in the Saudi Arabian cities where the young men meet and talk. > Despite governmental censorship of the press, she also discovered a short > account in a newspaper of a disturbance in Jeddah where 300 young men > attacked soldiers and security police. She also interviewed an Al Qaeda > terrorist who told her that some recent small bomb attacks in Saudi (for > which five English small-business men and oil engineers are now on trial > after signing 'confessions') were just practice attempts by Saudi > fundamentalist dissenters. They are making larger bombs and they'll be > directed against in royal family in due course, he said. Deborah Davies > also spoke about a European list of Al Qaeda terrorists that was offered to > a senior Saudi Prince who refused to look at it. They're obviously in a > state of denial. She also interviewed a Saudi dissenter (of the democratic > variety) who runs a web site in London and receives e-mails from Saudi > Arabia who thinks that, despite token arrests of a few Al Qaeda members, > the movement is very much alive and well, and reminded her that 15 of the > 19 hijackers of 11 September and two-thirds of the Al Qaeda now being held > in Cuba are Saudis. > > If Saudi Arabia is taken over by fundamentalist clerics (as Iran was in > 1979), who will undoubtedly threaten oil exports to America, then America > will have to act quickly to keep its economy afloat, its present reserve > stocks of oil being able to last only a few weeks. Above all, America will > no longer be able to afford to stand by as it did in the case of Iran and > will need large forces nearby to move in. > > America is now applying tremendous pressure on Saddam Hussein to allow full > inspection of his armament research sites. If he yields (or is overthrown) > and Iraq becomes "America friendly" again (as it was when Iran collapsed in > '79), then the next step will be for the Americans to re-equip the Iraqi > army and also send large forces of their own to Iraq, particularly to the > south for quick access to Saudi Arabia. If he doesn't yield then pressure > will be increased to the point that Bush will persuade the American people > that a full-scale invasion is necessary. > > If my speculations are correct, what is the time-scale for all this? Even > the American State Department cannot guess how long the present Saudi > regime will last so it will have to assume that it could happen anytime > from now onwards. Therefore it will have to act soon. Considering how long > it took America to send large forces to the Gulf last time, then it will > have to apply pressure on Iraq as intensively and quickly as possible. I > think we can expect high-altitude 'precision' bombing of Iraq quite soon if > Saddam Hussein doesn't yield quickly in the hope that he'll be overthrown > and a friendly government installed. As soon as that happens then a serious > build-up of large-scale American forces in Iraq and Kuwait can be expected > over the following months. They will have to stay there until Saudi Arabia > either collapses or reforms its nasty medieval kingdom where they still > stone women to death and behead petty thieves with the sword. > > That's how I see it this morning. Now for my second pot of tea. > > Keith Hudson > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > "Writers used to write because they had something to say; now they write in > order to discover if they have something to say." John D. Barrow > _________________________________________________ > Keith Hudson, Bath, England; e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________ >
