-Caveat Lector- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War! Saudis Balk at U.S. Use of Key Facility Powell Seeks Reversal of Policy; Refusal Could Delay Airstrikes at Terrorists By Vernon Loeb and Dana Priest Washington Post Staff Writers Saturday, September 22, 2001; Page A01 Saudi Arabia is resisting the United States' request to use a new command center on a Saudi military base in any air war against terrorists, forcing Pentagon planners to consider alternatives that could delay a campaign for weeks, defense officials said yesterday. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell is trying to persuade the Saudi government to reverse a decade-old policy in which it has refused to allow the United States to stage or command offensive air operations from Saudi air bases, officials said. While high-level talks aimed at resolving the matter are underway, the Pentagon is already considering moving the operations center to another country, the officials added. They did not specify where. A refusal by the Saudis would deal a significant blow to the Bush administration's efforts to build a broad international coalition in its effort to destroy the terrorist network of Saudi extremist Osama bin Laden and Afghanistan's ruling Taliban militia, which has harbored bin Laden and many of his top lieutenants. The Pentagon had been counting on using the command center at Prince Sultan Air Base in the coming air war. Besides delaying any operation, Saudi unwillingness to allow the United Sates to use Saudi bases for offensive operations could send a strong signal to the Arab world that accepting Washington's demands is not a prerequisite for ongoing relations with Washington. The Combined Air Operations Center at Prince Sultan Air Base, located outside Al Kharj about 70 miles southeast of Riyadh and completed just six weeks ago, is the Air Force's most advanced command and control center. It is capable of controlling the movements of hundreds of aircraft over an area of thousands of miles. The two nations have different perspectives on the Air Force facility: The United States sees it as capable of running operations throughout the Mideast, while the Saudi government would like -- at least publicly -- to see it used only to defend Saudi territory. Retired Marine Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, who until last year commanded U.S. military operations in the Mideast, said losing the ability to run combat missions from the new air operations center would be problematic only in the short term. "Obviously, it's easier to go into a place where you're already set up," he said. "But we have really worked to make our capability expeditionary and can set up fairly quickly" at bases in other countries. Victoria Clarke, the chief spokesperson for the Pentagon, declined to comment on the discussions with the Saudis. "We think it is appropriate for countries to announce what they are doing, not us," she said. "Different countries will be doing different things at different times. We have been very pleased by this response." Greg Sullivan, spokesman for the State Department's Near Eastern Affairs Bureau, said he was unaware of any dispute with the Saudis. "We've gotten everything we've asked for from the Saudis and we're very pleased with their cooperation," he said. Despite military ties with Washington that are decades old, the Saudi royal family remains extremely sensitive about cooperating with the U.S. military, given feelings among many Saudi citizens that their leaders are too closely allied with the United States. During the Persian Gulf War, the Saudis permitted the United States to fly combat missions from their soil. But afterward, the Saudis repeatedly refused Washington's request to base attack aircraft there for various military strikes against Iraq. The matter is so sensitive that U.S. officials often do not even ask the Saudis for permission to use their bases for offensive purposes. Such was the case when 40,000 troops and coalition forces moved into the Gulf region after Iraqi President Saddam Hussein prohibited United Nations inspectors from entering certain suspected chemical and biological weapons sites. Airstrikes were averted after Saddam relented. A cardinal rule in dealing with the Saudi government has been secrecy, or "plausible deniability," said one general who worked for years in Saudi Arabia. "Saudi cooperation was always something they did not want to broadcast," he said, referring to media accounts earlier this week in The Washington Post and the New York Times about the U.S. plan to run the coming air war out of the new operations center at Prince Sultan base. Public discussion of that plan, the general said, "put them in a really tough position. We should have known better." In the past, the Saudis have told U.S. officials that they cannot support strikes from their territory, or advocate strikes publicly, unless the target of the strikes, which in most cases has been Iraq, had struck first, in which case the U.S. action could be considered defensive. While the Saudis have balked at allowing combat missions to be flown or controlled from their soil, they have allowed refuelers, reconnaissance and other support aircraft to fly from Saudi bases. They have also allowed 5,000 U.S. troops to be stationed there, but have severely limited reporting on their presence or operations. In another war-related development yesterday, a spokesman at Fort Bragg, N.C., confirmed that the U.S. Army Special Operations Command had received a deployment order for sending troops and units abroad as part of the war on terrorism. But Maj. Rob Gowan said he could not comment on how many troops or which units were affected by the order. Staff writer Alan Sipress contributed to this report. *COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] Want to be on our lists? Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
