Most
Foreign Insurgents
In Iraq Are Saudis
By Peter Symonds
17 July 2007
WSWS.org
An
article in Sunday’s Los Angeles Times detailing the national origins
of foreign insurgents in Iraq has punctured a large hole in the Bush
administration’s relentless propaganda against Iran. For months,
the White House has been demonising Tehran for “meddling”
in Iraq by establishing networks to arm, train and finance anti-US insurgents.
Most foreign fighters, however, come, not from Iran, but Saudi Arabia,
a close American ally, with which the Bush administration in particular
has intimate ties.
According to military statistics
provided to the Los Angeles Times, about 45 percent of the hundreds
of foreign militants involved in attacks on US troops and Iraqi civilians
and security forces are from Saudi Arabia. Another 15 percent are from
Syria and Lebanon and 10 percent from North Africa. Nearly half the
135 foreigners currently held in US detention facilities in Iraq are
Saudis.
A senior American military
officer told the newspaper that Saudis are believed to have carried
out more suicide bombings in Iraq than those of any other nationality.
He estimated that half of all Saudi jihadists come to Iraq as suicide
bombers, who in the past six months have been responsible for killing
and maiming at least 4,000 Iraqis.
As the Los Angeles Times
explained: “The situation has left the US military [and one could
add, the Bush administration] in the awkward position of battling an
enemy whose top source of foreign fighters is a key ally that at best
has not been able to prevent its citizens from undertaking bloody attacks
in Iraq and at worst shares complicity in sending extremists to commit
attacks against US forces, Iraqi civilians and the Shiite-led government
in Baghdad.”
Saudi Interior Ministry spokesman
General Mansour Turki insisted that Saudi Arabia was doing everything
possible to halt the flow of Saudi fighters, arms and money to Sunni
insurgent groups in Iraq. Blaming the Iraqi government for not providing
information, he said: “We have no idea who these people are...
If we get good feedback from the Iraqi government about Saudis arrested
in Iraq, probably we can help.”
The senior US officer, however,
dismissed the response, saying: “Are the Saudis using all means
possible? Of course not... It needs to be addressed by the government
of Iraq head on. They have every right to stand up to a country like
Saudi Arabia and say, ‘Hey, you are killing thousands of people
by allowing your young jihadists to come here and associate themselves
with an illegal worldwide network called Al Qaeda’.”
As for the Bush administration,
it maintains a studied silence on the issue while continuing its campaign
against “Iranian interference” in Iraq. While the US dismisses
Tehran’s denials of involvement out of hand, Riyadh’s claims
to be stopping Saudi support for Iraqi insurgents are tacitly accepted
as good coin. The White House and the State Department refused to comment
to the Los Angeles Times.
The figures are not new.
On June 20, MSNBC.com posted an analysis of articles on Islamist websites
celebrating the deaths of foreign fighters in Iraq over the past two
years. Of more than 400 militants who had died in Iraq, 55 percent came
from Saudi Arabia, 13 percent from Syria, 9 percent from North Africa
and 3 percent from Europe. The US military confirmed to MSNBC.com that
Saudi Arabia and Syria were the leading sources of insurgents.
Iraqi National Security Adviser
Muwafaq al-Rubaie told the media last weekend that more than 160 Saudis
had been tried in Iraqi courts and hundreds were awaiting trial. Al-Rubaie
headed a high-level Iraqi delegation to Saudi Arabia last week to discuss
the issue. He declared that both sides had agreed to condemn inflammatory
fatwas or religious edicts inciting sectarian violence between Sunnis
and Shiites in Iraq.
US policy
If US foreign policy were
at all consistent, the White House and the Pentagon would be condemning
Riyadh and demanding action to halt the flow of Saudi fighters. Stories
would be appearing in the American media exposing autocratic Saudi rule,
its repression of women and savage application of Sharia law. Grave
fears would have been raised by the State Department over the announcement
last year that Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States were launching a civilian
nuclear program. The most strident US militarists would be demanding
regime change and Bush would be declaring that “all options were
on the table”—including the bombing of Riyadh.
That none of this is happening,
or is likely to happen, again demonstrates that the US accusations against
Tehran are simply pretexts used to justify possible military action
against Iran. The threats against Iran are not motivated by concerns
about the lives of US troops but the Bush administration’s ambitions
to establish American dominance over the Middle East and its huge energy
reserves. Far from publicly remonstrating with Riyadh, the White House
has in recent months been seeking to line up Saudi Arabia and other
“moderate” Arab states, including Egypt and Jordan, in an
anti-Iranian alliance.
The US invasion of Iraq has
profoundly destabilised the region, inflaming rivalries and sectarian
tensions. Saudi Arabia, which reluctantly supported the US invasion
of Iraq, regarded the Saddam Hussein regime as a bulwark against Iran,
its traditional rival in the Persian Gulf. Riyadh is deeply hostile
to the Shiite-dominated government in Baghdad, which it regards as little
more than a proxy for Iran. Saudi King Abdullah and other top officials
have pointedly snubbed Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on several occasions
to demonstrate their hostility.
Saudi rivalry with Iran intersects
with the intense hostility of the Wahhabist religious establishment
in Saudi Arabia against the Shiite sect and close traditional ties with
Sunni tribal groups in Iraq. Last November, in the wake of the Democratic
victory in mid-term US elections, King Abdullah reportedly told Vice
President Dick Cheney that his regime would be compelled to intervene
in Iraq on the side of Sunni insurgent groups against the Maliki government
if US troops were pulled out.
In a prominent comment in
the Washington Post on November 29, Saudi security adviser Nawaf Obaid
warned of Saudi intervention, noting: “Over the past year, a chorus
of voices has called for Saudi Arabia to protect the Sunni community
in Iraq and thwart Iranian influence there. Senior Iraqi tribal and
religious figures, along with the leaders of Egypt, Jordan and other
Arab and Muslim countries, have petitioned the Saudi leadership to provide
Iraqi Sunnis with weapons and financial support. Moreover, domestic
pressure to intervene is intense. Major Saudi tribal confederations,
which have extremely close historical and communal ties with their counterparts
in Iraq, are demanding action. They are supported by a new generation
of Saudi royals in strategic government positions who are eager to see
the kingdom play a more muscular role in the region.”
While the Saudi monarchy
publicly disowned Obaid, his comments reflect the sentiments of a significant
segment of the ruling elite. The regime has largely turned a blind eye
to the agitation of Saudi religious fanatics for a holy war against
Shiites in Iraq. Last December, 38 Saudi religious scholars posted an
edict to rally support for the Iraqi Sunni minority, claiming that the
“crusaders” [the US] and the “Safavis” [Iran]
were conspiring together to destroy Iraq and contain Sunni influence
throughout the region. Despite Al Qaeda’s opposition to the Saudi
regime, there is undoubtedly considerable sympathy in Saudi ruling circles
for its murderous attacks on ordinary Iraqi Shiites.
The Saudi monarchy cannot
afford to alienate the Bush administration by openly supporting Sunni
insurgents in Iraq. Moreover, the more cautious elements are undoubtedly
fearful that Saudi fighters returning from Iraq could strengthen the
internal political opposition to the monarchy and further destabilise
the country. After all, Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were the creation
of the 1980s “holy war” jointly backed by the CIA, Saudi
and Pakistani intelligence against the Soviet-backed regime in Afghanistan.
At the same time, Saudi claims
that it is not involved in Iraq are simply not credible. Its huge intelligence
apparatus is almost certainly very active in Iraq and may well be providing
support to Saudi jihadists in a proxy war against Shiite and Iranian
influence. In comments to the Los Angeles Times, Iraqi Shiite legislator
Sami Askari, one of Maliki’s advisers, accused Saudi officials
of deliberately sowing chaos in Baghdad and funding groups causing unrest
in the country’s Shiite south.
The danger that the sectarian
war in Iraq will spark a broader regional confrontation underscores
the reckless and incoherent character of US foreign policy. Having ousted
Saddam Hussein and installed a puppet government dominated by Shiite
parties with strong links to Iran, the Bush administration is attempting
to marshal support from autocratic “Sunni” regimes like
Saudi Arabia in its confrontation with Iran. Incapable of resolving
these contradictions, the Bush administration simply maintains a stony
silence on Saudi activities in Iraq.
Last week, the Saudi taboo
reached absurd proportions when US military spokesman Brigadier General
Kevin Bergner gave a press conference on the rising toll of destruction
caused by suicide bombers. He pointed out that most suicide bombers
were foreigners, as Sunni extremist groups were not able to recruit
Iraqis to indiscriminately slaughter their fellow countrymen. Like President
Bush, Bergner repeatedly invoked the role of Al Qaeda to justify the
continued US occupation. To illustrate his argument, he provided details
of a particular suicide bomber from a middle class family, recruited
at a mosque, and sent into Iraq via Syria. Bergner omitted to state
his nationality, claiming he had not received clearance. According to
the military source of the Los Angeles Times, the man was a Saudi citizen,
like many of the suicide bombers entering Iraq.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.