Author: Thomas L. Friedman
Publication: The New York Times
Date: October 30, 2001
URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/30/opinion/30FRIE.html?ex=1005542082&ei=1&en=526b3e3939cb8d14
In April 1988 Saudi Arabia asked
the U.S. to withdraw its newly appointed ambassador, Hume Horan, after
only six months. News reports said King Fahd just didn't like the U.S.
envoy. What the Saudis didn't like about him, though, was that he was the
best Arabic speaker in the State Department, and had used his language
skills to engage all kinds of Saudis, including the kingdom's conservative
religious leaders who were critical of the ruling family. The Saudis didn't
want someone so adroit at penetrating their society, so - of course - we
withdrew Mr. Horan.
Ever since then we've been sending
non-Arabic-speaking ambassadors to Riyadh - mostly presidential cronies
who knew exactly how to penetrate the White House but didn't have a clue
how to penetrate Saudi Arabia. Yes sir, we got the message: As long as
the Saudis kept the oil flowing, what they taught in their schools and
mosques was not our business. And what we didn't know wouldn't hurt us.
Well, on Sept. 11 we learned just
how wrong that view was. What we didn't know hurt us very badly. On Sept.
11 we learned all the things about Saudi Arabia that we didn't know: that
Saudi Arabia was the primary funder of the Taliban, that 15 of the hijackers
were disgruntled young Saudis and that Saudi Arabia was allowing fund-raising
for Osama bin Laden - as long as he didn't use the money to attack the
Saudi regime.
And most of all, we've learned about
Saudi schools. As this newspaper recently reported from Riyadh, the 10th-grade
textbook for one of the five required religion classes taught in all Saudi
public schools states: "It is compulsory for the Muslims to be loyal to
each other and to consider the infidels their enemy." This hostile view
of non-Muslims, which is particularly pronounced in the strict Saudi Wahhabi
brand of Islam, is reinforced through Saudi sermons, TV shows and the Internet.
There is something wrong with this
picture: Since Sept. 11, the president of the United States has given several
speeches about how Islam is a tolerant religion, with no core hostility
to the West. But the leader of Saudi Arabia, the keeper of the Muslim Holy
places, hasn't given one.
The truth is, there are at least
two sides to Saudi Arabia, but we've pretended that there's only one. There
is the wealthy Saudi ruling family and upper middle classes, who send their
kids to America to be educated and live Western-style lives abroad and
behind the veil at home. And there is an Islamist element incubating religious
hostility toward America and the West, particularly among disaffected,
unemployed Saudi youth.
It is said that truth is the first
victim of war. Not this war. In the war of Sept. 11, we've been the first
victims of our own inability to tell the truth - to ourselves and to others.
It's time now to tell the truth. And the truth is that with the weapons
of mass destruction that are now easily available, how governments shape
the consciousness, mentality and imagination of their young people is no
longer a private matter.
We now have two choices: First,
we can decide that the Saudi ruling family really is tolerant, strong and
wants to be part of the solution, and thus we can urge its members to educate
their children differently and ensure that fund-raising in their society
doesn't go to people who want to destroy ours. If so, I don't expect the
Saudis to teach their kids to love America or embrace non-Muslim religions.
But if countries want good relations
with us, then they have to know that whatever religious vision they teach
in their public schools we expect them to teach the "peaceful" realization
of that vision. All U.S. ambassadors need to make that part of their brief.
Because if tolerance is not made universal, then coexistence is impossible.
But such simple tolerance of other faiths is precisely what Saudi Arabia
has not been teaching.
If the Saudis cannot or will not
do that, then we must conclude that the Saudi ruling family is not really
on our side, and we should move quickly to lessen our dependence upon it.
I was for radical energy conservation, getting rid of gas-guzzlers and
reducing oil imports before Sept. 11 - but I feel even more strongly about
it now.
"Either we get rid of our minivans
or Saudi Arabia gets rid of its textbooks," says Michael Mandelbaum, the
Johns Hopkins foreign policy specialist. "But one thing we know for sure
- it's dangerous to go on assuming that the two can coexist."
