SAUDI ARABIA and the UNITED STATES, 1931-2002 by Josh Pollack*

SAUDI ARABIA AND THE UNITED STATES, 1931-2002 By Josh Pollack* The U.S.-Saudi relationship is one of America’s most important, enduring, and complex bilateral connections in the Middle East. It has been tested by many issues, including oil policies, the Arab- Israeli conflict, and confrontation with Iraq. Especially after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on America, in which many of those involved were Saudi dissidents, both sides have critiqued and reevaluated that link. This article provides a history of the U.S.-Saudi relationship and discusses its nature, problems, and limits. The enduring contradictions of the Saudi- ambassador to the United States since 1983. American relationship have lately inspired The dean of the foreign diplomatic corps in comparisons to a marriage of convenience. Washington, Bandar has served as the virtual Its close economic and security links have personification of the relationship for two often been strained by immense political, decades. On the American side, former cultural, and psychological distances. The President George H.W. Bush and Vice breakdown of the Israeli-Palestinian peace President Dick Cheney, who developed Saudi process in September 2000 brought on a ties during the Persian Gulf War, have been difficult time in the relationship, reminiscent instrumental in bringing President George W. of the period leading up to the oil embargo of Bush together with Crown Prince Abdullah, 1973-1974; moreover, unlike previous crises who currently manages the kingdom’s affairs in U.S.-Saudi relations, its effects are not in Fahd’s stead. At the same time, public mitigated by the commonality of purpose sentiment in both countries, fueled by cable experienced during the Cold War, especially television and the Internet, has played an during the 1970s and 1980s. unusually large role in the crisis. Both the The devastation of September 11, 2001 U.S. and Saudi Arabia responded with accordingly dealt a sledgehammer blow to an elaborate campaigns to improve their national already unsteady structure. In America, the images. shock provoked a complicated and angry Today’s problems are further complicated reassessment, in some ways reminiscent of by a substantial U.S. Air Force and British the reordering of U.S.-Chinese ties after the Royal Air Force presence on Saudi soil that bloodshed of June 4, 1989 in Tiananmen extends back over a decade to the Persian Square. The Saudis, thrust onto the defensive Gulf War. In the absence of any formal and frustrated with American policies and understandings on the status of forces, allied undertakings regarding Israel, Afghanistan, raids against Iraqi air defense sites have and Iraq, have engaged in some reassessment become entangled in Saudi domestic of their own. sensitivities, with problematic results for the The current situation both echoes and war in Afghanistan, as well as any future war diverges from past episodes in the against Iraq. Sustaining the relationship relationship. Both sides continue to navigate through these difficulties are the same the relationship through the narrow channels underlying factors that have always sustained of a few individuals experienced at it: the Western world’s need for maneuvering between their starkly unalike uninterrupted access to energy supplies, and systems and cultures. Notable in this respect the Saudi kingdom’s need for defense against on the Saudi side is Prince Bandar bin Sultan, predatory neighbors. confidant to the ailing King Fahd and Middle East Review of International Affairs, Vol. 6, No. 3 (September, 2002) 77 Josh Pollack THE FOUNDING, AND FOUNDATIONS, These first dealings set the pattern for OF U.S.-SAUDI RELATIONS much of what followed. First, as noted Saudi-American ties began with only the above, the human links between the United slightest of contacts. Despite the recognition States and Saudi Arabia were strikingly of the kingdom in 1931, no American narrow at the start, largely channeled through diplomat visited in a formal capacity until the person of Philby. The exchanges of 1940, when the U.S. envoy to Egypt, Bert businessmen, diplomats, warriors, students, Fish, was co-accredited to the Kingdom of the and tourists expanded these contacts in the Hejaz and Nejd and Its Dependencies, as it years to come, but remained subject to the was then called. In the year he had left to constraints of Arabia’s inhospitable climate serve in Cairo, Fish made just a single trip to and forbidding mores, as well as the religious Jidda to meet the ruler and founder, King Abd authorities’ resistance to exposing the al-Aziz bin Abd al-Rahman al-Saud, also kingdom’s subjects to Westerners and their called Ibn Saud. The seeming indifference of ways.(5) the Department of State reflected the extent to Second, what turned out to be the which Washington had relegated the remote kingdom’s unparalleled oil resources laid the kingdom to the British sphere. That foundations of the relationship. Over the sentiment was not at all shared by the Saudi following decades, control of Aramco and its king and his advisers, who saw in the revenues passed by steps from American into Americans a longed-for counterweight to Saudi hands, but Washington’s attention did Britain’s regional dominance.(1) not flag. Initially, the United States focused More consequential was a 1931 visit by on excluding other foreign powers, Charles R. Crane, a Chicago millionaire and particularly the British, As one American philanthropist, world traveler, former official viewed the matter in 1944, “The oil in ambassador, and associate of American this region is the greatest single prize in all presidents.(2) Abd al-Aziz had invited the history.”(6) Later, the United States instead American at the urging of his expatriate became concerned with energy security for British adviser, St. John Philby, a nominal the entire industrial world. As President convert to Islam. The king hoped that Crane George H.W. Bush would tell King Fahd bin might facilitate exploration for assets beneath Abd al-Aziz on August 4, 1990, just hours the soil of the impoverished kingdom, starting after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, “[t]he with water. security of Saudi Arabia is vital--basically Crane summoned to Jidda an experienced fundamental--to U.S. interests and really to mining engineer, Karl S. Twitchell, who the interests of the Western world.”(7) shortly proved instrumental in drawing the American leaders eventually concluded that attention of a major American oil company to their ultimate national interest in the Persian the kingdom’s potential to yield up a more Gulf was to keep the prize, and the power that fateful commodity: oil. In May 1933, after an comes with it, out of unfriendly hands, extended negotiation by telegraph with whether they might be those of radical Arabs, Philby, the representatives of Standard Oil of the Soviet Union, or revolutionary Iran. California (Socal) concluded talks in Jidda Where the profits happened to go was of with the Saudi minister of finance. Philby, secondary importance.(8) who was by then also quietly accepting The Saudis, for their part, were determined payments from Socal, advised Abd al-Aziz to from the first to the last to secure the integrity accept the results, a 60-year contract offering and sovereignty of the kingdom, and their the exclusive concession for exploration and hold on power within it. Abd al-Aziz extraction in the Hasa region, along the shores reportedly once enumerated to an American of the Persian Gulf.(3) In 1938, what was the factors behind his decision to seek ties, later to be called Aramco--the Arabian mentioning American oil expertise, a American Oil Company--first struck oil in reputation for respectful relations with other commercial quantities. Shipments abroad Arabs, greater interest in expanding business commenced the next year.(4) relations than in consolidating an imperial 78 Middle East Review of International Affairs, Vol. 6, No. 3 (September, 2002) Saudi Arabia and the United States, 1931-2002 sphere, and, “lastly, you are very far away!”-- in turn, balanced Saudi security concerns in implicit but sharp distinction to the against the implementation of their own British.(9) regional and global strategies for the The king’s concerns were underscored in containment of Soviet power, from alliance- the so-called “anti-imperial” clause of the building to nuclear deterrence.(13) The results 1933 contract, which explicitly rejected any were a series of highs and lows in the company influence over the kingdom’s relationship, depending on how closely the internal affairs.(10) Never confident of their security of the Saudi state and the American independent ability to defend their borders, policy of containment could be aligned at any the Saudis have faced a continuing challenge given time. over the decades: keeping America in, but not The main complications of the early 1950s too far in. The result has been a continuous derived from the American partnership with American military presence from the end of Britain, then a major regional power whose the Second World War to the present, mostly bases encircled the kingdom, both entangling in the form of a small training mission, and them in Arabian Peninsula border disputes only sometimes in the form of larger forces, and aligning them with the Saudis’ traditional as has been the case since the Persian Gulf rivals in Iraq and Jordan. Both states were War. ruled by kings of the Hashemite dynasty, which Abd al-Aziz had earlier displaced from THE COLD WAR PARTNERSHIP the Red Sea emirate of Hejaz, home to the The initial entry of the American armed holy places of Mecca and Medina. The forces into the kingdom occurred almost Hashemites’ proximity to the oil fields, incidentally at the end of the Second World revanchist ambitions, and British-led and - War, when the United States requested trained military forces all encouraged the permission to build a modern airbase at Saudis to conclude a mutual defense Dhahran, near the Hasa oilfields, to support assistance pact with the United States in 1951.

Load more