US criticizes Saudi Arabia

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

For the first time, US State Department has come out all guns blazing against the government of Saudi Arabia. None of the “charges” are new or surprising, as we have discussed these many times here on GS, but, if my memory is right, this is the first time, US has openly and so candidly criticized one of their so-called allies in the war against terror.
**
(http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/09/15/us.saudi.religious.rights.ap/index.html)**

The State Department said Wednesday that Saudi Arabia has engaged in “particularly severe violations” of religious freedom and for the first time included the kingdom, a key U.S. ally, on a list of countries that could be subject to sanctions.

A department report assessing the state of religious freedom worldwide said that in Saudi Arabia, freedom of religion does not exist and is not recognized or protected under the country’s laws.

The report also said that those who do not adhere to the officially sanctioned strain of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia can face “severe repercussions” at the hands of the religious police.

Wednesday’s announcement was a departure from the Bush administration’s practice of avoiding direct criticism of Saudi Arabia – a key ally in the war on terrorism, a strong backer of U.S. policies in Iraq and a major oil supplier.

Joining Saudi Arabia for the first time on the so-called “CPC list” were Eritrea and Vietnam. Countries redesignated as CPC countries were Burma, China, Iran, North Korea and Sudan.

2

^^Ya because the Saudi Government (& their Pakistani counterpart to a certain extent)...gave Bush a hand...not to help him in his election campaign...One example of such acts by Bush & Co was the hoax against the Pakistani Ambassador in DC....
Now Bush is turning all his guns towards Saudi Arabia to gain some support from there....keeping in mind the popularity of sentiments against Saudis in USA.....

3

It's a bit too late, but a welcome gesture nonetheless. As my Islami friends would say that it's all about Oil. Yeah, them Saudis should be fried in it.

4

MAToo terrorist analysis will always lead you to hatred and hell. Check this site before starting commie leftie conspiracy theories.

http://www.uscirf.gov/prPages/pr0207.php3

Note that commission is recommending Burma, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea), Eritrea, India, Iran, Pakistan, People’s Republic of China, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, and Vietnam.

Oil no oil, these countries are openly decimating their minorities. Knowing Pakistan, sad to say that minorities like Shia, Ahmadis, and Christians are not safe. Mullahs have been roaming the country torching, pillaging, and killing minorities.

Thank goodness, Pak army is hunting the MAToos in FATA areas. This has given a respite to Shias and Christians. Let’s how long it lasts.

5

^ What are you braging about???
I am just saying that ..Current Bush's foreign tactics, are almost all for "his Domestic affairs "& are "election oriented".........

6

Hello, wake up!

Here is what the US State Department wrote in thier 2003 Human Rights Report on Saudi:

The Government’s human rights record remained poor; although there were positive improvements in a few areas, serious problems remained. Citizens did not have the right to change their government. There were credible reports that security forces continued to torture and abuse detainees and prisoners, arbitrarily arrest and detain persons, and hold them in incommunicado detention. There were cases in which Mutawwa’in continued to intimidate, abuse, and detain citizens and foreigners. There was no evidence that violators were held accountable for abuses. Most trials were closed, and defendants usually appeared before judges without legal counsel. There were reports that the Government infringed on individuals’ privacy rights. The Government continued to restrict freedom of speech and press, although there has been an increase in press freedom over a series of years. The Government restricted freedom of assembly, association, religion, and movement. Violence and discrimination against women, violence against children, discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities, and strict limitations on worker rights continued.

2002:
The Government’s human rights record remained poor; although there were some improvements in a few areas, serious problems remained. Citizens did not have the right or the legal means to change their government. Security forces continued to abuse detainees and prisoners, arbitrarily arrest and detain persons, and hold them in incommunicado detention. Security forces committed torture. In 2001 the Council of Ministers approved a new law regarding punitive measures that would forbid harming detainees and to allow those accused of crimes to hire a lawyer or legal agent. On May 1, the new Saudi Criminal Procedural Law went into effect. Prolonged detention without charge was a problem. Security forces committed such abuses, in contradiction to the law, but with the acquiescence of the Government. The Mutawwa’in continued to intimidate, abuse, and detain citizens and foreigners. Most trials were closed, and defendants usually appeared before judges without legal counsel. The Government infringed on citizens’ privacy rights. The Government prohibited or restricted freedom of speech, the press, assembly, association, religion, and movement. However, during the year, the Government continued to tolerate a wider range of debate and criticism in the press concerning domestic issues. Discrimination and violence against women, discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities, and strict limitations on worker rights continued.

For some reason Guppies think that “Speaking Out” will change things. Sometimes that is not enough. Sometimes your need “Engagement”. Sometimes that is not enough, and you need “Sanctions”. Sometimes that is not enough. and you need “Confrontation”. Sometimes that is not enough and you need “Limited Military Action”. Sometimes you need War.

The decision as to what level of intervention is needed weighs the cost versus the benefit. Sometimes those decisions are hard to make…

7

well like OG pointed out, it is not the first time america has criticized saudia on his poor human rights record. But i guess this time, this announcemnet is politically motivated. john cherry has criticized bush consistently for his close links with Saudi royal family. As a matter of fact I was stunned to hear john Kerry slamming Saudi royal family so openly in his nomination speech. Normally, presidential candidates refrain attacking one particular country or a ruling party in their nomination speeches. But john Kerry mentioned Saudi royal family’s name particularly in his nomination speech and criticized Bush for his over-dependence on Saudis for oil. And at that moment I had a feeling that sooner or later, Bush will attack Saudis (verbally) to gain some political momentum for his election campaign. I think this announcement is politically motivated and I will not be surprised at all if His Royal Highness Prince Bandar bin Sultan (Saudi ambassador to USA and a very very close friends of bush family) was taken in confidence by Bush before the state department made these statements.

But lets keep our fingers across. If state department is serious in its criticism of Saudi royal family, then it is a very positive change in American foreign policy. If America really wants to win Muslims hearts, he has to take steps like this. Mr. Bush, help Muslims getting rid of these dictators and u will start winning your war on terrorism. But please don’t get rid of these dictators the way u got rid of saddam…….

8

^ how did these dictators come into being? and how did they become so powerful?

I say put sanctions on them and they should return the favor in kind for human rights violations in Iraq and Afghanistan to start with and then lets see what pans out... oil ka oil pani ka pani

9

^ why were the countrymen all hip hip horay when these dictatorships were first planted? the moment the regimes turned corrupt the blame game began... nowhere did the game ask who let the popular regimes become corrupt - the people living in the regime.

10

"hip hip horay" factor widely varies from country to country and one society to the other ... in the case of Saudis it was greed, ignorance, and lack of choice... "turned corrupt"? most of these regimes were corrupt from the day of their inception, why is the corruption an issue now (both for people outside of these socities and inside) is the question and I think the answers are many.

11

'Criticize' all they want they're still suckling from the oil tit. It's like a baby burping.

12

It's about time that someone pointed this out about Saudi Arabia.

Their surpression of all fiqhs except the Hanbali fiqh is unparalelled in Islamic history.

The Saudi government refuses to appoint any maulana who is not an adherent of the Hanbali fiqh to the position of imam at Mecca or Medina. They do not permit the opening of madrassahs that do not teach hanbali fiqh.

The Hijaz was dominated by Maliki fiqh until the 1920s when the Saudis took over, and for the past 80 years they've been trying to eliminate Maliki fiqh there.

Religious education in schools too focuses entirely on Hanbali fiqh, even in the Hijaz where the population is predominantly following Maliki fiqh.

Not to mention the official government (mis)treatment of Muslim groups that are not Sunni...

13

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Thap: *
'Criticize' all they want they're still suckling from the oil tit. It's like a baby burping.
[/QUOTE]

Exactly. If they're oh so self-righteous then please get your oil from elsewhere instead of supporting the very regime you're criticising!

Not to mention it also serves as a convenient base for their Navy and Air Force.

American hypocrisy at its best.

14

^ if you are so self righteous then please get your education from University of Peshawar. why live here and pay America for bombing muslims? Remember, each bag of frito lays potato chips you buy, pens, paper, underwear...pays for shiny new hellfires. Hypocricy goes around hai na!!

15

Just because a person studies/lives here doesn’t mean they have to agree with all of America’s foreign policies (wannabe immigrants: HINT, HINT). If that was the case then I guess all the Democrats should have left the US in 2000.

Besides, I don’t pay the US anything, they pay me. :hula:

16

Really so you don;t spend any money buying toothpaste, cup’o’noodle soups. Nothing right!!! How do you live wiht yourself…financing death of poor mujaheddin around the world. Chullu bhar paani mein..:rolleyes:

17

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
How do you live wiht yourself...financing death of poor mujaheddin around the world.
[/QUOTE]

Death for mujahideen is hardly a bad thing.

18

^ thank you for supporting our war against terror and aiding our ability to launch missles form helicopters at islamic extremist through your contributions. I am glad we agree they need to be removed from this beautiful planet of ours. I had you wrong…I apologize…we are together in this fight. God bless the USA!!! :jhanda:

19

The Saudi Royal Family deserves to be dethroned. They are responsible for a society without the basic rights. They make East Timor under Suharto look like paradise. Instead of engaging and discussing the issue with the King, a good ultimatum would be generally appreciated by the majority of the world. These people are not fit to take care of our holiest sites.

20

But wait a minute, all the money I get I send back to Pakistan :bummer:
Does this mean I am funding the extremists? :eek:
But isn’t that what the Good Ole US did a few years ago? :nono:
I am confused :konfused: