Pentagon rejects think-tank's recommendation to attack Saudi Arabia
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Pentagon has distanced itself from a report commissioned by an influential defence think-tank that suggested blowing up Saudi oil fields and damaging the country's financial assets unless it did more to fight terrorism.
The review, presented to the Defence Policy Board, a right-wing group headed by Richard Perle, an assistant secretary of defence in the Reagan administration, suggested an extreme approach to dealing with a country that "supports our enemies and attacks our allies".
The Saudis are "active at every level of the terror chain", the review – drawn up by Laurent Murawiec, a Rand Corp analyst and former adviser to the French Defence Ministry – said. "[Saudi Arabia] is the kernel of evil, the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent [in the Middle East]."
While the briefing proposes an extreme position, it is significant because there appears to be a growing consensus within Washington that Saudi Arabia could do more to apprehend suspected al-Qa'ida members.
That view is said to be particularly felt by Vice-President Dick Cheney and his officials, who have noted that 15 of the 19 hijackers on 11 September came from Saudi Arabia. More than 100 of the suspected al-Qa'ida and Taliban prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are estimated to be Saudi citizens.
Yesterday, the Pentagon distanced itself from the board's presentation and repeated Washington's official line. "The presentation does not reflect the official view of the Defence Department," it said.
"Saudi Arabia is a long-standing friend and ally of the United States. The Saudis cooperate fully in the global war on terrorism and have the department's and administration's deep appreciation."
No one from the Saudi embassy in Washington was available for comment, but its US ambassador, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, told The Washington Post: "I think they [the review's suggestions are] a misguided effort that is shallow and not honest about the facts. Repeating lies will never make them facts."
America's relationship with Saudi Arabia has developed over many years. In the 1980s, both countries spent billions of dollars supporting Afghan resistance to the Soviet invasion of that country.
The relationship became even closer at the end of that decade when America positioned 500,000 troops on Saudi soil to repel President Saddam Hussein's forces. Osama bin Laden, a Saudi citizen, has cited the presence of US forcesas a reason for his actions against America.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments