December 1, 2002

Critics Ask if Hans Blix, King Faisal Are Reliable

While awaiting the first report by U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix eight days hence, the Bush administration is evaluating the reliability of King Fahd of Saudi Arabia as an ally in the war against terrorism.

There is reason for concern on both counts.

Blix, former head of Sweden’s diplomatic service – is a compromise choice for the current inspection program. The U.S. nominee was rejected.

As director-general of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency in 1981, he was responsible for inspections of Iraq’s nuclear energy program.

During that time, Saddam managed to hide an advanced nuclear weapons program. Blix’s oversight was corrected by Israel’s preventive air strike against Iraq’s nuclear power plant producing weapon-grade plutonium.

Blix ruefully admits, "It’s correct to say that the IAEA was fooled by the Iraqis. But the lesson was learned. Not seeing something, or an indication of something, does not lead automatically to the conclusion that there is nothing."

Europeans are pleased with Blix’s announcement last week: "We are not coming to Iraq to harass or insult or humiliate them. We will not make a big deal over unintentional or minor infractions."

Americans are critical of the "cultural sensitivity" training he has required for his inspectors. There is concern that Blix and his staff are overly concerned about hurting Iraqi feelings and therefore susceptible to Iraqi duplicity.

Under U.N. Resolution 1441, Saddam has an opportunity to declare any weapons of mass destruction by Dec. 8.

Then, Blix must make his first, confidential report to the U.N. on Jan. 27. At that time, the U.N. Security Council will decide whether to sign off or give Saddam more time.

Blix has already stated he "needs at least a year to do the job." He should be careful not to go down in history as being fooled twice by Iraq.

The question is whether Blix’s report will justify another month or so of cat and mouse. Probably not. Every delay means more casualties, American and allied, at showdown. It is certain that President Bush will not be put off easily.

Who will stand with the U.S. at the moment of truth other than Britain -- and perhaps Australia and previous-victim Kuwait – is conjectural.

Strangely we are being opposed by King Fahd of Saudi Arabia who has been Saddam’s target ‘lo these many years.

It became clear this week that the Saudi have been financing Islamic terrorists for decades. The wife of Prince Bandar bin-Sultan, Saudi ambassador to the U.S., has donated thousands of dollars to two, known terrorists in the United States recently.

It is likely she believed the money was for medical charity. Nonetheless, this is another example of no-questions-asked policy.

It should be noted that Faisal is between a rock and a hard place. He and his 5,000 "princes" would like to enjoy their fabulous oil wealth quietly.

Fat chance. Geology and religion are met at Saudi Arabia. The country sits on the world’s largest pool of oil. The Prophet Mohammad started Islam in 610 at the city of Mecca. Millions of foreign Muslim pilgrims go there every year to pray.  

As merchant of black gold for western infidels, and guardian of Islam’s holiest site, Fahd must hew a thin line. He buys tolerance from the west by selling oil at a price not quite ruinous. He buys off Muslim fanatics with bountiful "protection" money – aka racketeering.

U.S. Secretary of State Powell insists that Faisal is a "good friend." However, one can’t overlook Faisal’s 1972 oil embargo to punish Americans for supporting Israel.

Or that Saudi Arabian bin-Laden acquired his wealth as a building contractor for Faisal.

Or that 15 of the 19 terrorists of Sept. 11 are Saudi citizens.

Or that Fahd would not let the U.S. investigate the Kohbar terrorism murders of U.S. military personnel at Riyadh.

Or that Fahd will not now let us use the airfield we built there to protect him from Saddam during the Gulf war.

With friends like Fahd, who needs enemies?

PARTING SHOTS

Quote of the week – Defense Secretary Rumsfeld’s answer to the dumb question asked by a reporter: "Is bin-Laden dead or alive?" Replied Rumsfeld: "Yes."

 * * *

Religious environmentalists drove electric automobiles to Detroit to badger Ford and General Motors with "What Would Jesus Drive" bumper stickers. Rev. Bob Schlichter of Punta Gorda asserts the answer is Honda. The Bible says (Apostles 2:14), "They continued daily in one accord."

By Lindsey Williams, columnist for Sun Coast Media Group newspapers