Martin Schram: Don't go to extreme with Saudis

Of all the non-government, non-military institutions that play crucial roles in the making of geopolitical and military policy, perhaps the most pivotal are the think tanks. That's because it is assumed that they will emphasize the think, not the tank.

So it was more than startling to read, in a recent Washington Post exclusive by Thomas Ricks, of the policy recommendations concerning Saudi Arabia. The recommendations were made to a Pentagon advisory board by an analyst from the Rand Corp. think tank. After a 24-slide briefing that concluded the Saudis are "the kernel of evil" and our "most dangerous opponent" in the Middle East, Rand analyst Laurent Murawiec reportedly presented the Defense Policy Board with a recommendation: Tell Saudi Arabia that it must stop supporting terrorism -- or the United States will seize Saudi oil fields and Saudi financial assets in the United States.

Whoa. Before we strap on our helmets and drive our tanks through the Arabian peninsula, let's put on our own thinking caps and figure out where we'll wind up.

Murawiec has indeed put together a briefing that amounts to a powerful indictment of Saudi Arabia: "The Saudis are active at every level of the terror chain, from planners to financiers, from cadre to foot-soldier, from ideologist to cheerleader." And as faithful readers of this column know, I've been sharply critical of Saudi Arabia for exercising dangerous duplicity. I've written that the Saudis seem to have been paying what amounts to protection money to terrorists or their fellow travelers to do whatever they want outside Saudi Arabia, as long as they will do nothing to overthrow the Saudi monarchy. So this isn't about being tough on, or soft on, Saudi support of terrorists.

But the idea of seizing Saudi Arabia's oil fields -- which is to say, seizing Saudi Arabia -- is not exactly the solution I had in mind. Unless the United States, leader of the free world, wants to have the rest of the free world turn against it. And against Israel, for good measure.

It was on July 10 that the Defense Policy Board met to consider options on Saudi Arabia. Here's what you need to know about the players: The board is just an advisory panel to the secretary of defense. It doesn't actually make policy. But it is influential because it is, by Washington standards, decidedly ex-rated: Ex-Assistant Defense Secretary Richard Perle is its chairman; and ex-Vice President Dan Quayle, ex-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, ex-defense secretaries James Schlesinger and Harold Brown, ex-House speakers Newt Gingrich and Tom Foley, and assorted ex-military top guns are on the board. The briefer, Murawiec, is an ex-adviser to the French Ministry of Defense and now an analyst for Rand, which proudly explains on its Web site that it "is the first organization to be called a 'think tank.' We earned this distinction soon after we were created in 1946 by our original client, the U.S. Air Force (then the Army Air Force). Some of our early work involved aircraft, rockets and satellites."

Now for the think-tank thinking: "Saudi Arabia supports our enemies and attacks our allies," said the Rand briefer. According to The Washington Post report, he said that Saudi Arabia should stop sending money to worldwide fundamentalist Islamic groups and stop all anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli statements made within Saudi Arabia (apparently referring to all media comments in that country of controlled media, which would indicate these attacks have earned the Saudi seal of approval).

He also said the United States should insist that Saudi Arabia "prosecute or isolate those involved in the terror chain, including the Saudi intelligence services." Or what? If the Saudis won't do this, then he recommends that Saudi oil fields be "targeted."

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's spokeswoman, Victoria Clarke, issued a statement saying the Saudis are America's friend and ally in the global war on terrorism. The Post reported that of the two dozen ex-greats in the briefing, only one spoke out in dissent. Kissinger was said to have objected to the anti-Saudi conclusion. His view was summarized as: "The Saudis are pro-American, they have to operate in a difficult region, and ultimately we can manage them."

Actually, we can't really manage them; the Saudis will forever stick it to us with one hand even as they are shaking ours with the other.

But we can manage without them. And we can manage without their military base that we have wrapped around ourselves as if it is our regional security blanket. But seize their oil fields? No. Better to just ignore the Saudis and let them play by themselves in their own sandbox.

------

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Martin Schram writes political analysis for Scripps Howard News Service.)