[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
SAUDI ARABIA'S TROUBLING EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, NONPROLIFERATION, AND TRADE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 19, 2017
__________
Serial No. 115-46
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
26-312PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected]
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California
DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas KAREN BASS, California
DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina AMI BERA, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
PAUL COOK, California TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
RON DeSANTIS, Florida ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
TED S. YOHO, Florida DINA TITUS, Nevada
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois NORMA J. TORRES, California
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois
DANIEL M. DONOVAN, Jr., New York THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
Wisconsin TED LIEU, California
ANN WAGNER, Missouri
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida
FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
THOMAS A. GARRETT, Jr., Virginia
Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director
Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade
TED POE, Texas, Chairman
JOE WILSON, South Carolina WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
DARRELL E. ISSA, California LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
PAUL COOK, California BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania DINA TITUS, Nevada
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York NORMA J. TORRES, California
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois
THOMAS A. GARRETT, Jr., Virginia
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Ms. Nina Shea, director, Center for Religious Freedom, Hudson
Institute...................................................... 4
David A. Weinberg, Ph.D., senior fellow, Foundation for Defense
of Democracies................................................. 14
The Honorable Frank Wolf, distinguished senior fellow, 21st
Century Wilberforce Initiative (former U.S. Representative).... 34
Douglas Johnston, Ph.D., president emeritus, International Center
for Religion and Diplomacy..................................... 40
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
Ms. Nina Shea: Prepared statement................................ 7
David A. Weinberg, Ph.D.: Prepared statement..................... 16
The Honorable Frank Wolf: Prepared statement..................... 37
Douglas Johnston, Ph.D.: Prepared statement...................... 42
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 62
Hearing minutes.................................................. 63
David A. Weinberg, Ph.D.: Material submitted for the record...... 64
The Honorable Frank Wolf: Material submitted for the record...... 72
SAUDI ARABIA'S TROUBLING EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 2017
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:15 p.m., in
room 2200 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ted Poe (chairman
of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Poe. The subcommittee will now come to order.
Without objection, all members may have 5 days to submit
statements, questions, and extraneous materials for the record,
subject to the limitation in the rules.
The Chair will ask that the witnesses come forward and sit
in your designated positions.
The Chair has distributed to all members an expert from--
excerpts from current textbooks published by Saudi Arabia's
Ministry of Education. The Chair would ask and direct that the
staff furnish this material to all of the witnesses at this
time.
Saudi Arabia is an ally in the fight against terrorism.
Many of the same terrorist organizations that threaten the
United States also desire to overthrow the Saudi Government and
break our partnership with the government. It is a key member
of the Coalition to Fight ISIS, with its pilots flying
alongside Americans since day one of the campaign in Syria.
Last year Saudi Arabia adopted strict laws prohibiting
fundraising for terrorism, jointly designated support networks
for al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
However, the Saudis still have much more they need to do at
home to counter the sources of extremism in the region. The
battle against terrorism will ultimately have to be fought and
won on the battlefield of ideas. Saudi Arabia has simply not
done enough to defeat extremist ideology.
The Kingdom is playing the role of both arsonist and
firefighter when it comes to Islamic extremism. Nowhere is this
more evident than the textbooks Saudi Arabia produces to teach
young people. For too long, Saudi Arabia's education curriculum
has inspired the very ideology that is at the root of many
terrorist organizations like ISIS and al-Qaeda. Saudi textbooks
are full of anti-Semitism, conspiracy theories, and calls to
violence that have incited students both at home and across the
world.
This poisonous ideology has provided the groundwork for
generations of extremism. In fact, ISIS adopted official Saudi
textbooks for its schools in 2015 until that terrorist
organization could publish its own textbooks. However, its
export of hateful material through Saudi-funded schools abroad
has helped spread the toxic ideology to more tolerant and open
Muslim communities in countries such as Kosovo and Indonesia.
While the Kingdom has repeatedly pledged to remove
extremist content from its curriculum, troubling language
remains in many of the most recent editions of Saudi textbooks.
In 2006, the Saudis committed to eliminate all passages that
promoted hatred toward any religion by 2008. Yet even today,
years later, textbooks include content that discourages
befriending infidels, claims the goal of Zionism is world
domination, and encourages fighting any infidel who refuses to
submit to the supremacy of Islam. This intolerance is
unacceptable and directly contributes to the widespread
persecution of religious minorities that plague the Middle
East.
Another passage in a current Saudi textbook for middle
school students states that ``the mujahideen who are doing good
deeds for the sake of Allah . . . should be given
transportation, weapons, food, and anything else that they may
need to continue their jihad.'' Messages such as this undermine
the Saudi's own counterterrorism efforts. By indoctrinating
children into the belief that the people of other faiths are
inferior or that are a threat to Islam, Saudi Arabia is
ensuring future generations of extremists that will join the
ranks of terrorist groups.
This is not to ignore that some positive steps have been
taken. In recent years, the Kingdom has introduced passages
that denounce terrorism and encourage dialogue with other
faiths. But these steps only send mixed messages to easily
influenced young minds so as long as those more extreme
messages remain.
The State Department has previously in other
administrations, failed to hold Saudi Arabia counterparts to
past pledges. The Saudi--the State Department has even refused
to publish reports that shed light on these troubling textbooks
for fear of embarrassing our Saudi partners, information that
they have in the possession of the State Department. This is
troubling.
While we appreciate Saudi Arabia's contribution to our
overall counterterrorism efforts in the region, we must hold
them accountable for their role in fueling the very extremism
that we are both trying to combat. It is in both of our
countries' interests in the fight against terrorism. We all
need to be on the same page. And that is just the way it is.
I will yield from the gentleman from Massachusetts Mr.
Keating, the ranking member, for his opening statement.
Mr. Keating. Thank you, Chairman Poe, for holding this
hearing. And thank you to our witnesses for being here. Mr.
Wolf, welcome back.
We have dedicated a lot of time in this subcommittee with
talks of countering terrorism and violent extremism. Our last
hearing addressed that very issue in Europe, in light of the
many attacks carried out against so many innocent civilians
across the region.
We are here to discuss the issue in the context of Saudi
Arabia's school curriculum, and in particular, reforms that
have been made to ensure children just going to school are not
being trained in intolerance and violence but, also
importantly, to identify what work still must be done. The
spread of extremist ideologies and instances of individuals
being inspired to commit acts of terrorism has forced us to
learn much, much more about the factors that make individuals
vulnerable to committing acts of violence and taking human
lives.
We realize that the messages these individuals are exposed
to can change the course of their lives and push them to carry
out heinous crimes of their own in their own communities, and
in those communities they may have never known, but their
actions have led to dehumanization, and they actually come to
believe legitimate targets of violence are their victims.
These materials that our future generations spend every day
of the most formative years of their lives learning from are
therefore very important. Texts that dehumanize and condone
violence against others simply cannot be tolerated.
Saudi Arabia is an ally of the United States in fighting
terrorism. And if there is ever to be a lasting peace and
security in the Middle East it will require every country in
the region stepping up and being a leader in eradicating
extremism and promoting the institutions and rule of law needed
to ensure that such hatred and violent ideologies are never
again permitted to take root or to spread.
Today I hope to learn more from our witnesses about the
reforms and progress the Kingdom has already made, what
existing challenges lie before us and, specifically, how we in
Congress can support progress in this regard. Every year that
goes by children are being taught intolerance. And that
compounds the challenges we will face in creating a safer world
for them to grow up in going forward.
So, I am looking forward to today's hearing about the steps
that can be made sure to take these materials molding our
future generations and bringing them forward, not only in Saudi
Arabia but in communities around the world. We all have forms
of intolerance, and we all must work to remove these from our
own countries. This must be achieved as quickly as possible,
however. We cannot afford to be patient while intolerance that
promotes or condones violence in any form is not only shared
but taught and continues to undermine our collective efforts to
protect communities from terrorism and violent extremism.
Again I would like to thank our witnesses and I yield back.
Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Do any other members wish to be recognized?
[No response.]
Mr. Poe. Seeing none, without objection all witnesses'
prepared statements will be made part of the record. I ask that
each witness please keep your presentation to no more than 5
minutes. If you see a red light that appears before you, that
means stop. And we do have your statements and all members have
had access to those statements for some time.
I will introduce each witness and then give them time for
their opening statements.
Ms. Nina Shea is the director of the Center for Religious
Freedom at the Hudson Institute. Previously she was appointed
by the United States House of Representatives to serve seven
terms as a commissioner on the U.S. Commission on International
Religious Freedom.
Dr. David Weinberg is a senior fellow at the Foundation for
Defense of Democracies. Prior to joining the FDD, he served as
Democratic professional staff member at the House Committee on
Foreign Affairs.
The Honorable Frank Wolf served, God bless you, 17 terms in
the United States House of Representatives. He is now a
distinguished senior fellow at the 21st Century Wilberforce
Initiative.
And Dr. Douglas Johnston is the president emeritus and
founder of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy.
Prior to his current position he served as vice president and
COO of Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Ms. Shea, we will start with you. You have 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF MS. NINA SHEA, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR RELIGIOUS
FREEDOM, HUDSON INSTITUTE
Ms. Shea. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee.
This is an important hearing. It comes at a critical time
when Saudi Arabia itself is expressing a new vision for itself
of reform. And many thoughtful voices after 9/11 made a
connection between the fact that most of the perpetrators and
the mastermind behind those attacks were from Saudi Arabia, and
that their educational system could have a lot to do with what
happened that day.
The Saudis--the Saudi King--back in 2003 convened his own
panel to examine the Saudi textbooks and they confirmed some of
our worst fears. And they found that the Saudi Kingdom, and I
am quoting, ``religious studies curriculum encourages violence
with others and misguides the people into believing that in
order to safeguard their own religion they must violently
repress and even physically eliminate the others.''
For 15 years after 9/11 Saudi Ministry of Education
textbooks still teach an ideology of hatred and violence
against Jews, Christians, other Muslims such as Shiites, Sufis
and Amadiyyas, Hindus, Baha'is, Yezidis, animists, sorcerers,
and infidels of all stripes, as well as other groups with
different beliefs. The most objectionable passages are from the
upper grades' religious textbooks.
While the Saudi Government has made much of reform in the
early grades, those religious texts, like those for math or
English, have not been particularly problematic, though overall
critical thinking and ideas that conflict with the government-
approved ones are banned.
Each academic year the Ministry of Education issues a new
edition of grades 1 through 12's religious textbooks. And they
are mandatory in all Saudi public schools. Each edition
reflects some changes in wording, content, and placement.
Nevertheless, over the past some 10 years, the content, that I
have been looking at these books, the content has continued to
retain violent passages and directives.
Christians, Hindus, and those practicing witchcraft are to
be fought and killed. The textbooks incite violence against
polytheists, a category that would of course include all non-
monotheistic religions, but in Saudi Wahhabi teaching can
include monotheistic religions too, such as Christianity.
Christians are also considered infidels who must be fought
unless they have a protection contract with Muslims. Conspiracy
theories are taught as fact about the Freemasons, the Rotary
Club, the Lion's Club, the American University of Beirut, and
so on.
Dogmatic lessons in Saudi middle and high school textbooks
include that many--instruct that many Muslims should be killed
for their beliefs, including blasphemers, Christian converts,
and those who merely doubt the Prophet's truth, as well as
Shiites and Sufis, who are condemned as polytheists for praying
or even seen crying at gravesites.
No group, however, is more vilified than the Jews. The
problem is far deeper than that conveyed by the State
Department's characterization of it as simply stereotypical or
anti-Semitic language. Repeatedly Jews are demonized,
dehumanized, and targeted for violence. The textbooks instruct
that the Zionist aim is Jewish domination of the world and
controlling its destiny.
When I was in Saudi Arabia in 2011 with the U.S. Commission
on International Religious Freedom I had a chance to ask the
Saudi justice minister at the time why the Protocols of the
Elders of Zion, an infamously anti-Semitic fabrication from the
Russian revolution, is included in the textbooks on Hadith,
which is the traditions of Islam's Prophet Mohammed, where it
continues to be taught as historical fact. He responded that
the Protocols are treated as part of Islamic culture because it
is a book that has long been found in plentiful supply in Saudi
Arabia and that it was a book that his father had in his house.
In the interests of time I am going to refer to my written
testimony for specific examples. You have already cited a few.
But just to say that apostates are singled out for
punishment in this life, death unless they repent within 3
days.
Christians, again, are considered polytheists, and
polytheists are to be--is a reason to fight those who practice
it and to commit jihad against it, is another quote from these
books.
Homosexuals, the punishment is death.
Jihad is extolled and defined. Its first definition is
asserting effort in fighting unbelievers and tyrants.
And there are many more examples. And these are posted on
the Internet and shipped worldwide. And they have been linked
by our counterterrorism officials to growing extremism.
The Saudis, the one point I would like to make is that the
Saudis themselves have admitted that the textbooks need reform.
They do not deny it. Any Saudi that I talked to has agreed,
including the Saudi Minister of Education in 2011, but they
have not really finished it. They have never finished it. And
they have a long history of broken promises where they have
said that they did; either they did clean them up, as our
Ambassador to Washington, former Ambassador Turki al-Faisal
told us, or that the reform is just around the corner and that
it will be completed in 2 years or 5 years or 10 years. And
over this period it has not happened.
The government--U.S. Government--has failed to verify this.
And has even, as you mentioned, covered it up.
So, I will conclude my testimony there and urge you to
mandate that Congress, mandate--that Congress mandate the State
Department review the textbooks and highlight and detail the
troublesome portions of it. And to, even to make defense
contracts with Saudi Arabia contingent on the cleanup of these
textbooks and so that they are not in danger of hurting or
killing any American that might be a member of the groups that
are singled out for violence and dehumanization in these
reports.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Shea follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Ms. Shea.
Dr. Weinberg.
STATEMENT OF DAVID A. WEINBERG, PH.D., SENIOR FELLOW,
FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES
Mr. Weinberg. Chairman Poe, Ranking Member Keating, and
distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you on behalf
of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies for having me here
today. I will deliver an abridged version of my written
testimony.
As I explain in that text, encouraging Saudi Arabia to
remove incitement from its government-published textbooks for
its public education system is not just the right thing to do,
it is also a national security issue. Fighting terrorists
militarily can only achieve so much if Saudi textbooks and
other sources of incitement continue to provide fertile
intellectual ground for violent extremism.
This past May I published a long list of intolerant
statements in Saudi textbooks from the most current school
year, which I will draw from extensively here. I have included
all of these passages in their original Arabic as an appendix
to my written testimony.
I found that Saudi textbooks still recommend killing people
for many acts that U.S. law would characterize as personal
choices. That included adultery, anal sex, converting from
Islam, or purported acts of sorcery.
The textbooks are also rife with anti-Christian and
particularly anti-Semitic inciting, often framed as anti-
Zionism. One book called Christianity an invalid, perverted
religion. Another accused Zionism of plotting a global Jewish
government. And a third called Zionism an octopus that it
accused, falsely, of trying to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and
the entire Islamic creed.
A fourth book taught that befriending infidels is
forbidden, citing a Quranic verse that says not to take
Christians or Jews as allies. That textbook called such
infidels enemies of Muslims and of God, and taught that Muslims
must abhor them, quite literally teaching hatred.
These are all examples from current textbooks used in the
2016 to 2017 Saudi school year.
According to a forthcoming report by Human Rights Watch,
the textbooks also repeatedly refer to well-known stereotypes
of Shiite or Sufi Muslim rituals as horrendous examples of
polytheism. This is particularly important, because a passage I
found in a current Saudi textbook called for fighting such
polytheists except under a handful of extenuating
circumstances.
That book also teaches that there are four types of
infidels, and that if a non-believer doesn't happen to fit into
one of the first three categories--diplomats, peoples with whom
Muslims have a non-aggression treaty, or people who agree to
pay a special tax associated with second class status--then
they are combatant whom it says Muslims are commanded to fight.
Saudi Arabia has made some positive changes to its
textbooks in recent years but not enough. A few passages
condemning terrorism or racism and permitting kind treatment to
peaceful non-believers have been added. Direct calls to
violence or hatred are somewhat less common.
By the way, I would like to share a little bit of news with
you today. Seventeen minutes after this hearing was scheduled
to start the Saudi Embassy posted on Twitter that, ``The
Ministry of Education has finalized a round of textbook
revisions in line with the objectives of the national
transformation plan.'' This is particularly puzzling because in
an interview with the Wall Street Journal earlier this year
Saudi Arabia's education minister seemed to suggest that the
broader change involving incitement and other issues in its
curriculum would have to wait until 3 years, up to 3 years from
now when the Kingdom would move to tablets in the classroom.
Saudi officials routinely oversell the success and ambition
of their efforts to reform these books to date. In 2005 Saudi
Arabia said it had removed all the problematic passages from
its textbooks. When Nina Shea proved that that was incorrect,
the Saudis assured the U.S. that all intolerant passages would
be removed by 2008. They missed that deadline, as well as
others they had pledged for 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. Even
some of the textbooks they claim to have fixed in recent years
still contain incitement.
U.S. policy on this issue has not been up to the task. For
example, the State Department issued the country reports on
counterterrorism today. And while there are several lines in
there about the Saudi curriculum, there is only half, less than
a full sentence on what incitement still remains.
But there is much that Congress can do to help. The U.S.
Commission on International Religious Freedom called on the
executive branch this year to ``undertake and make public an
annual assessment'' of Saudi textbooks to ``determine if
passages that teach religious intolerance had been removed.''
Congress should help by passing legislation that requires the
administration to issue such a yearly report, and allocates the
resources of it to do so, no later than 90 days after the start
of the Saudi school year so such findings are actually still
valid for diplomats. And such a report should quote all such
passages that could be seen as encouraging violence or
intolerance for public scrutiny.
There are a number of other recommendations that I include
in my written testimony. But in the interests of time, I will
leave off there.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Weinberg follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Dr. Weinberg.
The Chair will now recognize Congressman Wolf.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE FRANK WOLF, DISTINGUISHED SENIOR
FELLOW, 21ST CENTURY WILBERFORCE INITIATIVE (FORMER U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE)
Mr. Wolf. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee.
The issue of Saudi educational curriculum as a means of
promoting intolerance and inspiring terrorism is not a new one.
This topic hit close to home in 2003, when Ahmed Omar Abu Ali
was arrested while in class at the Islamic University of Medina
for an attempted plot to assassinate President Bush. Before
attending the University of Medina, Mr. Abu Ali attended and
was a valedictorian at a high school which was located here in
northern Virginia, the Islamic Saudi Academy. Mr. Abu Ali was
ultimately sentenced to life in prison and is currently serving
out his sentence in a supermax in Colorado.
The reason I would like to highlight this particular case
in particular is due to the fact that concerns were raised
regarding the educational material being used by the Islamic
Saudi Academy over and over. Not only was the school funded by
the Saudi Arabian Embassy, which meant it fell under the Saudi
Ministry of Education, but the Saudi Ambassador to Washington
led the board of directors. He literally led the school.
In 2007 when asked by the United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom to make textbooks publicly
available, the school refused to comply. We got copies from a
professor that gave us one on the side. One letter from USCIRF
on the issue stated, ``Based on past documentation, significant
concerns remain about whether the Saudi textbooks used at the
ISA Academy explicitly . . . hate, intolerance and human rights
violations, and in some cases violence, which may adversely
affect the interests of the United States.''
In 2008, I wrote Secretary Rice on five different occasions
regarding the concerns held by the Commission regarding the
content of the textbooks. At that time I requested a meeting be
convened between relevant State Department officials, USCIRF
representatives, and expert analysts commissioned by USCIRF to
translate the textbooks in order to determine what was being
taught by the Academy. Such meeting never took place.
Generally, the State Department has been weak on this issue
in both Republican and in Democratic administrations.
During this time, USCIRF was finally able to obtain copies
of some of the textbooks being used by the Islamic Saudi
Academy. After a thorough analysis, the Commission concluded
that the textbooks contained very troubling passages that did
not conform to international human rights standards, including
vilification of those who adhere to Christianity, Judaism,
Baha'i'ism, Ahmadism, and Shia Islam and others. I have
submitted for the record some of those statements.
And in 2009 I sent a letter, again, to Secretary of State
Clinton, urging the State Department monitor and report on the
textbooks published by the Saudi Government. In that letter I
acknowledged, ``To date, we have had only vague assurances on
the part of the State Department and the school that the
curriculum has been reformed. But these assurances are
insufficient, particularly when they are utterly at odds with
USCIRF's findings, and may be indicative of wider problems,
namely, the status of Saudi commitments made in 2006 to conduct
a comprehensive revision of textbooks and educational curricula
to weed out . . .''
While it is impossible to say that Mr. Abu Ali was directly
radicalized by the textbooks used at the Islamic Saudi Academy,
the use of the books that promote religious discrimination and
the justification of violence toward non-believers cannot be
tolerated, certainly not in Fairfax County, not in Virginia,
not in America, but quite frankly, anywhere around the world.
Consider that if this is the academy's curriculum in the
United States, just imagine how prolific the problem has been
across Saudi-affiliated academies, funded programs in other
countries around the world, especially in some countries in the
Middle East.
While the Ahmed Omar Abu Ali case is now almost a decade
old, Saudi Arabia has continued to promote and export radical
Wahhabism. In the wake of the Orlando shooting just last year,
Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton stated, ``It is
long past the time for the Saudis, the Qataris and the Kuwaitis
and others to stop their citizens from funding extremist
organizations. And they should stop,'' she said, ``supporting
radical schools and mosques around the world that have set too
many young people on the path toward extremism.''
And, unfortunately, by funding top American university
research centers, the Saudi Government has been able to
minimize voices of those in academia who you would have thought
otherwise would have had the best means for researching the
effects of radical Wahhabism.
While there are many concerns regarding the influence of
Saudi Arabia, more specifically radical Wahhabism, on countries
around the world, it would be remiss not to acknowledge that
very recently some small improvements have been made to the
educational material. In the latest report by USCIRF they said,
``In February 2017 Saudi officials stated that the final stage
of revisions to high school texts was underway. During its
visit, USCIRF obtained some textbooks currently in use and
found some intolerant content remained in high school texts,
though at a reduced level.''
They go on to explain while there has been progress in
terms, there is still concern that some of the teachers may be
promoting a more radicalized version of Islam.
Some recommendations: One, the USCIRF has some very good
recommendations. Undertake and make public and annual
assessment.
I believe you have to put this in the legislation. If you
just let the State Department or the American Embassy in Saudi
Arabia, they will always find a reason not to do it. So I think
it needs to be mandated that the relevant Ministry of Education
textbooks determine the passages that teach religious
intolerance have been removed.
Secondly, press the Saudi Government to denounce publicly
the continued use around the world of older versions of Saudi
textbooks and other materials that promote hatred and
intolerance. And make every attempt to retrieve and buy back
previously distributed textbooks that contain intolerance.
You know, even in America's schools sometimes you're in a
class there will be a textbook that is 10, 15 years old. These
are still in schools around, around the world.
And keep in mind, lastly, the Saudis funded almost all of
the madrasas that were up on the Afghan-Pakistan border that
helped lead to what took place in the Taliban. Mullah Omar, the
head of the Taliban, was a graduate of a Saudi-funded academy.
The issue needs more work.
And I want to thank the subcommittee and the members
because I kind of thought for a while this issue was kind of
forgotten about. Mandate it and put it in. If you take the
pressure off the Saudis they will slip back in and this will
come in. You keep the pressure on and you can make a tremendous
difference.
I thank you for the hearing.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wolf follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Congressman Wolf.
Dr. Johnston.
STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS JOHNSTON, PH.D., PRESIDENT EMERITUS,
INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR RELIGION AND DIPLOMACY
Mr. Johnston. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you
for the honor of presenting to your committee some of the work
our center has been doing to try to help facilitate educational
reform in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We have a written
testimony that covers that comprehensively. I will just touch
on some of the highlights.
Before I do, though, I would like to just take 1 second to
honor the other witnesses here. Each is a champion of human
rights and religious freedom in their own right, and it is an
honor to be with them.
Our task, which I consider complementary to their own, has
been to take action to address the problem. And in 2011, we
received a grant from the State Department to develop
recommendations that would help facilitate reform efforts that
were already underway in the Kingdom. Toward this end, we
assessed all the textbooks for discriminatory content. And we
also tried to determine global dispersion of those textbooks.
It was a--from the start our approach was one of seeking to
be balanced, giving them credit for whatever progress had been
made, not only in that but in their deradicalization program,
but to be very unsparing in our detail of what yet remained to
be done. And there we completed a report, very comprehensive,
included 99 textbooks. I could go into great length on that,
but just suffice it to say that this report is just replete
with examples of the kinds of problems that have been cited
here with the other witnesses.
There is, at that point in time, this is 2011, sprinkled
throughout you would find direct license given for violent
behavior toward others who do not subscribe to that similar
brand of Islam. You would also find direct license for such
things as desecrating the tombs of the Sufi saints in Timbuktu,
which the extremists did before the French kicked them out. So,
lots of problems.
There were not only problems in the textbooks as a whole,
but even in the six grades that had already been thoroughly
revised we did find problems.
So, one of the things I would just point out, though, in
terms of looking at these things, I think it is important to
try to avoid using a western lens as we do so. By that I mean
what we try to do is hold their feet to the fire by comparing
what is in those textbooks to what is in the Holy Quran with
respect to that same subject area, what is in the Cairo
Declaration of Human Rights in Islam with respect to that. In
all cases, the Saudi textbooks were much more conservative than
the sources I just mentioned.
So, that is, that is a very important piece is just
understanding exactly where, how much freedom the Government of
Saudi Arabia has to really maneuver. There are so many wild
cards in the mix. There are charities through which textbooks
are distributed. There are maverick members of the royal
family. There are deep-pocketed Saudis who are not members of
the royal family. Lots of people with lots of agendas.
And one of the things that is also a bit of a constraint is
the fact that the original pact between the monarchy and the
Salafi Ulema called for education belongs to the religious
establishment. So one of the things that the Saudis were having
to do is to finesse that aspect, that obligation. They also
need to worry about the credibility that they maintain within
Islam itself as custodian of the two holiest sites. So this is,
this is not to forgive any of the textbook content, this is to
just explain why sometimes it may take a little bit longer than
we would like.
We established a comprehensive baseline for future
analysis. And we felt that the progress that the Saudis were
making was credible enough that we should probably keep the
report private, not release it to the public. Our concern was
that western critics seizing upon the offensive passages that
still remain might just shut down the whole process as a
defensive backlash sets in and the conservatives move in. We
have seen this time and again in different situations in the
Islamic world.
So, we spent the next 3 years implementing some of the
recommendations that we had come forward with.
Now, just to bring it right up to the present, we are in
another month we are going to be starting a new effort to look
at the textbooks of the high school grades which had not been
revised the last time we looked at them. We are also going to
take an in-depth look at three countries on how the Saudi
educational materials are affecting the religious and social.
What is that impact?
And I will say this, right now the Saudis claim to have
just completed that process, reform process that started way
back in 2007. And they realize, however, that they still have
problems. Many of those have been mentioned here right now. And
what they are planning to do is tackle it from two aspects.
One, is by 2020 to have developed a set of curriculum
standards. They have never had curriculum standards before. And
this is part of their national plan on educational reform which
was articulated in 2014, $22 billion behind it. It is very
serious money. That money has stayed protected even during
their budget shortfalls. And by these curriculum standards they
will then revise wholesale the content in all of the textbooks.
In the meantime, on a more urgent basis, they are going to
be looking at the current revised textbooks and within--
starting within 3 months they will start making changes on a
priority basis. And they will have these completed, according
to them, by the next school year, 2018 to 2019. And there is so
much going on right now. They are going to--in 3 years they
will have converted from textbooks to tablet computers. So
there is a lot of change underway.
I believe that the commitment is real. And they certainly
do understand the problem.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Johnston follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Dr. Johnston. The Chair recognizes
himself for some questions.
I want to be clear that when we are dealing with Saudi
Arabia it is not all or nothing. Like I said earlier, they are
the arsonists but they are also the firefighters when it comes
to terrorism. That is what makes this very troubling, this
whole issue.
And, Ms. Shea, let me start with you. If I understand
correctly, Saudi Arabia agreed in 2006 that they would fix this
problem and they would have it all fixed by 2008. Is that
correct?
Ms. Shea. Yes, Mr. Chairman. They----
Mr. Poe. Okay. Reclaiming my time because I only have a few
minutes.
So here it is now 9 years later and it is still not fixed,
maybe some progress, but it is the issue that they promised in
2006 to fix the textbooks has not come about. Is that right?
Ms. Shea. Yes, that is correct.
Mr. Poe. So that is nine grades. That is almost a
generation of students that they furnished the textbooks to
that are still receiving this, in my opinion, violation of
human rights.
Saudi Arabian schools teach religion and it is mandatory
that all students go to these religious classes. Is that
correct?
Ms. Shea. Yes.
Mr. Poe. And that is where these textbooks are used?
Ms. Shea. Yes.
Mr. Poe. And they are not only used in Saudi Arabia but
they are used in other places in the world, including in the
United States, as Congressman Wolf has stated; is that right?
Ms. Shea. They have about 20 schools that they directly
run. And then they are spread--for example, Dr. Johnston's
report said that there were 150 schools that Saudi Arabia has
established in Burkina Faso alone. So that gives you some, you
know, some idea of the scale. It is all over the world, all
continents and where there are people, where there are Muslim
communities. And they are--not every one is receiving Saudi
textbooks, but many, many are.
Mr. Poe. And some say that the radicalization in Kosovo and
Indonesia are a result of these textbooks being in these
schools. Are you aware of that?
Ms. Shea. Yes, I am. I hear it all the time.
Mr. Poe. Congressman Wolf.
Mr. Wolf. Yes.
Mr. Poe. Dr. Johnston, I know the State Department
contracted with your group to study this issue, gave a grant,
American taxpayer money, a grant for you all to study the
issue. You studied it. You have got a report there in your
hand. But the State Department still to this day refuses to
release to the public that report. Is that correct?
Mr. Johnston. No, that is not true, sir.
Mr. Poe. So they have, they have released the report?
Mr. Johnston. They have. But not, not on their own doing.
Mr. Poe. It has been released because somebody leaked the
report.
Mr. Johnston. No. It was because the New York Times used
the Freedom of Information Act to get a copy of the report.
Mr. Poe. So it has been. The public does have access to
your entire report?
Mr. Johnston. Absolutely.
Mr. Poe. All right. Thank you. I did not know that.
So, Congressman Wolf, let me ask you. You mentioned a few
things that must be done. This has been going on for a good
number of years. And where we are today, I think the United
States--this is my opinion--doesn't want to endanger the
sensitivities of our relationship with our Saudi allies. What
would--how would you characterize this relationship and the
demanding that we--that they change their textbooks?
Mr. Wolf. Well, it goes up and down. And during the area of
oil crisis nobody wanted to offend the Saudis. America is fast
becoming basically energy independent.
I think what you are doing with the hearing today by
bringing the attention.
Two, there ought to be the new U.S. Ambassador for
Religious Freedom, the person whose name I have heard is a very
outstanding person who will be very good on this issue, the
subcommittee should meet with that person.
Thirdly, you ought to have questions going over to the
Senate Foreign Affairs Committee. When they send the name up of
the new Ambassador there will be very tough questions from both
sides of the aisle--this is not a political issue, if you
will--aggressively putting him on record or her on record,
whoever it is, that they will speak out.
Lastly, when he or she is confirmed this subcommittee
ought, ought to meet with them.
And I think the more you pressure and do it publicly, in a
very respectful way, you have to be careful, though, because
the Saudis put a lot of money in different universities. They
also hire prominent law firms in town. I couldn't believe, 3
weeks ago a prominent law firm was hired to represent Bashir,
an indicted war criminal, indicted for genocide, responsible
for the death of 200,000 to 300,000 people in Darfur, bombing
people in the Nuba Mountains, and yet a law firm, prominent law
firm working for him. So you have to be careful that there
isn't pressure.
But what you have done today following up with it, I don't
think the State Department will aggressively do it unless the
Congress pushes them.
Mr. Poe. Last question. Dr. Weinberg, you mentioned that 17
minutes into this hearing, that was a public notice that we
were having this hearing, the Saudi Arabians did something.
What did they do?
Mr. Weinberg. They, they announced on social media that a
new round of curriculum revisions had been completed which,
again, needs to be not a justification for letting scrutiny off
but a justification for added scrutiny to see if they have
actually delivered on what they pledged.
If I could just add my voice to what the Honorable Mr. Wolf
said about envoys. In addition to encouraging the
administration to nominate a qualified individual for the
congressionally-mandated post of Ambassador-at-Large for
International Religious Freedom, there are four other important
positions that are laying vacant on this issue right now.
There is currently no nominee, at least as of last I
checked 2 days ago, for a U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. It
should be somebody with real experience in the relationship and
not just business experience.
Additionally, there is no nominee for the Special
Representative of the State Department to Muslim Communities
Abroad, a crucial vacancy.
Additionally, there is still no nominee, no nominee for the
Anti-Semitism Envoy at the State Department. And the Secretary
of State even suggested that such a nominee might be
counterproductive for addressing anti-Semitism by taking it out
of the priorities of the State Department, which I think is a
deeply counterproductive perspective.
And then, lastly, there is the position of Ambassador for--
or Special Envoy for Religious Freedom of Minorities in the
Broader Middle East, a position that is mandated by Congress.
There is somebody serving in this capacity but not with the
level of seniority that Congress has mandated.
So those are all areas where you all can have an important
voice.
Mr. Poe. Four positions, four witnesses, I think maybe we
can solve that problem right here.
I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts, the ranking
member Mr. Keating.
Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Johnston, you mentioned that the Center is moving
forward and they are looking at three countries to see what the
effect, do an in-depth examination of the religious and social
impact of Saudi educational materials in those countries. Can
you tell us and expand on what countries were chosen and what
reason were those countries included in this study?
Mr. Johnston. They have not been chosen. We are currently
examining the feasibility of securing a memorandum of
understanding with selected governments that would pass this
test. These are going to be three countries of strategic
consequence. They will be drawn from Southeast Asia, the Middle
East, and Europe.
Mr. Keating. Could you share any timetable that you might
have?
Mr. Johnston. I would say that we would, we would have this
firmly underway within 2 months.
I would say, too, and I am sorry that time didn't permit
this earlier, but in response to our study on the global
impact, the Saudis actually put out a request to the Cultural
Attaches of every one of their Embassies around the world
encouraging them to, directing them to retrieve any old
textbooks that might be in use within their respective
geographic areas and to replace them with new.
The problem with that, of course, is the new still have
problems. But this is to just show you that they are not deaf
to the issue of this stuff going worldwide. And one of the
things we are trying to do is just to impart a sense of
ownership on all of that. And I think they are stepping up to
the plate.
Mr. Keating. Well, 9 years, they might be not be deaf but
they are slow of hearing I would say in a sense.
Mr. Johnston. It is glacial.
Mr. Keating. Certainly.
And one of the concerns, too, when we are looking at this
overall problem and the expansion of these materials, I think a
lot rests on the control that the home country has on its
education curriculum. I think Ms. Shea mentioned Burkina Faso
and Mali.
And how much are countries like that reliant on these Saudi
materials? Financially, what is the control? And this should
seem to me an opportunity for the United States to try and deal
with this directly. What opportunities could we have in those
countries if they are reliant on money and resources for
curriculum from Saudi Arabia, which we are learning today still
contains material that is not, not appropriate, to say the
least?
So, tell us about what your views are of the impact of
those home-controlled countries on the curriculum?
Ms. Shea. Yes, it is very determinant. I even spoke to an
imam from a mosque in the United States about--who had Saudi
textbooks in his library that he made available in the school.
And he has since removed it he said. But he, he said that the
reason why is that he didn't--he was working with an immigrant
community that was impoverished, and that they do not have a
school, they do not have textbooks, they do not have religious
textbooks. So they turn to the country in the world with the
deep pockets for such things. So they----
Mr. Keating. Could I interrupt to say that given the U.S.
interest here, isn't that a priority for our country perhaps?
Is there an opportunity? Or would they not be receptive to the
United States?
Ms. Shea. Well, it is going to be very tricky. The United
States cannot be funding religious things like that.
Mr. Keating. How about through NGOs or funding through NGOs
or anything like this?
Ms. Shea. Well, I think the solution, again, is to force
the--or press the Saudis to clean up their textbooks because
they are going to be online. And----
Mr. Keating. Well, if they are, if the Saudis are so
sincere about this, what are they doing currently to the
current generation and the prior generations that have been so
indoctrinated in this material? Have they done anything in a
remedial nature to deal with this whatsoever?
Mr. Johnston. Well, one of the things they did in their
deradicalization program is that they fired 3,000 imams. They
retrained 20,000 others out of a total pool of 75,000 imams. So
that is, that is taking care of it within their own borders.
Beyond that, the question that you asked where they have
paid for the mosques and all the rest of it, you find in most
countries they have significant control over what is taking
place in the schools.
Again, I would just point out there is an important caveat
here. That may not be the Government of Saudi Arabia very
easily it seems. You know, peel back the onion, it is very
difficult to follow.
Mr. Keating. If I could----
Mr. Johnston. But, but a more----
Mr. Keating [continuing]. Just because my time is about to
expire, if I could just--then you can have your chance with the
committee to address that, a little bit of an expansion here.
Congressman Wolf mentioned some of the things directly he
thought. He gave specifics about what the U.S. could do. Just
in a very short summary, if any of you have specific, specific
ideas I would like to hear them.
Mr. Weinberg. So on the topic of exportation that we were
just discussing, one thing that has always plagued this issue,
and this was a challenge for that New York Times investigation
that the chairman was discussing, I spoke with some of the
reporters who were involved in that and related efforts at the
Times, and one of the challenges when it comes to studying this
exportation issue is there is often only anecdotal data or it
is, you know, very, very vague and impressionistic.
So, one of the things that the U.S. Government can do to
really play an important role here is to use all the assets of
the U.S. Government on this, and in particular, the
intelligence community. The easiest thing, or the most
important thing that can be done in terms of informing this
debate would simply be a directive from Congress to the
intelligence community to monitor the exportation of incitement
from Saudi Arabia, including but not limited to textbooks, and
to direct them to report on this.
Additionally, Congress can call for rebooting the U.S.-
Saudi strategic dialogue with a track to include issues related
to incitement. And that rebooting, in a general sense, is
something that the new crown prince of Saudi Arabia is reported
to support.
And then, additionally, Congress can publicly and privately
raise this issue, as well as urging the President to do so, and
to issue a formal directive to U.S. agencies and cabinet
members to do so as well.
Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Weinberg. In respect to my
other committee members, if you can do that in writing----
Mr. Johnston. Do you want any more ideas?
Mr. Keating [continuing]. I think that would be helpful.
We might, but I have to be respectful of the other
committee members, unless we have a second round. But anything
like that I think the committee would appreciate in writing.
And, also, you know the committee is aware perhaps that
there is classified material along the lines that Dr. Weinberg
suggested that they may want to review, something that I think
the committee might be interested in doing.
And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr.
Perry.
Mr. Perry. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the panel here.
Mr. Weinberg, you mentioned a report in your testimony, or
maybe in questions, I can't remember, but what is the report
going to do? What is it going to do to Saudi Arabia and what is
it--said report, so to speak, what would it do to the United
States?
Mr. Weinberg. So, one of the challenges of this issue to
date is something that Ms. Shea addresses in her written
testimony, which is the tendency of the State Department,
because its priority is maintaining constructive relations with
Saudi Arabia and advancing a range of other issues in the
bilateral relationship such that they usually don't want to
rock the boat, that a long-term strategic priority for the
United States like textbooks doesn't get raised in the
immediate term when it needs to get raised, and it gets kicked
down the road indefinitely.
So as a result, State Department language on this issue
every year in their International Religious Freedom Report, in
their Human Rights Report, as well as in their country reports
on terrorism such as the one that came out today, basically
have a throw-away line or two about some incitement still
remaining, without providing any specific examples typically,
or at least without providing direct quotations. And so, and
well----
Mr. Perry. Is this not like widely known? Like, doesn't the
whole world, like, we all know this; right? Everybody knows,
everybody in the room knows this. With all due respect, I just,
look, the report might be nice but I don't, I don't see it
moving the ball quite honestly.
Mr. Weinberg. Yes.
Mr. Perry. I mean, maybe in the panoply of everything you
are going to do that, you have to add that.
Mr. Weinberg. If I could play devil's advocate for a
moment. So, part of the challenge with this issue has been the
absence of current data when people actually have their
conversations with Saudi officials.
So, for example, the important study that Mr. Johnston's
institute did, its results were not raised with Saudi officials
by them or by the U.S. Government to the best of our
knowledge----
Mr. Perry. But that is the, that is----
Mr. Weinberg [continuing]. Until the books were already
obsolete.
Mr. Perry. That is an issue of will, not of information. I
mean, I have got textbook experts right in front--excerpts
right in front of me here, so.
Mr. Weinberg. But the reason those excerpts were done,
until May most of those excerpts were not actually in the
public sphere because nobody had gotten access to the books and
sat down and read them and transcribed them.
Mr. Perry. You are telling me that we legitimately----
Mr. Weinberg. So for several years we didn't know.
Mr. Perry. And I am not trying to be bellicose or
difficult----
Mr. Weinberg. Yeah.
Mr. Perry [continuing]. But you are telling me we had no
physical evidence like this----
Mr. Weinberg. Right.
Mr. Perry [continuing]. Until May 2017?
Mr. Weinberg. For this academic year, yes.
Mr. Perry. Oh, for this academic year. But we have for
every other academic year back to 1970, 1980 or something.
Mr. Weinberg. But just, just like that tweet from the Saudi
Embassy that we were discussing, the Saudi Government every
year claims that this has, this has been seriously worked over
and so the stuff that people are concerned about is old news.
And so it is important for the United States Government----
Mr. Perry. Well, of course there is propaganda. I mean, you
can listen to Russia T.V. and Al Jazeera as well if you want to
believe all that stuff. But I mean, I hope that Americans are a
little brighter than that.
Let me ask anybody this: Regarding incitement, because I
just don't feel like we ever go far enough, and I am not sure
even the suggestions I have heard go far enough to suit me--
that is just me--but does anybody know whether incitement, you
know, when you talk about the penalty for the adulterer who has
previously consummated a marriage is stoning to death, that is
in the book; or apostasy, you know, the penalty for apostasy is
killing, that is, you know, that is in the textbook; you know,
I don't know if this is incitement in the classic example or
case. And I don't know if it meets the Brandenburg test.
Does anybody know if it does? Have we ever tried to? I
mean, nobody wants to get into the suppression of free speech,
but at some point free speech crosses over the line into
incitement. Now, I guess the test is intended, likely, and
imminent, and which the courts at some point decided what
imminent was. Does anybody know whether that has ever been
challenged? Have we ever taken a shot at it? Does the
government have an interest?
Okay. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Shea. Well, I think, I think we have done that in the
case of Americans who have posted such death threats against,
like for example, the South Park cartoonist who did an
irreverent cartoon of----
Mr. Perry. But I am talking about the textbooks. Is this,
is this,----
Ms. Shea. But no, I mean I don't see how that----
Mr. Perry [continuing]. Is this considered incitement?
Ms. Shea. I don't see how that could be, I don't see how
there is--there is diplomatic immunity--I don't see how the
Saudi textbook.
Mr. Perry. The textbook has diplomatic immunity?
Ms. Shea. Well, they are published by the Government of
Saudi Arabia who would be held responsible. The Ministry of
Education of Saudi Arabia is the, the printer. And the
Government of Saudi Arabia is the sponsor.
Mr. Perry. So if the Government of Saudi Arabia publishes
information that says that every, every citizen that has an
affiliation with Saudi Arabia living in the United States
should kill the next American they see, there is nothing we can
do about that? Like we can't, we can't have that removed from
the shelf because it is the Government of Saudi Arabia?
Ms. Shea. Well, that is the--I mean, we have pressed people
who actually carried out the crime. But it, you know----
Mr. Perry. But incitement, there have been prosecutions for
incitement in advance of the crime based on incitement; right?
The question is has, to anybody's knowledge has anybody in the
United States on behalf of the United States pursued that
avenue regarding the textbooks and the passages therein as
incitement?
Ms. Shea. Some of the 9/11 victims' families may have been
suing Saudi Arabia for reparations. But, but I don't know what
the theory of their case was, whether it was the incitement.
Mr. Perry. It seems like maybe either the answer is no or
unknown. So maybe that is a place we can go into further.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
The Chair will have one more round of 2 minutes per member.
I will yield my time initially to the ranking member Mr.
Keating from Massachusetts for his questions.
Mr. Keating. Mr. Weinberg, you said one of the things that
we can all do is speak up more and be consistent in doing it at
every level. Taking into consideration what Congressman Wolf
said, you know, there are generations of leaders before this,
both sides of the aisle, that haven't been aggressive enough,
as he testified.
However, President Trump was just in Saudi Arabia.
President Trump was talking about extremism and the need to
band together to do it. Yet there is no report that he brought
this issue up in the course of that.
What is the danger in not bringing this up, particularly at
that level, particularly under that thing?
Mr. Weinberg. Yes. So this is, this is, this is the
challenge is that the President almost never raises the issue.
This was the case with President George W. Bush, this was the
case with President Obama. This was the--appears to be the case
with President Trump. Which is part of why the strategic
dialogue was inaugurated between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia
under the Bush administration so that senior officials could
still raise priority concerns when it didn't rise to a level of
the Commander-in-Chief as their number one, or two, or three
priority but still needed to be addressed because of U.S.
interests.
But that having been said, that is not an excuse for the
President not to address it. It is not an excuse for the
President not to direct cabinet members to do so as well.
President Trump, when he participated in the inauguration
of a global center for combating extremist ideology in Saudi,
while he was in Saudi Arabia--which by the way was in the works
for 2 years and then they repackaged it to be a deliverable
during this summit--he predicted it would make history.
Reflecting on his visit to the Kingdom several weeks later,
he urged all nations to stop teaching people to kill other
people, stop filling their minds with hate and intolerance. And
he said he would not name other countries besides Qatar.
Now, I actually have an article draft forthcoming which
explains why Qatar's record on counterterrorism issues is
actually worse than all of its other neighbors in the Gulf
monarchies. But that having been said, the books need to be
addressed directly, with knowledge, on a regular basis with
current information about the current school year, or else it
is not going to have any impact with the Saudi Government.
Otherwise, the Saudi Government is going to keep doing what it
is doing, which is reprinting these books year after year with
incitement, and indoctrinating, you know, at least several more
years of students with this problematic information.
Mr. Johnston. May I correct the record on something? This
report was in fact--I briefed the Saudis in Riyadh on this
report. It was sent over through diplomatic channels as well.
And out of that came one ray of hope.
We worked for several years on one of the recommendations
which was to bring Saudi educators together with American
educators to deal with the problem of bias and intolerance in
national education systems. Out of this came a series of
recommendations to their government, and our own, but to their
government which I delivered to their Minister of Education.
One of the things I feel is so important, and it hasn't
been mentioned here, but far more important than these
textbooks, far more important is the teacher training. And we
have opportunities now to be able to go over there and in the
context of this national plan for educational reform, which was
crafted mostly by McKinsey & Company, it is a dynamite plan,
and if they fully implement it it will actually leapfrog some
of our own habits. But I think there the door is open that we
could go and help them implement this and particularly get at
the teacher training, which is, as I say, far more important.
Mr. Keating. I yield back.
Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr.
Perry.
Mr. Perry. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Johnston, Dr. Johnston, I understand one of the
problems for the United States is how the actions, the
statements versus actions coming from Saudi Arabia are
determined. And I indeed asked the Secretary about the metrics
to determine efficacy of the Saudi's actions and how we are
measuring their progress.
I will tell you now--well, the man's been on the job for 4
or 5 months, right, so we have to give him some leeway--but I
didn't get a lot of confidence that anything meaningful was
there. And I actually wonder, some of the officials who may be
determining whether what the efficacy is, literally that might
be, I hate to say it, but so to speak working for the other
side.
So, in your work with the, the ICRD how would you
characterize the metrics we use and who is determining? Is it,
it is appropriate or is that problematic that--that needs to be
addressed? And where is that addressed?
Mr. Johnston. No, I, I think one of the metrics is the
baseline that we established here back in 2011. To be sure, we
haven't looked at those books in 5 years. But the U.S.
Commission on International Religious Freedom did several years
ago. We provided them the baseline.
They determined that further reform was taking place. And
in this year's annual report they even talk about a visit there
in February of this year where they determined that more reform
was taking place. So this is a metric.
We are going to be looking very hard at it starting in
another month on the high school grades. That is where most of
the onerous content exists.
And one of the other things in terms about why this is so
slow is they took a full year to field test their revisions to
the 10th grade, which was, as far as we were concerned, was the
one grade where it was the worst. And they did those revisions.
I don't know what has come of that. We will find out. But they
did take a full year to test it.
And the other thing we have to remember is that a lot of
this is getting in on religious grounds. And some of that is
pretty----
Mr. Perry. But I think they use that. And good for them, I
suppose.
Mr. Johnston. Sometimes yes. Yes.
Mr. Perry. But it is an Achilles heel for the United
States. And we can't allow that to be used against us,
especially for what many consider to be seditious activity.
And I also would question what progress means or what, you
know, reforms are taking place at what level. I mean, reform,
you know, they might change one word in that sentence and of
course they reformed the sentence, I guess in this classic,
very strict constructionist sense. But from the greater sense
and the spirit of it, it is not getting the job done and it is
not getting done quickly enough for us.
And what they do in their country, quite honestly and quite
frankly from my opinion, that is their business, but what they
do in our country is our business.
Mr. Johnston. Yes. No, your points are very valid.
One thing I would say is in addition to eliminating
negative content, one of the things we have found, and we just
took a quick glance, there is the addition of very positive
content that sort of works in the other direction.
I don't know to what extent they are constrained by this
needing to keep their religious establishment on board, because
that is where they get their, their authority from is from the
religious establishment. That is part of the package. So it is
a difficult walk that they are making. The people that I have
worked with I am 1,000 percent convinced are very sincere. And,
in fact, one of them----
Mr. Perry. With the chairman's indulgence, I agree, in
their country it is inexorably linked since they came to power,
the House of Saud. And I get all that and why the need to keep,
to do all the things they need to do. I don't agree with it but
I understand it.
However, in this country none of it is appropriate, none of
it is appropriate and we should take action.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman.
Congressman Wolf, I have a question for you first and then
I will let you make a comment because I know you want to keep,
you want to talk about the last question.
ISIS used Saudi Arabian textbooks up until 2015. That was 2
years ago. And now they use their own textbooks. Would you like
to comment on where ISIS gets--got their textbooks to begin
with?
Mr. Wolf. Well, you are right. In the New York Times piece
they say, ``In a huge embarrassment to the Saudi authorities,
the Islamic State adopted official Saudi textbooks for its
schools until the extremist group could publish its own
textbooks in 2015.''
Secondly, when I was in 2 years ago we went up into the
Nineveh Plains. We went into meetings with all the different
people. At every meeting I said, Tell me, who is helping the
Saudis--rather, who is helping ISIS? And every meeting, every
meeting two came up, some three, but two came up: The Saudis,
not always the Saudi Government but Saudi individuals, and he
sort of alluded to the renegade guy; secondly, Qatar. They were
aiding and abetting ISIS. And there was another country,
Turkey, who was for the longest period of time was allowing
people, they go to Istanbul, they call a telephone number, they
go south and they join.
They may have changed. But don't forget, 15 of the 19
hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden was from Saudi
Arabia. The number of people from my area who were killed in
the attack on the Pentagon, the guys who did it, Saudi Arabia.
And so I think what this committee has done today with the
hearing, the textbooks are important, but all these issues, and
you push and you push and you push. And I urge you to meet with
the new ambassador, and I urge you to sit down with him or her,
whoever it is, and pressure them, and the new religious freedom
ambassador. I think you may have started something here.
And the real danger is you even recall last year--I read
the 28 pages--you remember last year the issue came up, the
Saudis hired law firms and PR firms in this town to do
everything. Fortunately the Congress, to its good credit,
passed it and was not influenced. But you know what is going
on, so by this hearing you can cover all the textbooks are
important but terrorism is important. All these things are
very, very important. And, hopefully, this can be the genesis
if you guys, men and women, continue to really make a
difference and stop what Saudi Arabia has been doing for a long
period of time.
Mr. Poe. Thank you. And the ranking member and I will
request a meeting with the Ambassador and we will go from
there. Maybe have a hearing in the future on Qatar, have all of
you back.
And I want to have one last question for all four of you.
Since we are talking about textbooks and schools, how would you
rank the--at this time--the goal of changing the textbooks so
that they don't preach hate, intolerance, and violence? And it
is real simple, it is not pass or fail, it is A, B, C, D, or F.
You understand the question, Ms. Shea? How would you rank
what Saudi Arabia is doing right now?
Ms. Shea. F.
Mr. Poe. All right. Dr. Weinberg?
Mr. Weinberg. F with credit for effort.
Mr. Poe. F with credit for effort. Okay.
Congressman Wolf?
Mr. Wolf. F plus instead of F.
Mr. Poe. Dr. Johnston?
Mr. Johnston. I would give it a D.
And one of the things I would point out is that as long as
we are, you know, buying 150 billion--selling $150 billion
worth of arms to the Saudis, they are not going to pay a whole
lot of attention to western criticism. When you couple that
reality with the line they are walking with the religious
establishment, I think that they are making as much progress as
one could hope for at this point in time.
They need to do a lot better, but there is, there is
sincere desire to do better on their part, the government's
part. I don't know about the religious.
Mr. Poe. And without belaboring the point, if we take Ms.
Shea's recommendation, we tie defense contracts to Saudi Arabia
with the repairing of their textbooks, that may get somebody's
attention. I don't know. We will see.
Anyway, I want to thank all of you for being here. I want
to thank all of the people in the audience for being here as
well.
And this subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:56 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]