[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 57 (Wednesday, May 8, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E750]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         RELIGIOUS FANATICISM AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN SAUDI ARABIA

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. TOM LANTOS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, May 8, 2002

  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, in recent months our Nation, and this 
Congress, has sought to understand the motivation for and consequences 
of religious fanaticism, especially in the Middle East. An opinion 
article entitled ``In Saudi Arabia, an Extreme Problem,'' published in 
the Washington Post today brings into focus the fundamental problem of 
religious fanaticism in Saudi Arabia. This insightful article asserts 
persuasively that political and religious fanaticism has given rise to 
the deplorable human rights conditions, particularly concerning women, 
in Saudi Arabia. The article is all the more compelling because its 
author, Sulaiman Al-Hattlan, is a Saudi Arabian citizen and a 
courageous voice for democracy and human rights and who has witnessed 
first-hand the devastating effects of religious fanaticism in his 
country. He believes that the Saudi government must pursue reforms in 
order to promote education, free-thinking, political participation, and 
the human rights of the Saudi people. Mr. Speaker, I earnestly commend 
the following article to the attention of my colleagues and request 
that the article be placed in the Congressional Record.

                [From the Washington Post, May 8, 2002]

                  In Saudi Arabia, an Extreme Problem

                        (By Sulaiman Al-Hattlan)

       While the Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah rightly searches for 
     peace in the Middle East, it is equally important for us in 
     Saudi Arabia to seek peace for our own home.
       As a citizen of Saudi Arabia, I dread the possibility that 
     Osama bin Laden might instigate a repeat of a deadly 1979 
     Saudi government mistake. In that year, a group of religious 
     fanatics occupied the Grand Mosque of Mecca. They denounced 
     the legitimacy of the Saudi government, claiming that it 
     wasn't ``Islamic'' enough. The government managed to reclaim 
     the mosque, and later the group's leader and most of his 
     followers were executed.
       But the end of the story had a twist: Though the government 
     killed the extremists, it then essentially adopted their 
     ideology. After the Mecca incident, Saudi authorities began 
     imposing crushingly strict and pointless rules. Women were 
     banned from appearing on television. Music was not allowed to 
     be played in the Saudi media. Stores and malls closed during 
     the five daily prayers. Members of the religious police were 
     granted more power to intervene in people's personal lives. 
     The Saudi government did all of this to please the Islamists, 
     perhaps fearing further extremist threats. The 
     fundamentalists interpreted these government actions as a nod 
     to their power and an indication that they were now dictating 
     the rules of the game.
       The result has been all sorts of restrictions that have 
     created notions of fanaticism in the kingdom, and a society 
     with a constant undercurrent of a ``witch hunt.'' Different 
     groups in Saudi society end up competing with fundamentalists 
     over who can appear more conservative in the public eye. Our 
     private life, too, has been full of contradictions and 
     hypocrisy, as we seek to avoid being alienated or excluded as 
     ``seculars'' or ``liberals.'' In our obsession with our 
     image, and fearing each other, we all lose. As a society, 
     Saudi Arabians lost 20 years of a generation by avoiding a 
     harsh reality: Our government was wrong, and, by extension, 
     so were we. None of us dared to say it loudly then, and some 
     still cannot say it. But our reaction to the 1979 Mecca 
     tragedy has created a generation of angry, confused young 
     people, many of whom have become fanatics, including those 15 
     Saudis among the 19 suspects in the Sept. 11 terrorist 
     attacks and the 100--or more--Saudi prisoners in Guantanamo. 
     How many other confused young Saudis are still out there?
       It does not take a great deal to describe the motives of 
     terrorism. Oppression and poverty are an easy recipe for 
     fanaticism. People with no option of independently leading 
     their lives will more willingly follow an extremist mentality 
     because they know nothing else, and have no moderate 
     alternatives to compare it with. This extremist mentality 
     becomes so entrenched and pervasive that its endurance is not 
     dependent upon the life or death of one persuasive leader. 
     Therefore, whether bin Laden eventually is killed or survives 
     the current war is a temporary concern; in the long term, the 
     real issue is the endurance or destruction of his rabid 
     philosophy.
       The Saudi government itself must fight against all kinds of 
     monopoly of thought or debate. Right now, it faces a 
     historical opportunity to develop its educational system, 
     augment freedom of the press and expand women's rights, among 
     other pressing issues. It can begin to give qualified, young, 
     educated Saudis access to more political participation. This 
     would involve ending regionalism, a process that gives 
     greater privileges to some families from certain Saudi 
     regions. As an added bonus, such a measure would safeguard 
     against future tribal conflicts--still very much a part of 
     Saudi national politics--that could result from the 
     continuation of regional economic and political favoritism. 
     It might also help end the civil cold war our society, 
     silently, is going through.
       Saudi Arabian society must also start a tough process of 
     social and political reform. Our independent writers and 
     intellectuals should be part of a public social dialogue that 
     tolerates different ideas and thoughts. Our universities need 
     to open doors for political and social activities to their 
     students: At the very minimum, students ought to have the 
     right to form students' organizations. This would teach them 
     the concept of ``social activism,'' and to organize civilized 
     and peaceful activities within their universities. Such ideas 
     can help the next generation create and participate in a 
     productive and peaceful civil society, instead of dying in 
     Afghanistan or elsewhere for causes that most of them do not 
     even fully comprehend.
       What we learned from the deadly 1979 Mecca experience 
     should be put to use now. Ending political and religious 
     fanaticism is crucial for the survival of the Saudi society 
     and its leadership. Release from this chokehold can only come 
     from within Saudi Arabia. Just as Prince Abdullab has become 
     the most promising hope for peace in the Middle East, he is 
     also our best hope for immediate social and political reforms 
     in the kingdom.

     

                          ____________________