We have already seen how Britain’s backing was instrumental in clearing Ibn Saud’s road to power. Nowadays there is a relationship of even greater co-dependency. On the one hand, the western world in general and America in particular benefits from cheap oil, with prices not just being kept down by the low extraction costs due to nature, but also by the active connivance of the Saudi regime. During the period of the cold war, Saudi Arabia also provided a counterweight to Arab nationalist regimes like that of Gamal Abdul Nasser, regimes that tended to lean towards the USSR. It also lavished money on anti-communist forces in the region such as the mujahedin. Now, however, despite this role being much diminished, it remains a key, and usually loyal, US ally in the region.
A obscene oil for arms system has developed. In return for cheap oil the military industrial complex of the US and Britain supply vast quantities of the latest sophisticated weaponry - battle tanks, surface-to-air missiles, fighter-bombers, ships, etc. However, this is not for the defence of Saudi Arabia or the House of Saud. There is too much hardware for the Saudi armed forces to use. Much of it simply rusts. Furthermore the royal family does not trust its own people nor even the officer caste. For example, only those closely related to it are permitted to fly armed aircraft. British prime ministers - Labour and Tory, US presidents - Democrat and Republican - happily connive in this colossal waste of productive resources.
Ideological Progeny
It is not hard to see where Osama Bin Laden and Al-Quaeda’s interpretation of Islam comes from by making a study of Wahhabism. Wahhabism was a reform movement that began 200 years ago to rid Islamic societies of cultural practices and interpretation that had been acquired over the centuries. The followers of Abdul Wahab (1703-1792) began as a movement to cleanse the Arab bedouin from the influence of Sufism.
Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab formed his ideas as a rebellion against what he saw as a laxity in religious practice. He focused on the Muslim principle that there is only one God, and that God does not share his power with anyone. From this unitarian principle, his students began to refer to themselves as muwahhidun (unitarians). Their detractors referred to them as "Wahhabis" - or followers of Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab, which had a pejorative connotation. The idea of a unitary god was not new. Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab, however, attached political importance to it. He directed his attack against the Shia who revered Imams, even after their death.
Article comments
1 - MBD
Yeah, we should tell Saudi Arabia to take their oil and shove it up their ass.
An oil boycott will teach them a lesson.
2 - methuselah
IMO the turning point was in 1973 when OPEC manipulated oil prices. We, the USA, had a choice between pursuing the new technoogies, alternate energy, altered tax subsidies and national conservation policies toward energy independence, or we could depend on future political and warfare policies to control foreign oil. We chose the latter, and that was a big mistake that continued our dependence on SA scoundrels and led to 9/11 and the iraq invasion. In 1973 (and following) we tied our fortunes to the fortunes of the Saudi family, to our disadvantage.
3 - Sooli
This article has quite a few fallacies, even though for the most part it is accurate (70% imho).
But I only have time to make one observation only, and I believe it is the most important:
The writer fails to mention the modern-day influences of al Qa'ida, such as Israels subjugation of the Palestinians, Israel's invasions of Lebanon, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Saudi's (and others) "hosting" of US & UK forces, the 1990's sanctions on Iraq, and "Western" blind support of all despotic, brutal, and corrupt regimes in the region (including Israel), among other modern-day popular greivances.
This is what motivates people who join al Qa'ida, this is where it draws its popular base from, and this is what all radical groups in the region -Wahabi and non-Wahabi- focus on to draw support and justify their acts.
Claiming that al Qai'da has commited violent acts of terrorism simply because it is "Wahabi" (which it is not) is far from the truth, and is a clear attempt to divert us from the true issues at hand.
The reasons why all extremists are violently angry at "the West" are the exact same reasons why moderates in the region and abroad are moderatly angry at "the West".
It is modern day political events that have driven some people to extremism and violence. If it was simply ideoligy, then millions of non-Muslims in the region would have been killed first, especially those in modern-day Saudi Arabia.