‘Saudi Arabia could expose those complicit in 9/11 if Obama releases secret Congressional report’

A woman holds a child during a commemoration ceremony marking the 23rd anniversary of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing at the north reflecting pool of the 911 Memorial in New York. © Shannon Stapleton
Saudi Arabia is motivated by the Wahhabist version of Islam, which tells people to fight the infidel and in return we will protect your family and give you money, Colin Cavell, Assistant Professor of American Studies at the University of Bahrain told RT.

US President Obama is arriving in Riyadh on Wednesday, to meet King Salman. The talks are expected to focus on counter-terrorism. However, there are some major disagreements between the two countries.  Relatives of the victims who died in the September 11 attacks are calling on Obama to reveal details from a confidential Congressional report, which many believe provides a link between Saudi Arabia and 9/11.

RT: If Washington follows through on this threat what could be the impact for relations between the US and Saudi Arabia?

Colin Cavell: Well, they wouldn’t dare follow through on that threat, because that would mean the US would no longer protect and give succor to the Kingdom - this most reactionary, unelected monarchy in the Middle East. So it is a backchannel to certain powers in the US: Please don’t pursue this, because we can expose certain families in the US and certain individuals who are also complicit in the events of 9/11.

RT: Both countries have always claimed to be close allies. How close are the ties between the two countries?

CC: Ever since President Franklin D. Roosevelt established diplomatic relations with King Ibn Saud before WWII to get oil reserves so the US could be victorious in the war, we [the US] have made an implicit deal with the devil. We will support Saudi Arabia and keep the House of Saud ruling there as long as they provide cheap oil.

International law agreements must be kept, but there is also a condition of international law that when conditions change then the different powers can alter their agreements. And believe me, the conditions have changed, because Saudi Arabia is the instigator now of wars against Bashar al-Assad in Syria; the overthrow of the elected government in Egypt; wars in Yemen; occupation of Bahrain, etc., etc., etc. It’s causing many lives to be lost and much pressure on the US. So this relationship is unstable and untenable.

RT: Just ahead of the visit, Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes raised concerns over Saudi Arabia's alleged links with terrorist groups. How could this affect Obama's visit?

CC: It started back when the Soviets were helping President [Mohammad] Najibullah in Afghanistan. Even Hillary Clinton admitted the US, along with Saudi Arabia, helped to create Al-Qaeda using jihadist Takfiri fighters to counter the Najibullah government and the Soviets. So they have continued to utilize this type of poor, unemployed people who are motivated by religious reasons. In Saudi Arabia they are motivated by the Wahhabist version of Islam, which tells then to go fight the infidel and we will protect your family and give you money.

They’ve used these types of fighters to wage counter-revolution primarily against the Arab Spring revolt that started in 2011- late 2010 that people of the region want democracy. Saudi Arabia doesn’t want any form of democracy – the whole kingdom is anathema to any form of democratic rule. So people are looking to where democracy is in the region. They see it in the Republic of Iran, where they have had democratic elections since their revolution; they have a say in their government; their people are having a progressive society; women are not prohibited from driving, from working, for making their own decisions – and that is what people want. They want to live in the modern world. And Saudi Arabia is an anachronism; it is an antique that doesn’t correspond with modern business relations.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.