Should the West Hold Saudi Arabia Accountable for Human Rights Abuses?

[Art]

And These Are The Good Guys?

Why on Earth does the West which is so quick to condemn human rights abuses in other countries continue to pander to these sick Saudi despots.

Saudi maid verdict 'outrageous'

Human Rights Watch has called on Saudi judges to overturn a decision to drop charges against a Saudi couple accused of severely abusing an Indonesian maid.

A judge in Riyadh awarded $670 damages to the maid, Nour Miyati, but dropped all charges against her employers.

The female employer, who admitted the abuse and was originally sentenced to 35 lashes, had her sentence overturned.

Human Rights Watch said the ruling on Monday was "outrageous", and sent "a dangerous message" to Saudi employers.

Ms Miyati, 25, contracted gangrene after allegedly being tied up for a month and left without food in 2005. She had to have several fingers and toes amputated.

New York-based Human Rights Watch called for an appeals court to "impose stiff penalties on the employers, including imprisonment, and payment of significant financial compensation".

Saudi officials have not commented on the report.
snip
On Monday a Riyadh judge found the female employer not guilty, despite her earlier admission and "compelling physical evidence", the group says.

A prior Saudi judgement, subsequently overturned, had seen Ms Miyati convicted of falsely accusing her employers and sentenced to 79 lashes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7415290.stm

Incredibly the maid was originally sentenced to 79 lashes for making a 'false' accusation despite her employers admitting they had done it!

Saudi Arabia may well be the world's biggest supplier of oil but the West is also their biggest customer. It's about time the West used this leverage to force them to show at least a modicum of civilised behaviour.

 

[Gokul43201]

How's that been workin' for y'all so far?

And I thought jingoism was an antiquated term.

That was too cryptic for me...perhaps Art is better at crosswords.

And on a related note, Art, who are the "good guys" of the title? That has me confused too!

 

[DaveC426913]

Nevermind.

 

[russ_watters]

And on a related note, Art, who are the "good guys" of the title? That has me confused too!

The Saudis. Art was pointing out the troublesome nature of our relationship with Saudia Arabia.

 

[russ_watters]

Saudi Arabia may well be the world's biggest supplier of oil but the West is also their biggest customer. It's about time the West used this leverage to force them to show at least a modicum of civilised behaviour.

It isn't just about the oil, part of it is geography. Nevertheless, I agree that we should stop sucking-up to them and start putting pressure on them to become civilized. They aren't fundamentally better than Iran on that score (better in some ways, worse in others).

Have you seen the movie "The Kingdom"? Very good movie about a fictional terrorist attack (and the lack of help from SA in investigating it) on Americans in Saudia Arabia, reminsicent of the Khobar Towers attack.

 

[lisab]

Perfect world: we, the West, can just not care about the ME. I look forward to the day that we will GET OFF OIL!

Idealistic, I know. But I think we have the will now, in the US, to seriously move in that direction.

 

[lisab]

It isn't just about the oil, part of it is geography. Nevertheless, I agree that we should stop sucking-up to them and start putting pressure on them to become civilized. They aren't fundamentally better than Iran on that score (better in some ways, worse in others).

Have you seen the movie "The Kingdom"? Very good movie about a fictional terrorist attack (and the lack of help from SA in investigating it) on Americans in Saudia Arabia, reminsicent of the Khobar Towers attack.

Thanks - I'll put that movie on my NetFlicks list.

 

[Cyrus]

Thanks - I'll put that movie on my NetFlicks list.

Oh, you have to see that movie its damn good. Dont rent it, just buy it.

 

[lisab]

Oh, you have to see that movie its damn good. Dont rent it, just buy it.

OK. It's a subject I'm very interested in.

 

[Gokul43201]

Related news:

Human Rights Watch issued a report calling for the release of Matrook al-Faleh, 54, who was seized at King Saud University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, two days after he publicly criticized conditions in a prison where two Saudi human rights activists are serving jail terms, according to the agency.

Jamila al-Uqla, al-Faleh's wife, said her husband went to the university on Monday and never returned. She said police informed her that he was in custody at the city's main detention facility.

The next day, al-Uqla said, she tried to call police back, but no one could give her more details. She said that police did not say why he was seized and that she has not heard from him since.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/05/23/saudi.arrest/index.html

 

[Art]

It is hard to understand the West's stance in general and the US's in particular to Saudi Arabia.

SA is a model of everything the US gov't claims to stand against. It's oppressive, racist, discriminatory, non-democratic, a breeding ground for fundamentalists and the world's major financial supporter of the terror groups the US is fighting. It's state religion Wahhabism is the most extreme of all forms of Islam.

SA were involved in 9/11 with most of the terrorists involved in the hijackings coming from there and the leader of their organisation Osama bin Laden is a Saudi national and his group was financed by Saudi business men

I can understand oil is important but I am sure given the will the US and the West could find a way to survive without Saudi oil perhaps by improving relations with other oil producing countries or by exploiting previously uneconomic sources which given the huge price increases in oil would now be viable though if real pressure for reform was applied through the UN I doubt it would need to come to that.

Bush was reported to have asked them during his recent visit to increase OPEC production and was given short thrift by the people the US keep in power there. What other country could snub the US president with such impunity??

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia - Saudi Arabia’s leaders made clear Friday they see no reason to increase oil production until customers demand it, apparently rebuffing President Bush amid soaring U.S. gasoline prices.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24660754/

I am genuinely puzzled as to why Saudi Arabia is treated as some kind of sacred cow

 

[Gokul43201]

It is hard to understand the West's stance in general and the US's in particular to Saudi Arabia.

SA is a model of everything the US gov't claims to stand against. It's oppressive, racist, discriminatory, non-democratic, a breeding ground for fundamentalists and the world's major financial supporter of the terror groups the US is fighting. It's state religion Wahhabism is the most extreme of all forms of Islam.

I am genuinely puzzled as to why Saudi Arabia is treated as some kind of sacred cow

I think the key is the bolded part - the royal family does not overtly finance terror groups. And that, if I may speculate, may itself be a direct result of US pressure. The US can hardly make a case for buddying up to SA if they were financing terror groups like Saddam was. But the US needs SA for the oil, so the easiest way to exert influence would be to require that there be no open financing of terrorism - it's a win-win situation for both sides.

But in support of US policy, I must add the the Saudi royal family is probably the only major dictatorial regime in modern history that has not been a recipient of US aid money.

 

[waht]

Anyone up for a nuclear SA? Bush certainly is:

Mrs. Ros-Lehtinen commented, "At a time when Saudi Arabia and its allies in the OPEC cartel are squeezing consumers with devastatingly high oil prices, the Bush Administration is rewarding the Kingdom with promises of future nuclear cooperation."

http://www.nysun.com/foreign/bush-nuclear-deal-with-saudis-is-criticized/76928/?print=6586451121

 

[Art]

I think the key is the bolded part - the royal family does not overtly finance terror groups. And that, if I may speculate, may itself be a direct result of US pressure. The US can hardly make a case for buddying up to SA if they were financing terror groups like Saddam was. But the US needs SA for the oil, so the easiest way to exert influence would be to require that there be no open financing of terrorism - it's a win-win situation for both sides.

But in support of US policy, I must add the the Saudi royal family is probably the only major dictatorial regime in modern history that has not been a recipient of US aid money.

Incredibly Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world have indeed been recipients of US aid, both military and financial. It seems financial aid only stopped in 2007

US House votes to block aid for Saudi Arabia
(Agencies)
Updated: 2004-07-16 16:09

U.S. lawmakers cheered as the House of Representatives voted on Thursday to strip financial assistance for Saudi Arabia from a foreign aid bill because of criticism that the country has not been sufficiently cooperative in the U.S. war on terror.

The vote was a stinging defeat for the Bush Administration which had strongly opposed the measure saying it would "severely undermine" counterterrorism cooperation with Saudi Arabia and U.S. efforts for peace in the Middle East.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-07/16/content_349153.htm

Apparently Bush found ways to circumvent the house vote linked above but congress in 2007 seems to have closed the loopholes he used.

U.S. House votes to ban aid to Saudi Arabia
WASHINGTON, June 22 (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives voted on Friday to prohibit any aid to Saudi Arabia as lawmakers accused the close ally of religious intolerance and bankrolling terrorist organizations.

The prohibition, reflecting persistent tensions with the kingdom after the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States in 2001, was attached to a foreign aid funding bill for next year that has not yet been debated by the Senate.

It also faces a veto threat from the White House because of an unrelated provision.

A spokesman for the Saudi embassy in Washington declined to comment on the legislation.

In the past three years, Congress has passed bills to stop the relatively small amount of U.S. aid to Saudi Arabia, only to see the Bush administration circumvent the prohibitions.

Now, lawmakers are trying to close loopholes so that no more U.S. aid can be sent to the world's leading petroleum exporter.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N22191479.htm

 

[AhmedEzz]

You know what, I can answer to every post here and in other places but you know, I just don't care and don't have enough time...all I'm hoping is that one looks at one's self and one's accusations and judgments before making such irrational and rushed judgments.

The West is not the ideal civilized loving place you're promoting, and even if part of is so...think how it was made like this, and on what expense?...I love Europeans and real civilized Americans by the way, great people.

 

[Gokul43201]

The West is not the ideal civilized loving place you're promoting, and even if part of is so...think how it was made like this, and on what expense?

Did you read the thread carefully? I don't see any assertion that the west is ideal. In fact, the point of this thread is to discuss hypocrisy in US/EU foreign policy.