|
The First Point of Disagreement
The Response sent by American intellectuals to their colleagues in Saudi Arabia is worthy of lengthy
discussions, and constitute an important opportunity for a Saudi-American dialogue aiming at transcending the complications arising from the events of September 11th, and affecting the
relationship between the two countries. One of the most important points that are worthy of attention is ``the first point of disagreement" where the American intellectuals note that when we
speak of the 3,000 innocent victims who fell on September 11th, we do not merely refer to ``perpetrators," but to ``alleged perpetrators."
``These words sadden and disappoint us. Do you expect us to believe that you are not aware that 15 of the 19 murderers of September 11 were Saudis? (…) Or that a high proportion of Qa`ida
and Taliban fighters captured by U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan are Saudis? (…) These facts are well known and are beyond empirical dispute. Yet your letter incorrectly suggests that these
facts are not facts at all, but instead mere ``allegations," and that this entire subject – who are these terrorists and who is supporting them? – is somehow irrelevant to the present crisis."
Had the American intellectuals labeled this first point of disagreement ``quintessential" they would not have deviated from the truth. We seek a dialogue with the Americans, but we ignore the root of
the problem, and we avoid facing the accusations directed at our religious discourse, school curricula, our attitude towards others, and our responsibility for extremist thought in many Islamic
countries. This approach prevents us from engaging in an internal dialogue, as well as one with the others. The objection of the American intellectuals to our approach is not surprising, since denial of
truth is prevalent in both our writings and our debates. It is no longer possible to deny the truth.
The denial for which the American intellectuals fault us does not serve as a means to defend our image. Maintaining it extends the life of the false information that is invented to explain events away,
out of our fear of transparency and our refusal to face the others and defend our position. What is hopeful is that the position of the Saudi ``intellectuals" is contrasted by an openness at the official
level. The speech of the Crown Prince `Abdullah bin Abdulaziz at the Petroleum University is a clear indication of the importance of facing up to the truth, with openness and sincerity, since time
no longer allows us to indulge in silence.
Dawud al-Sharyan
Al-Hayat, Sunday 27 October 2002
Translated into English by Hassan I. Mneimnah.
|
