Saudi Gazette JEDDAH – The legislation allowing the United States to sue sponsors of terrorism under the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) and publicly targeted against Saudi Arabia for the 9/11 attacks has been strongly opposed by Saudi Arabia, who considers it harmful to its long-standing alliance as well as to the international community. The bill would not likely improve international efforts in the fight against terrorism, according to Saudi political expert and writer Dr. Abdulmajeed Al-Jallal. "The problem is not whether the bill would be approved or not but the fact that it's passed by a country considered to be an ally of Saudi Arabia who have cooperated for years to combat terrorism. Saudi Arabia is also a victim of terrorism. It will impact the two countries' relations and lose trust." Families of the victims of the events of 9/11 have long sought to sue Saudi Arabia for an alleged role since 15 of the 19 hijackers of the attack were Saudi individuals, according to US media outlets. However, there is no solid evidence in the classified 28-page document from the Congressional report that the Saudi government financed the terrorist organization behind the attacks. Reaffirming the White House's stance that urges the rejection of the bill, Al-Jallal says this bill would impede US efforts to fight terrorism and potentially open records of US military involvement causing victims around the world to sue the US government, such as the US invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan among others. "It will breach sovereign immunity. It will also create chaos and a range of problems in international relations," says Al-Jallal. "Other countries will react and take similar procedures." "Victims of 9/11 events have lawyers, senators, and politicians who have been backing their cause for years. Congress is dominated by lobbies and political interests, including Israeli and Iranian influence," he further said, commenting on the unanimous votes for the bill by Congress. "We need to reexamine the Saudi media and public relations' strategy in facing the growing Iranian and Israel influence abroad and have Saudi Arabia's voice heard. We need huge efforts in effective Saudi lobbying that establish long-term relations with politicians, think tanks, research centers, decision-makers, and media outlets. It's unfortunate that such a bill was unanimously voted for," he said, adding that there is a high possibility Obama's veto will be overridden. Despite the 9/11 events were one of the worst terrorist attacks in modern history, there is no evidence that suggests Saudi Arabia's role, says Salman Al-Ansari, founder and president of the Saudi American Public Relation Affairs Committee (SAPRAC). "The American political fabric knows that Saudi Arabia is completely innocent and has been vindicated from the events of 9/11, with both the 9/11 congressional report and the recently declassified 28 pages clearly showing a complete lack of any evidence that would implicate it, and that any evidence against the Kingdom is presumptive, hypothetical and indeterminate," he says. This bill, he explains, would negatively affect US national security, its free trade policy, and its international relations with its allies. "Any strategic relationship the US has with its closest allies will take a turn for a much rockier road fraught with tension mistrust." Al-Ansari sees that this bill "will play into the handbook of extremist groups who constantly feed on their narrative of demonization of America and take advantage of it for their recruitment efforts." On the economy, he predicts other implications include foreign investments to retreat to less politically-inflamed economies, in addition to the gradual loss of private investment as well. "The United States will succumb to a much less attractive investment climate, depriving it of the sort of investments that are crucial not only to job creation, but to the continuing revival of the US economy," he says. Top Democrat official Adam Smith, who oversees military issues, stated in a letter that the legislation would put US personnel at risk by weakening the international protections that shield them against prosecution in civil and criminal courts around the world. It would waive sovereign immunity protections for foreign governments found responsible for terrorism on US soil, provoking other countries to sue US officials abroad. "The bill will damage any strategic relationship the US has with its closest allies", says Ahmed Al-Ibrahim, a US-Saudi relations expert. Since JASTA lacks precedent themselves, it will turn much needed allies into adversaries." He says it will also create a grossly inaccurate image of the United States as an enemy of Islam in the eyes of terrorist organizations. "Since 9/11, the United States has been attacked and there should be an effective intelligence work to counterterrorism," says Naif Alkhathran, a political science student studying in the United States and is involved in the presidential campaign of democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. "However, thousands of bills are being proposed annually in Congress and only 4% of them become law," he explains. "Congress seeks to create effective public policy." He further says, "In terms of JASTA, Congress should be more concerned about passing laws that would counterterrorism and assure families of 9/11 victims that they are going to be safe in their own homes. If JASTA were to pass, countries listed as sponsor of terrorism by the State Department will be sued," he says, noting that Saudi Arabia has not been listed as a sponsor of terrorism by the US State Department.
