The United States Congress has spent time on the “Justice Against State Sponsors of Terrorism” bill which was passed, vetoed by the president and passed again by Congress. A moment should be taken to account for what we know about this bill. It’s authors and supporters specifically state that it is aimed at the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Closer inspection of it will see this to not be so. The bill is primarily in existence today for the insistently held belief among many that the September 11 attacks were sponsored by the Kingdom and were carried out with direct material support from citizens and officials to enable those terrorist attacks. Much time has passed since that fateful day that changed the world forever. A September 11 Commission was formed with the intent of providing a summary of what happened and how the terrorist acts were able to occur. It did not find a direct, or indirect, role of the Kingdom as an enabler or a state sponsor of those attacks. Recently 28 pages were released from a US Senate Report that were expected by some to further show implication of Saudi Arabia in the attacks. Those 28 pages also did not find a direct, or indirect, role of the Kingdom as an enabler of, or a state sponsor of those attacks. With the benefit of time and hindsight there has still not been anything credible that shows prior knowledge of, enabling of, or state sponsored support of the terrorist actions taken on that day. If for discussion’s sake the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a state sponsor of terrorism then obvious questions arise regarding this role. What interests was it trying to achieve in enabling the September 11 attacks and what outstanding issues existed at the time between Washington and Riyadh that would make it a need for the Kingdom to resort to such acts to address them?
Among many reasons why this bill is just not in anyone’s interest is that the United States itself is also a target, not just the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In effect, what the bill does is eliminate sovereign immunity among Nation-States and their officials. So the United States as well could be a target of a similar measure from another country. In theory why shouldn’t an Iraqi be able to lodge a complaint against the United States in Baghdad? And by extension would not those countries of Europe, the Middle East, and beyond to Central Asia who provided logistical and intelligence support in Washington’s war on terror also be complicit in terrorist acts in this theoretical case? Would this also make them state sponsors of terrorism? What would keep other Nation-States from trying to bring United States officials, soldiers and intelligence operatives into their own courts for interpretations of their version of this line of thinking? Perhaps a deeper look into actual and direct state sponsorship of terrorism would be beneficial for discussions sake.

Why JASTA is unjustified

The United States Congress has passed the “Justice Against State Sponsors of Terrorism” bill. (File photo: AFP)
Last Update: Wednesday, 20 May 2020 KSA 09:49 - GMT 06:49
DAY | WEEK |
-
15870 Views Loud explosion heard in Saudi Arabia's capital Riyadh
-
2517 Views Coronavirus: Police detain 100 in Amsterdam after protest over lockdown, curfew
-
1482 Views Israel talks tough on Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas: Our response to be extreme in next war
-
631 Views German court blocks return of two refugees to Greece, citing risks facing them
-
447 Views Saudi Arabia’s FII confirms speakers, details for fourth annual forum
-
385 Views Grazing cows lead to squabble on Lebanese-Israeli border
-
24093 Views Coronavirus: Dubai temporarily postpones Pfizer vaccine campaign amid global shortage
-
19780 Views Saudi Arabia’s PIF to invest 3 trillion riyals over next 10 years: Crown Prince
-
15870 Views Loud explosion heard in Saudi Arabia's capital Riyadh
-
10131 Views The American University of Beirut’s battle for survival
-
8853 Views Full moon to align directly above Kaaba in Mecca on Jan. 28
-
8455 Views Coronavirus: Dubai restaurants offer discounts for vaccinated diners
SHOW MORE