The Dream That Became A Nightmare

WAY BACK IN 1979: Some foreign observers thought in 1979 that traditionalism was no longer a strong force in Saudi Arabia. This idea was disproved when at least 500 dissidents invaded and seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca on November 20, 1979. The leader of the dissidents, Juhaiman ibn Muhammad ibn Saif al Utaibi, a Sunni, was from one of the foremost families of Najd. His grandfather had ridden with Abd al Aziz in the early decades of the century, and other family members were among the foremost of the Ikhwan. Juhaiman said that his justification was that the Al Saud had lost its legitimacy through corruption, ostentation, and mindless imitation of the West--virtually an echo of his grandfather's charge in 1921 against Abd al Aziz. Juhaiman accusations against the Saudi monarchy closely resembled Ayatollah Ruhollah Musavi, Khomeini's diatribes against the shah. The Saudi leadership was stunned and initially paralyzed by the takeover. The Grand Mosque surrounds the Kaaba, symbol of the oneness of God and believed by Muslims to have been built by the Prophet Abraham. The courtyard is one of the sites where the hajj, the fifth pillar of Islam, is enacted. Because of the holiness of the place, no non-Muslims may enter the city of Mecca. Furthermore, all holy places come under a special injunction in Islam. It is forbidden to shed blood there or to deface or to pollute them in any way. Despite careful planning on Juhaiman part, a guard was shot dead by one of the nervous dissidents. Such a desecration is a major violation under Islamic law and merits crucifixion for the convicted offender. Juhaiman party included women as well as men, other peninsular Arabs, and a few Egyptians. A score of the dissidents were unemployed graduates of the kingdom's seminary in Medina. They had provisions for the siege they expected as well as extensive supplies of arms. The government's initial attempts to rout the dissidents were stymied. Before any military move could be authorized, the ulama had to issue a dispensation to allow the bearing of arms in a holy place. When the religious problems were solved by announcement of the ulama's ruling, logistical problems bogged down the efforts of the military and the national guard for several days. Finally, two weeks later the military effort succeeded, and the dissidents were dislodged. All the surviving males were eventually beheaded in the squares of four Saudi cities. 

Turning back to the Siege of Mecca in 1979 when Juhayman al-Otaibi and his followers stormed Mecca. It becomes clear that this galvanized America and Saudi Arabia to further bankroll Sunni Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan and bordering regions of Pakistan. After all, the elites in Saudi Arabia needed a distraction and America was worried about the repercussions of this extremely important event. The year 1979 in the Islamic world was dramatic and this applies to the Iranian Revolution, the Soviet Union entering Afghanistan, and the Siege of Mecca in Saudi Arabia. However, the greater event was the Siege of Mecca because for America and Saudi Arabia the crisis in Afghanistan was a welcome distraction. Therefore, funding Sunni Islamic terrorism was a great way to take the “heat” of elites within Saudi Arabia and to unify Sunni Islamists into their version of an Islamic jihad. At the same time, it is also clear that the Islamic ulema violated the words of the prophet Mohammed because killing is forbidden in the Grand Mosque. However, the Islamic ulema supported the attack against the jihadists and Saudi units, the French National Gendarmerie Intervention Group (GIGN), CIA operatives who were involved in the planning, and other covert security agencies, stormed the Grand Mosque and killed hundreds of Sunni jihadists. The true extent of the attack was hidden in general from the outside world but the repercussions remain powerful today. In an earlier article published by Modern Tokyo Times it was stated that “The Saudi Arabian regime in 1979 faced a major crisis because the siege of Mecca could have led to severe pressure on the House of Saud. Therefore, the regime turned to America in order to crush the uprising. CIA operatives were sent to help.” Ziauddin Sardar states in his article called “The battle at Islam’s heart” (1 November 2007 – The New Statesman) that “A horde of CIA operatives was quickly converted to Islam so that they could enter the Holy City to assess the battlefield for themselves. They recommended chemical warfare.” Therefore, the French GIGN which is a specialist counter-terrorism unit and which is trained in hostage taking events, alongside CIA operatives, were converted to Islam with the blessing of political elites in both America and France. The conversions lacked sincerity and is clear evidence that the House of Saud, the Islamic ulema in Saudi Arabia, the slave mentality of America and France which would do anything for the monarchy, all worked hand in hand. Irrespective if individuals agree with crushing the jihadist uprising, it is clear that individuals like Osama bin Laden would understand this event from “an Islamic point of view” and this applies to violating the Grand Mosque of Mecca. The trade-off between the Saudi regime and the religious leaders of Saudi Arabia was that they would be allowed to do whatever they liked apart from threatening the ruling elites. Therefore, terrorism in “not our backyard” was implemented and radical organizations were allowed to spread their ideology throughout the world and clearly with great success. Ziauddin Sardar further comments that “Thus began, on the morning of 20 November 1979, the Siege of the Sacred Mosque. What happened during the next two weeks has had a profound impact on most of the Muslim world.” He continues by stating that “The insurgents were led by a Bedouin preacher, Juhayman bin Seif al-Uteybi, and his brother- in-law Mohammed Abdullah al-Qahtani, the alleged Mahdi. The rebels included Egyptians, Pakistanis and American converts, but most were Saudis from the Oteiba tribe, which had actually helped King Abdul Aziz, founder of Saudi Arabia, to seize control of the Arabian Peninsula in 1902. They believed that the royal family had become corrupt, that the state was promoting heresy, that religious scholars were collaborating with the royal family in spreading immoral practices and that Saudi Arabia had become obsessed with money and consumerism. I knew their kind rather well.” It was also reported that you had a connection with the bin Laden family because “In the 1960s Osama bin Laden’s half-brother Mahrous bin Laden joined a rebel group opposed to the Saudi government. With his assistance, in 1979 the rebels smuggled weapons into Mecca using trucks belonging to the bin Laden family company. Five hundred rebels then seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca (sic), Islam’s holiest mosque in its holiest city. They try, but fail, to overthrow the Saudi royal family. All the men who took part are later beheaded except Mahrous. Eventually he is released from prison because of the close ties between the bin Ladens and the Saudi royal family. Mahrous apparently abandons the rebel cause and joins the family business. He is eventually made a head of the Medina branch and a member of the board. He will still hold these positions on 9/11. But a newspaper reports that “his past [is] not forgiven and most important decisions in the　[bin Laden family business] are made without Mahrous’ input.” (Collection of sources – Sunday Herald (Glasgow), 10/7/21; Ha’aretz ,12/18/2002; and New Yorker, 11/5/2001) Juhayman al-Otaibi was a powerful leader despite the lack of followers who supported his logic. He believed firmly that the House of Saud was polluting Islam and that materialism was destroying the fabric of society alongside other important factors. Therefore, he and his followers stormed Mecca in order to challenge the ruling elites and this event led to shockwaves within the Sunni Islamic community. Over two weeks you had an Islamic jihad against the Saudi regime and hundreds of Islamists were killed by a mixture of forces. Mecca had become a battleground and a place full of blood and devastation. Accounts vary about the forces which were instrumental in protecting the House of Saud but America, France, and Pakistan played their role and the CIA gave powerful support. Shortly afterwards, Afghanistan would become a rallying call in spreading radical Sunni Islam and clearly America had a shared objective with the House of Saud. Therefore, “several birds could be killed with one stone.” This applies to a much needed distraction for Saudi Arabia; the need to retake the mantle of being the guardians of　Sunni Islam; to undermine the role of Iran within the Muslim world because they followed the Shia faith; and to defeat communism in Afghanistan and unleash a brutal war for the Soviet Union. Therefore, from the siege of Mecca to the war in Afghanistan you had a shared geopolitical interest for both America and Saudi Arabia, alongside the CIA and other security operatives, who would covertly support Islamic terrorism via Pakistan. Firm objectives and ties were being made and Pakistan would also witness Islamization under General Zia- ul-Haq and once more it is clear that America favored General Zia-ul-Haq over democratic forces in India.