Prince of Thieves

I've yet to read the book, but from the excerpts in the Washington Post and points discussed in the major media, the most damning information in Bob Woodward's new book has to be the "Bandar revelation." For those who haven't heard, Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia has promised the Bush administration that OPEC will increase crude oil production and lower prices before the November elections to ensure a solid economic boost for Bush to run on..

First, there's the obvious question of, if Bandar can raise or lower crude prices as he sees fit, what's stopping him from doing so now, when Americans are paying historically high (though internationally still very low) gasoline prices. You'd expect no less from such a close Bush family friend that that the president's mother has nicknamed him Bandar Bush, a man with such a high standing in the Bush administration that he was briefed on the Iraq war plan before even the president's own Secretary of State.

But then of course we must ask why crude prices are suddenly so high to begin with. A vague, "because of the war" makes no sense. We've been in Iraq for a year. Why now? What's the driving factor behind the inflated prices Americans are paying at the pump? We know that American oil companies are processing less of the crude they have on hand, which is in turn driving prices up just as surely as OPEC's decreasing output, but it is the compounded effect of the two that have prices reaching the heights they are. That, though, is not at issue. Why has an organization, OPEC, headed by Prince Bandar, close Bush family friend and trusted ally, chosen to cut back on production now? If logic counts for anything, he must have had a hand in the price spike as well.

Given that Bandar enjoys such privileged access to the Oval Office and the Crawford ranch as well, given that he is briefed on war plans clearly marked as classified against any foreign eyes, that he would allow oil prices to rise to current levels implies one of two things. Either he is indifferent to the political "heat" on Bush, which is unimaginable, or this spike was, as was the planned pre-election drop, decided upon in advance. Under cover of an OPEC decision to cut back production, American companies cut back operations at their refineries too, increasing not only Arabian but American profits as well. Everybody wins. Everybody, that is, except the independent gas station proprietor and the American consumer.

The biggest question raised by all this is why, and how, on earth an Arab monarch can play such a participatory role in American politics. Forget the hundreds of millions of dollars funneled to Bush family and friends by the Saudi Royals. Forget the Saudi nationals collected from all around the country in the days following September 11th, flown to the safety of their homeland and free from questioning by American authorities. Forget about the fact that the Saudi government is paying top dollar for Bush familiar James Baker's law firm to defend themselves in a civil suit brought by the families of 9/11 victims. Forget even the oil connection that binds the families Bush and Saud together at the hip.

The Bush administration owes the American public a detailed and honest accounting of what exactly gives an Arabian monarch the right to decide an American election. The price-fixing amounts to nothing less than Prince Bandar, and by proxy the Saudi government, attempting to influence who should be in power in the United States, a decision traditionally left to the American voter. That 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens should not be lost on us either. After the furor raised over John Kerry suggesting that there were many "foreign leaders" who would like to see him prevail in November, the Bush campaign, if not the administration (devoid as they are of responsibility--for anything), should explain how a tyrannical and oil-rich kingdom's meddling in the electoral integrity of America can be any better at all.

These questions, like so many others before and undoubtedly still to come will most likely go unanswered by the president, but that shouldn't stop Americans from asking them. If the Bush administration is ever to understand that accountability does indeed extend to their own actions, it will only come by the American public calling loudly for answers. Though he did, unfortunately, once publicly long for an American dictatorship (it would be a lot easier, he said) Bush should realize that he is not, unlike his friends in the Saudi royal family, a brutal despot past the reach of both law and public opinion. Not yet, in any event.