In a remarkable last chapter from Posner's previous book, "Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9-11" (Random House, 2003), the journalist reports that when Abu Zubaydah, the terrorist allegedly behind the bombing of the USS Cole, was captured, he was tricked into thinking he was being interrogated by Saudi investigators. CIA officials were then astonished to hear him explain that three high Saudi officials could vouch for him. To prove it, Zubaydah provided their phone numbers. The big question: has the US government followed up on Posner's reporting, given its implications?

Daily Star columnist Ron Chepesiuk recently caught up with Gerald Posner and asked him that question and others about the Saudi-US connection. Here are excerpts from that interview.

Daily Star (DS): How would you assess Saudi Arabia's record as a US ally?
Gerald Posner: Saudi Arabia's record has been a mixed one. The Saudis have been very difficult to figure out. Now that they are having their own serious battle with terrorists who are trying to take down the House of Saud, they are fighting a serious battle against terrorism to ensure their own survival.

But outside of their borders, I don't think the Saudis have been very helpful. They give up enough intelligence to the US government to keep it relatively happy but not so much that they give up the store.

DS: From your research on your book, did you get a sense of how endangered is the House of Saud because of the terrorism threat?
GP: I think the position of the House of Saud is precarious. Of course, I'm six thousand miles away and the CIA predicted the Shah was safe one week before he was deposed.Ê It's true that with the rise of the oil prices Saudi Arabia is seeing a windfall, but it continues to have a lot of big problems. The government has run on a big deficit for some time. There is growing unemployment, especially among the young. The Saudis have wasted a lot of money on the military at the expense of the health and education of their citizens. Revolution can be fueled by religious fervour and political ideology, but it can also be fueled by poverty and economics. Still, the money is flowing back into the Saudi coffers again because of surging oil prices, and that should keep them in power and buy time, if they use the money right.

DS: President Bush has talked a lot of about of spreading democracy to the Middle East and the Gulf region. What would happen to Saudi Arabia if it got serious about implementing democratic reforms?
GP: The elections Saudi Arabia held last February were a tiny step forward, but bringing democracy to Saudi Arabia is a two edged sword. Bush should be careful for what he wishes because he may actually get it. I'm saying that democratic elections in the Middle East could easily bring governments to power who are hostile to US interests. If you have open and fair elections in the Palestinian Authority, I have no doubt Hamas would win. Hezbollah did well in the recent elections in Lebanon. If we have elections in Jordan, does Bush really think he would get someone elected to power who would be as favourable to US interests as the country's king? The same thing can be said about Mubarak in Egypt. A lot of people in the Middle East are angry with the U.S. because of its policies, and the Iraq War has exacerbated that anger.

DS: The 9-11 Commission report called Saudi Arabia "problematic," but it didn't explain what it meant by that.
GP: Yes, what a choice of words. You may have a mother-in-law who is problematic, but a government? The weakest part of the 9-11 Commission report is what it said about Saudi Arabia. But in fairness to the 9-11 Commission, it didn't have the time, money or resources to investigate the Saudi matter thoroughly. The Commission had its hands full trying to figure out how the FBI's and CIA's screw up on 9-11.

DS: Was the 9-11 Commission evasive for political reasons?
GP: I'm sure the report was glossed over not to embarrass the Saudis. It seems strange to me how the (airplane) flight on September 13 in which the Saudis departed the country two days after the 9-11 attacks, could be described as business as usual. On September 13, no private flights were allowed in US airspace except for the private flight of three Saudis from Tampa, Florida, and Lexington, Kentucky. Four other private planes wanting

to fly that day where brought down and forced to land by military aircraft.

Even aircraft that were carrying organ transplants were not allowed to fly on September 13.Ê That flight with the Saudis aboard took place two hours after Prince Bandar met with Bush at the White House. Do you think that's a coincidence? All Bush had to tell the American public was that the Saudi government feared a backlash against its citizens living in the US, so we are going to do them a favour since they assured us that none of their citizens leaving the country had anything to do with 9-11. After all, they are our ally. But Bush didn't do that and that has fueled the speculation.

DS: Didn't the FBI claim it investigated?
GP: All the FBI did was conduct a few cursory interviews and check the names on the passenger manifest against the names on the passports. Given those procedures, the 20th hijacker could have left the country.

DS: In your book, "While America Slept," you end with a chapter about the interrogation of Zubadyah -- what he supposedly reveal about the Saudi-terrorist connection? Has the US checked out your explosive revelation to see if it's true?
GP: No, not at all, and what's remarkable is that there has been no public pressure from the US public and the media to do so. But if Zubadyah had named four Iranians or four Syrians, I have no doubt we would be seeing an investigation.

DS: In "The Secrets of the Kingdom," you write about the Saudi lobby in the US. When we think of powerful lobbies in the US, we think of the Israeli lobby, but the Saudi lobby is one of the most effective lobbies in Washington, isn't it?
GP: Yes, no lobby in Washington is more powerful than the Israeli lobby, but Saudis lave learned from the Israelis. The Saudis have spent a lot of money to show how issues that are good for them can be good for the US. They have been effective, but since 9-11 it has been increasingly more difficult for them to be so.

DS: In "Secrets of the Kingdom," you report that the Saudi Arabia may have wired all of its major oil facilities with explosive charges containing Semtex. What has been the US government's reaction to this revelation?
GP: It's really amazing. It's been zero. You would think Congress would pick upon the story, given its importance, and say let's investigate to see if it's true. The Bush administration continues to give the Saudis a free ride, and I don't think that's good for US interests.

Ron Chepesiuk is a visiting professor of journalism at Chittagong University and a research associate with the National Defense College in Dhaka.