Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, several media organizations and politicians began to look with increased scrutiny at the possible role that Saudi Arabia may have played in the attacks as well as at potential connections with the terrorist group Al Qaeda. Despite its status as a US ally, many found it upsetting that 15 of the 19 hijackers of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were Saudi citizens.

In an investigative report published in its December 2, 2002 issue, Newsweek followed the “Saudi money trail” directly from the hijackers to a member of the Saudi Royal family. Since then, a flurry of attention has focused on the links between Saudi Arabia and the September 11 attacks. In his book, Intelligence Matters, former Florida Senator Robert Graham highlighted connections between a Saudi government spy and the planners of the terrorist attacks and criticized the deletion of 28 pages from the 9/11 Commission Report that dealt with Saudi Arabia. Questions about Saudi involvement continued even after the final version of the report established no connections to the terrorist attacks.

In response to such questions, the Saudi government launched a massive lobbying and public relations campaign in the United States around the first anniversary of the terrorist attacks. Though Saudi Arabia has historically remained indifferent to US public opinion, the recent surge in negative feelings toward the country spilled into the political realm as many legislators, including former US Senator Bob Graham, called for deeper investigations into the country’s activities regarding terrorism. Saudi Arabia hoped to prevent any detrimental political action and threats to its status with the United States by reforming its image with a public ad campaign.

The most unusual part of the Saudi campaign has been its focus on broadcasting a message directly to US citizens. Beginning in 2002, ads appeared on US television networks, radio stations, in major newspapers and magazines, and throughout the Internet. Though they differed slightly in content, all the ads featured the slogan, “The People of Saudi Arabia: Allies Against Terrorism.” More recently in August 2004, following the final release of the 9/11 Commission Report, the Saudi government paid for a series of radio ads emphasizing that no link had been established between Saudi Arabia and the September 11 attacks in the report.

According to US Justice Department records, Saudi Arabia has spent over US$20 million on advertising, lobbying, and public relations. The government employed a number of public relations firms to handle its image, most notably Qorvis Communications, which crafted the country’s short and long term media strategies. Qorvis received approximately US$200,000 per month for its services, totaling over US$4.5 million since the public relations campaign began.

Since 2002, lobbying has become a major part of the country’s strategy to steer policy in the United States. One of Qorvis’ partners, Patton Boggs, lobbied on Saudi Arabia’s behalf with US Congressional staffers 62 times in the first half of 2004. Additionally, the country has started an effort called the Women’s Project for Saudi Arabia. As part of the project, Qorvis pays consultants US$81,000 to send important US businesswomen to Saudi Arabia in an effort to improve the country’s image on gender issues. Saudi Arabia has also sought to change the way it is treated in the media by having officials meet with the editorial boards of seven major US newspapers, including The New York Times and USA Today, and appear on numerous cable news programs. Since much of the public’s perception of Saudi Arabia comes from its treatment in the media, officials hope a change in coverage will translate into a change of attitudes.

The public relations and lobbying efforts on behalf of Saudi Arabia have hardly had their desired effect. Several television networks, including The History Channel, The Weather Channel, and USA Network, refused to carry the “Allies against Terrorism” advertisements. The campaign also appears to have been unsuccessful at changing public opinion. One poll found that the number of US citizens with a negative opinion of Saudi Arabia has actually risen in the period since May 2002, from 50 percent to 63 percent. More importantly, 59 percent of US citizens believe that Saudi Arabia “supports terrorism,” while only 19 percent say they have confidence in Saudi Arabia as a reliable ally in the War on Terror.

The ads have failed to reform the country’s image for several reasons. First, the 30 second spots have largely avoided addressing the most pointed criticisms of Saudi Arabia and instead have focused on vague notions of alliance with the United States or symbolic actions, like the revocation of Osama bin Laden’s citizenship. For most US citizens, this does little to change a perception reinforced by several years of media reports that some of Saudi Arabia’s most prominent clergy and government support Al Qaeda. Additionally, US dependency on Saudi oil has created the dichotomy in public opinion that Saudi Arabia can be a formal ally for economic reasons while still working politically to undermine the United States. As an added hurdle, some of the radio ads also denounced Israeli military tactics against Palestinians, a position usually unpopular among the US public.

For the time being, Saudi Arabia must deal with the reality that despite its status as a US ally for over 60 years, the fact of the matter is that such status is still debatable for most of the US public.