Exclusive - New Secrets Revealed about Bin Laden’s Years in Sudan

Osama bin Laden is seen in a file photo taken in Afghanistan in 1998. (Reuters)
Osama bin Laden is seen in a file photo taken in Afghanistan in 1998. (Reuters)
TT

Exclusive - New Secrets Revealed about Bin Laden’s Years in Sudan

Osama bin Laden is seen in a file photo taken in Afghanistan in 1998. (Reuters)
Osama bin Laden is seen in a file photo taken in Afghanistan in 1998. (Reuters)

“I will leave, but you won’t solve your problems with the Americans.” These were the parting words of al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden, as he boarded a military plane that flew him out of the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, to the mountains of Tora Bora in Afghanistan in 1996. Bin Laden, who was killed exactly nine years ago, never expected to be expelled by a fundamentalist regime that had adopted a hardline Islamic ideology opposed to the West and Americans. His prediction did come true, however. A year after he left Sudan, Washington imposed economic sanctions against the country.

Seven years before his expulsion, Sudan had fallen into the hands of the National Islamic Front, also known as the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1970s, after a military coup on June 30, 1989. The coup was plotted by the group’s leader, Hassan al-Turabi. Afterwards, Sudan was transformed into a safe haven for Islamic jihadist groups in other countries, especially Arab ones.

Failed assassination

The US listed Sudan as a state sponsor of terrorism in 1993 after accusing its government of harboring the al-Qaeda leader and opening its territories to extremist groups from throughout the world. Bin Laden arrived in Sudan in 1991 under the guise of a businessman and investor. He was close to the Islamic group that was ruling the country and that had adopted jihadist slogans against the West. Bin Laden consequently held several open and secret meetings with the leaders of the Islamic Front, such as Omar al-Bashir and Turabi.

Sources close to the decision-making powers at the Front at the time, said Bashir, the now-ousted president, and his deputy, Ali Osman Taha, had visited Bin Laden at his house in the Riyadh neighborhood in Khartoum to inform him about plans to deport him to Afghanistan.

The same sources said Bin Laden had asked about the fate of his assets and properties in Sudan. He was informed that they will be liquidated and that his rights will be preserved. In fact, this never happened, revealed circles close to those in power. As Bin Laden was flown out of Khartoum, Bashir and his deputy, headed to Turabi’s home to inform him that the al-Qaeda leader had left the country at his own volition after acknowledging the difficult situation it was going through. This was the official version of events.

The sources, however, stated that Taha had first proposed his expulsion after the failed attempt to assassinate Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, in 1995. Taha was rumored to have been involved in the plot. Bashir was convinced that he must go. Taha wanted to “get rid of” Bin Laden immediately after it soon started to emerge that he and his regime may have been in on the assassination attempt by providing the conspirators with logistic help.

Former security and intelligence chief Qutbi al-Mahdi told Asharq Al-Awsat that Taha’s role in the plot was limited to logistic support and financing the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Jamaa al-Islamiyya groups that carried out the attack. Turabi had directly accused Taha and his deputy of being involved in the plot. He revealed that Taha had personally detailed to him the incident, asking him to eliminate two Islamists who were involved. They had just recently returned to Khartoum and were later expelled to Afghanistan.

Taha’s actions demonstrate that he was “always prepared to do anything to keep his position in power, even sacrificing his fellow members in his organization,” the sources said. This statement was confirmed by conspirators who had later plotted to remove Turabi from power. They succeeded in 1999 and the Islamist Front split between Bashir, who remained president, and Turabi, who became part of the opposition.

Necessary sacrifice

The sources dismissed the official story about Bin Laden’s “voluntary” departure from Sudan, instead saying the Sudan Brotherhood members had “sacrificed” him because they feared the consequences of the failed attempt on Mubarak’s life. The failed attack led to the ouster of then intelligence chief Nafeh Ali Nafeh and several Islamist members of his agency. The sources said Turabi had asked Bashir to keep Nafeh in his position because his dismissal would implicate Sudan. Bashir did not heed the warning and acted on his own.

Other reports suggest that Bashir had repeatedly sought to get rid of Bin Laden after his regime grew tired of al-Qaeda. His attempts all failed. He even tried to hand him over to the United States, which responded that it did not have enough evidence to put him on trial and secure a conviction. At the time, Vanity Fair magazine released a statement from the intelligence chief, Qutbi, that Sudan was ready to turn over Bin Laden, who was not yet wanted by the CIA. Washington was not interested at the time.

When Bin Laden received word that the regime was seeking to hand him over to foreign forces, he requested to leave. Sources close to the decision-making powers at the time told Asharq Al-Awsat that the expulsion was decided by the Sudanese regime, specifically Bashir and Taha.

Prior to his expulsion, the intelligence agency had detained all foreign Islamists in Sudan. They turned over the Libyans to then ruler Moammar al-Gaddafi, the Eritreans to Eritrea and the Tunisians to Tunisia. Bin Laden was about to be handed over to the US.

Beginnings

In the mid-1990s, German authorities at Frankfurt airport arrested a Syrian called Imad and known as Abou Hajar, a member of al-Qaeda. He was handed over to US intelligence. He was given save haven by the Islamist regime in Sudan and was resident in Khartoum for years. He led prayers at a mosque in the Riyadh neighborhood, the same neighborhood where Bin Laden lived and the same mosque where the al-Qaeda leader prayed.

A resident of the neighborhood told Asharq Al-Awsat that Abou Hajar had given religious lessons at the mosque, which was frequented by different foreign residents of the upscale neighborhood. Many were close to Bin Laden. Bin Laden himself said little and kept to himself except when greeting others in a low barely audible tone. His house was guarded by members of the security and intelligence services.

His rented home belonged to a Sudanese man, who was rumored to be the head of the al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory that was struck by the US with a Cruse missile in 1995 for its alleged ties with al-Qaeda and for manufacturing chemical weapons. The attack was in response to the bombing of the US embassies in Dar Es Salaam and Nairobi. Washington also carried out air raids against “mujahideen” training camps in Afghanistan. One such attack sought to kill Bin Laden.

Sources said that when Bin Laden first requested to reside in Sudan, he was welcomed by Turabi, who dreamed of having his country become a safe haven for Islamist businessmen from across the Muslim world. He allowed them to enter without visas and granted the Sudanese citizenship to whoever requested it.

Soon after his arrival, Bin Laden began investing millions of dollars in several different projects. He set up various companies, implemented road projects and bought a farm belonging to Khartoum University. He used the farm to set up a training camp for the various multinational members of al-Qaeda. The harboring of these fighters, who had already received high levels of training even before arriving in Sudan, would later drag the country into terrorism.

US relations

Turabi even had relations with the “Afghan Jihad” group. The sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that these ties probably date back to 1979 after the Soviets occupied Afghanistan when Turbai served as justice minister in Prime Minister Jaafar Nimeiry’s government. Turabi had even convinced the premier to open the first office for the Afghan Jihad in the Arab world in Khartoum. The office was secretly opened in 1980.

Bin Laden played a central role in the Afghan Jihad due to his wealth and ties with Abdullah Azzam, the Brotherhood member, whom sources say had the idea to form al-Qaeda.

Relations between the Islamic movement in Sudan with the US date back to the Cold War and the Afghanistan War when Soviet intelligence accused the Muslim Brotherhood of operating under Washington’s influence. It is often said in Sudan that generations of Islamic movement members earned their university and higher education degrees in the US. They include Ahmed Osman Makki, Amin Hassan Omar, Sayyed al-Khatib and dozens of others.

Turabi and Bin Laden first met at the former’s house in Khartoum in 1988 in wake of floods that had ravaged Sudan. Bin Laden had landed in the country as part of a relief team that included his younger brother. Sources close to Turabi told Asharq Al-Awsat that he did not hold many meetings with Bin Laden and they were often held in secret. Turabi often spoke to Bin Laden of shifting the Islamic movement towards openness, while the al-Qaeda leader stuck to his extremist views. They also discussed investment in roads, agriculture and airports.

The sources confirmed that Bashir enjoyed good relations with Bin Laden. He used to visit him at his home and they were seen together at the inauguration of several projects in Sudan. World leaders avoid discussing any ties they may have had with Bin Laden while he was living Sudan, which raises questions by over his activity, which was not limited to investment and that the Sudanese government was aware of his actions.

Mahdi told Asharq Al-Awsat that Turabi and Bashir had both agreed on the need for Bin Laden to leave Sudan as soon as possible after coming pressure from regional countries and possibly even Taha.

After the Soviet Union quit Afghanistan in the early 1990s and after fierce fighting between the Arab Afghan Mujahideen with American support, they feared that the US would turn them over to their countries, he continued. Many consequently sought refuge in Sudan, which welcomed them with open arms. Some worked in investment with Bin Laden.

9/11 Avoided

Mahdi said that the Sudanese government offered to hand over Bin Laden to the Americans, who responded that they had no charges against him. Khartoum, therefore, had no choice but to deport him to fend off any terrorism accusations against it. Mahdi stressed: “America is responsible for forming terrorism because it supported the terrorists while they were fighting the Russians. After the end of the Cold War, it exerted pressure on Sudan to expel Afghan Jihad members from the country. We had no choice but to force them to return to their countries. The security and intelligence agencies were not involved in handing them over to US intelligence.”

Mahdi denied that the Brotherhood, which is accused of plotting to assassinate Mubarak, had any relations with Bin Laden and his companion, Ayman al-Zawahiri. He said members of the Egyptian Jihad and Jamaa al-Islamiyya were attempting to implicate al-Qaeda, but they failed.

Taha, he revealed, played a role in the failed attempt on Mubarak’s life. His role was limited to providing logistic and financial support. Taha believed that Mubarak was the greatest obstacle in the development of Sudanese-Egyptian relations and relations with the Gulf and several other countries.

The sources said the idea of the assassination was first proposed by the Egyptian Jihad and they approached Taha for support. Contact between the two sides took place through Sudanese intelligence.

The plot ultimately failed. Three people were killed at the scene and Ethiopian security arrested three suspects, while three others fled to Sudan. They were reportedly killed to eliminate any traces back to their leaders.

“Bin Laden and his all jihadist groups had their own unit in the Sudanese intelligence and security agency,” a security source told Asharq Al-Awsat on condition of anonymity. “When counter-terrorism cooperation began, then agency chief Salah Abdallah Gosh handed American intelligence 300 valuable intelligence files on Bin Laden.”

The move was a stab in the back by Sudan against the Islamists, he said.

American intelligence would later say that the failure of Bill Clinton’s administration to cooperate with Sudan was a direct factor that led to the September 11, 2001 attacks. Had the administration been aware of the important information Sudanese intelligence had handed over to the US, New York would have avoided the attack that changed the world. Afghanistan ultimately became Bin Laden’s final safe haven. Its Taliban rulers refused to turn him over to Washington.



Saudi Flag Narrative Centers on Justice, Security

Saudi flag’s profound symbolism reflects unity, justice, strength and prosperity (SPA)
Saudi flag’s profound symbolism reflects unity, justice, strength and prosperity (SPA)
TT

Saudi Flag Narrative Centers on Justice, Security

Saudi flag’s profound symbolism reflects unity, justice, strength and prosperity (SPA)
Saudi flag’s profound symbolism reflects unity, justice, strength and prosperity (SPA)

Ensuring a certain level of security is not difficult for any state, regardless of its system of governance. Security, understood here as the preservation of order, can exist under many political systems. History shows that numerous authoritarian governments have succeeded in imposing strict security on their societies.

The real question, however, lies not in the existence of security but in its nature and its source. The issue is whether the desired security is that of authority imposed by force, or that of justice arising from a system of values and a fair legal order.

Security under authoritarian systems is often superficial, enforced through mechanisms of control, surveillance and punishment. It is inherently fragile because it relies on fear rather than consent, and deterrence rather than justice. Such security remains vulnerable to disruption at the first shift in the balance of power or legitimacy, as many historical examples demonstrate.

By contrast, another form of security is more stable and enduring, the security that stems from justice. This emerges when society believes that the rule governing it is fair and that the authority enforcing it is subject to a higher reference rather than an unchecked will.

National flags often reflect a country’s identity, principles and values, as well as the orientation of its political or intellectual systems. They may also contain symbols carrying religious, historical or cultural significance.

The flag of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia stands apart not only for its color and symbols but also for its meanings and implications. It reflects the state’s deep-rooted history, embodies its identity and represents the values and principles on which it was founded.

Saudi Flag Day, observed annually on March 11, highlights the close bond between Saudis and their national banner and reflects their pride in their identity.

Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz has said that celebrating Flag Day affirms pride in national identity and in the flag’s historical symbolism and deep meanings that embody the country’s constants and represent a source of pride in its history.

He has also said that the Saudi state was founded by its forefathers on the principles of monotheism, justice and unity under one banner, a foundation that brought security and prosperity.

Saudi researcher and historian Dr. Abdullah Al-Munif said the Saudi flag is not merely a sovereign symbol of the state but also an expression that carries deep significance for the state’s philosophy and vision for life and society.

“The green color, which symbolizes Islam and prosperity, reflects support for a state founded on an Islamic approach with a commitment to justice and to spreading security in its comprehensive sense,” he said.

“The phrase ‘There is no god but God, Muhammad is the Messenger of God’, inscribed in Arabic, highlights the enduring foundation upon which the state stands and affirms its commitment to an approach that does not deviate from this reference as a basic guide for governance and politics.”

He added that the sword, which symbolizes strength and the pursuit of justice, reflects the state’s effort to protect the path it believes is right, with the aim of spreading justice and establishing security across the country.

“These three elements are not merely formal components but form a precise equation linking justice and security in a cause-and-effect relationship,” he said.

“The Islamic approach represents the spiritual and social foundations of the state that seeks to achieve justice and stability, ensure security and provide an environment suitable for promoting what is right.”

In this sense, the Saudi flag becomes a symbol of the dynamic interaction among the components of the state. The state seeks to achieve security as a necessity for establishing and spreading what is right, while also pursuing justice and stability as the basis for comprehensive security and sustainable prosperity.

The Saudi flag can therefore be read historically as more than a sovereign symbol. It symbolizes the state’s vision. The three elements that compose it, the green color, the inscription and the sword, reflect a precise equation between justice and security in a cause-and-effect relationship.

Legal expert Dr. Fahd Al-Tarisi said the phrase at the center of the flag represents the system’s supreme reference.

“It is a clear declaration that the justice on which governance is based is not the product of a temporary political will but rests on a fixed religious reference,” he said.

“The presence of this phrase at the center of the flag therefore means that law and justice derive their source from a higher system of values rather than from political authority alone.”

He added that the sword placed beneath the phrase does not symbolize violence or domination but rather the authority to enforce justice.

“Every legal system needs power to protect it and ensure respect for it, otherwise it remains merely text,” he said. “The sword therefore symbolizes the power that protects the principle, not the power that replaces it.”

He said the placement of the sword beneath the phrase reflects a symbolic order in which power serves justice rather than replacing it.

The green color that fills the flag, historically associated in Islamic culture with calm, stability and reassurance, can symbolize the social security that emerges when justice prevails in political and legal systems.

In this reading, the symbolism of the Saudi flag presents a clear equation: the reference establishes justice, power protects that justice, and from this arises the security and stability of society.

This distinction highlights two types of security: the security of authority, imposed by force and often present in authoritarian systems, and the security of justice, which arises naturally when the rules governing society are fair and enjoy moral and legal legitimacy.

Within this framework, the symbolic structure of the Saudi flag presents a clear vision of the state. Security is not the starting point but the result. The cause that leads to it is justice protected by legitimate power within a stable reference.

In that sense, the flag becomes more than a national emblem. It becomes a visual expression of a philosophy of governance that sees true stability not as something built on fear but as the outcome of justice that produces security.

For Saudis, the flag reflects the needs and aspirations of the Saudi citizen, summarized in the values of justice, stability, security and prosperity.

In celebrating Flag Day, Saudis celebrate a nation that sees its strength in unity, a leadership that places service to its people among its top priorities, and a banner under which people and leadership have stood together for centuries.


Researcher Owns 100 Rare Flags From Saudi State Eras

Saudi researcher Adnan Al-Tarif poses with two Saudi state flags (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Saudi researcher Adnan Al-Tarif poses with two Saudi state flags (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT

Researcher Owns 100 Rare Flags From Saudi State Eras

Saudi researcher Adnan Al-Tarif poses with two Saudi state flags (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Saudi researcher Adnan Al-Tarif poses with two Saudi state flags (Asharq Al-Awsat)

Saudi Arabia marked Flag Day on March 11 for the fourth consecutive year, following a royal order issued on March 1, 2023, designating the date as an annual celebration of the national flag, whose current form was approved in 1937 by King Abdulaziz.

Saudi researcher Adnan Al-Tarif, who owns around 100 flags, says one of the most notable pieces in his collection is the original banner of the First Saudi State, along with dozens of other flags used during later phases of the Saudi state across its three historical eras.

According to historical sources, the banner that Al-Tarif proudly owns — and keeps in a bank vault to protect it from damage, loss, or theft — was “a green banner made of khazz and ibraism (the finest types of silk), bearing the phrase ‘There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’ in Arabic, and attached to a simple pole.”

The banner remained in that form during the reigns of Imam Muhammad bin Saud, founder of the First Saudi State, followed by his son, Imam Abdulaziz bin Muhammad, his son, Imam Saud bin Abdulaziz, and his son, Imam Abdullah bin Saud.

A banner that was never defeated

Al-Tarif said the first Saudi banner was raised in 1727 by the founding imam Muhammad bin Saud, whose rule lasted 40 years. The banner was either carried by him or entrusted to one of his sons.

Citing the historian Ibn Bishr, Al-Tarif said that Imam Abdulaziz bin Muhammad, the second ruler of the First Saudi State, and his son, Imam Saud, would send messengers to tribal leaders specifying a date and meeting point at a particular water source. The banner would be raised there in advance, and no tribal chief would fail to attend.

Ibn Bishr also wrote that Imam Saud “was granted success in his campaigns, and no banner of his was ever defeated.”

When Ibn Bishr described the life of Imam Turki bin Abdullah, founder of the Second Saudi State, he said that, when preparing for a campaign, Turki would write to the princes of towns and tribal leaders, specifying a time and place for assembly.

Military equipment, army supplies, and horse fodder would be sent out 15 days before departure. The banner would then be raised near the palace gate a day or two before the campaign began.

Imam Turki ordered the banner to be carried ahead of him, and his son Faisal later followed the same system of presenting or raising the banner before the palace.

Three centuries of development

Al-Tarif said the Saudi flag — also referred to as the banner or bayraq — has flown in green for three centuries, passing through several stages before settling into its final form in the later years of King Abdulaziz’s reign.

He also cited accounts from travelers and Orientalists who wrote about the Saudi banner.

During the height of the British-French rivalry, Domingo Badía y Leblich, a Spanish traveler later revealed to be a spy, pretended to convert to Islam and traveled under the name Ali Bey al-Abbasi to study the Saudi state.

He arrived in Makkah in January 1807, traveling from Morocco through North Africa, and witnessed the entry of Imam Saud’s army into the city.

He recorded that 45,000 followers of Saud, dressed in the garments of pilgrimage, entered to perform the rites, led by a green flag embroidered with large white letters reading “There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.”

Meanwhile, Swiss traveler Johann Ludwig Burckhardt, who adopted the name Ibrahim Abdullah after converting to Islam, wrote in observations from his travels in the East around 1810 about the military affairs of Imam Saud bin Abdulaziz bin Muhammad bin Saud and his authority across the Arabian Peninsula.

He noted that each prince had his own banner, and that Saud had several.

A new form of the flag

Al-Tarif said King Abdulaziz initially used the same banner employed during the first and second Saudi states before introducing modifications.

Writer Amin Al-Rihani recorded that the banner carried by King Abdulaziz early in his reign had a white section near the pole and a green section, and was square in shape, bearing the phrase “There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” in Arabic, with two crossed swords above it.

Its design later changed to include one sword beneath the inscription.

In 1925, King Abdulaziz ordered the creation of a new flag design. In 1937, the Shura Council approved official dimensions of 150 centimeters in length and 100 centimeters in width.

In the same year, decisions were issued concerning official flags, including those of the king, crown prince, army, air force, internal flag, royal naval flag, and merchant naval flag.

In 1952, the Shura Council issued decisions introducing other measurements and modifications. In 1973, the Council of Ministers approved the national flag law.

Later, during the reign of King Fahd, the Basic Law of Governance issued in 1991 defined the nature of the flag: green in color, with a width equal to two-thirds of its length, bearing the phrase “There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” with a sword beneath it.

A unique case

Al-Tarif said the symbolism of the current flag reflects guidance, justice, strength, growth, and prosperity.

The Islamic declaration of faith symbolizes the message of peace and Islam upon which the kingdom was founded. The sword represents strength, unity, wisdom, and security. The green color reflects the banner of Islam and symbolizes peace, generosity, tolerance, and water, while white symbolizes purity associated with Saudi Arabia.

He said the Saudi flag is unique, as it is the only flag that is never lowered to half-mast during mourning or disasters, and it cannot be used for advertising or commercial trademarks.

The flag must not touch the ground or water, be taken into impure places, or be sat upon. It also does not bow to guests during honor-guard ceremonies or mourning periods, according to Article 16 of the flag law, which also sets penalties for violations.

Families who carried the banner

In the First Saudi State, the banner was carried by Ibrahim bin Tuq and Abdullah Abu Nahiyah, who was killed during the siege of Diriyah in 1818.

In the Second Saudi State, it was carried by Al-Humaidi bin Salama, Saleh bin Hadyan, and Ibrahim Al-Dhafiri.

Under King Abdulaziz, the first to carry the banner was Abdul Latif Al-Maashouq during the recapture of Riyadh in 1902. He later took part in subsequent battles and was killed in the Battle of Bukayriyah in 1904.

His son Mansour Al-Maashouq then carried the banner and was killed in the same battle.

Afterward, Abdulrahman bin Mutrif and his sons assumed the role.

To this day, the responsibility of carrying the banner has been entrusted to the Al-Mutrif family, although many individuals and families have been honored to carry the Saudi flag in various battles and locations.

Sewing and calligraphy

Regarding the making of the flag, Al-Tarif cited historian Abdulrahman Al-Ruwaished, who wrote that sewing and writing the flag were entrusted to individuals from well-known families in Riyadh, including Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Shaheen and Saad bin Saeed.

Bin Saeed handled the preparation of the materials used for the flag, though he did not personally sew it.

Some documents indicate that King Abdulaziz tasked Sheikh Abdulrahman Al-Tubaishi with purchasing and securing certain materials for the banner.

Later in his reign, flags were manufactured in several countries using fabric-on-fabric techniques in the United States, Pakistan, and some Arab countries.

Among the earliest calligraphers of the Saudi flag during King Abdulaziz’s era was Sheikh Omar Asim Al-Hasani, from Al-Jumum in Wadi Fatimah near Makkah, who had worked in Kuwait at Al-Mubarakiyah School and later became its director.

He also wrote the script for the old Kuwaiti flag bearing the word “Kuwait.”

He was asked to inscribe the Saudi flag around 1911.

When King Abdulaziz ordered the opening of the Kiswah factory for the Kaaba in 1926, one of the first workers was calligrapher Abdul Rahim Amin Abdullah Bukhari, who was tasked with writing the inscriptions on the Kaaba’s covering and designing the calligraphy for its door.

He was also asked to write the Saudi flag and its decorative elements in Arabic Thuluth script.

Rare collections

Al-Tarif said one of the most notable parts of his collection is Saudi flags.

“I thank God that among my most prominent possessions are Saudi flags. I own more than 100 old and rare flags of different sizes, shapes, materials, and historical periods, including flags from the First and Second Saudi States that were used during campaigns to establish unity and security in this blessed land,” he said.

He said he also collected flags used during events attended by King Abdulaziz, including flags used on the king’s car.

His collection includes flags from the era of King Saud, as well as flags used during King Faisal’s visit to the United States in 1945, and others from the reigns of King Khalid and King Fahd during foreign visits.

Among the most important items he owns is the flag placed between King Fahd and King Salman bin Abdulaziz during a ceremony honoring King Saud when he assumed power in 1953.

Al-Tarif said he documented the flags through photographs and examined them at major international centers to verify their authenticity. They were also verified by individuals historically tasked with carrying the banner, including members of the Al-Mutrif family, as well as through the finials placed atop flagpoles.

He said he owns more than 10 finials made of silver, copper, and other metals used during the reign of King Abdulaziz, along with a rare document stamped by King Abdulaziz seven years after entering Riyadh, related to details about the Saudi flag.

Museums and heritage

Al-Tarif said that during his research career, he also established three private museums dedicated to camels, horses, and falcons, containing rare pieces, some of which are more than 300 years old.

He has also collected postage stamps related to these subjects from countries around the world, as well as newspaper articles published since 1850, photographs dating back more than 100 years, and museum artifacts, including utensils, incense burners, coffee pots, clocks, and license plates from the reigns of King Abdulaziz, King Saud, King Faisal, and King Khalid.

His collection also includes telephones used in royal palaces from the era of the founding king through later Saudi monarchs.

Diplomatic tensions over the flag

Al-Tarif also recounts an incident involving Saudi Arabia’s refusal to lower its flag following the death of King Faisal I of Iraq, which angered the British.

He said that after Sheikh Ibrahim bin Muammar was appointed Saudi minister plenipotentiary to Iraq in 1923, shortly after the Saudi legation opened in Baghdad, the appointment reflected the Saudi king’s confidence in his abilities.

Large Saudi communities lived in Iraq at the time, and Arab tribes inhabited the border regions between the two countries. Among his duties were caring for Saudi nationals, overseeing the implementation of newly signed border agreements, and managing arrangements for pilgrims traveling to perform the Hajj.


Tracing the US Military’s Learning Curve on Fighting Iran’s Drones: What to Know

A visitor of an exhibition takes a photo of parts of an Iranian made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Shahed-131/136, which was launched on Ukrainian territories, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 27, 2025. (Reuters)
A visitor of an exhibition takes a photo of parts of an Iranian made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Shahed-131/136, which was launched on Ukrainian territories, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 27, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

Tracing the US Military’s Learning Curve on Fighting Iran’s Drones: What to Know

A visitor of an exhibition takes a photo of parts of an Iranian made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Shahed-131/136, which was launched on Ukrainian territories, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 27, 2025. (Reuters)
A visitor of an exhibition takes a photo of parts of an Iranian made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Shahed-131/136, which was launched on Ukrainian territories, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 27, 2025. (Reuters)

The Iran war quickly tested America's ability to combat the swarms of cheap drones that have become a staple of the modern battlefield after Ukraine and Russia demonstrated how effective they could be.

Iran launched so many drones across the region at once that some slipped through the defenses, including a strike that killed six US soldiers at an operations center in Kuwait.

Experts and defense leaders stress that the US military has been able to shoot down the majority of Iran’s drones and take out much of its drone capabilities. But critics said too often missiles that cost millions of dollars were used to down small drones that cost tens of thousands.

The US is bringing an anti-drone system to the Middle East that has been tested in Ukraine, which had proposed a deal with the US last year to offer its drone expertise. Such an agreement is yet to be made, and American forces are facing a steep learning curve as they scramble to deploy more cost-efficient defenses against Iran's Shahed drones, which fly low and buzz like mopeds before smashing into their targets.

“We are crushing them — there’s no doubt about it — but if even one drone gets through our defenses and hurts an American, for me, that is enough to warrant fixing the problem,” said drone warfare expert Brett Velicovich, who operated Predator drones in the US Army and co-founded a drone manufacturing company.

Here’s what to know about Iran's drones and efforts by the US to shoot them down:

US says it's attacking the source of Iran's drones

Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Tuesday that the number of drones launched by Iran had fallen 83% since the war began on Feb. 28. Iran launched more than 2,000 drones in the days after the initial US and Israeli attacks, other top military officials said.

Caine told reporters that US forces were striking military and industrial targets in Iran “to deny them the ability to continue to generate those one-way attack drones.”

Hundreds — if not thousands — of Patriot missiles have been used by the US and its allies across the Middle East to defend against Iranian missiles and drones. But now the US seems to be relying more on attack helicopters and machine guns as a more cost-effective way to shoot down Iranian drones, experts say, and President Donald Trump suggested as much.

“Now we have low-cost interceptors effectively combating Iranian drones,” the Republican president said Monday.

The military also is bringing in an American anti-drone system proven to work in Ukraine against Russian drones, which are similar to Iran's, The Associated Press has reported. Known as Merops, the system flies drones against drones, fits in the back of a pickup truck and uses artificial intelligence to navigate when electronic communications are jammed.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told journalists on Tuesday that his country proposed a deal with the US last year to provide cutting-edge and battle-tested drone technology, including interceptor drones.

“I do not know whether they refused it. I’m not sure, but it was definitely postponed,” Zelenskyy said, adding that Ukraine still hopes to sign such a deal.

Experts say the US military has been slow to overhaul its arsenal and tactics to respond to the new threat from fleets of drones.

“This is going to be a big wake-up call for how the US military defends its citizens and fights wars forever,” Velicovich said. “Because it’s sort of like we’re the best military on the planet, but stuff’s still getting by us.”

Travis Metz, the Pentagon’s drone dominance program manager, told senators last week that the Defense Department has committed $1.1 billion to buy drone systems over the next 18 months, including 30,000 small, one-way attack drones to be delivered to military units over the next five months.

US is leaning on knowledge from Ukraine

Pentagon officials have conceded in classified briefings to Congress that they initially struggled to stop the waves of Iranian drones, leaving US service members and allies vulnerable. High-profile targets like a Dubai skyscraper and airports across the region have been struck.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last week that “thousands of Iranian missiles and drones have been intercepted and vaporized.” But he conceded, “this does not mean we can stop everything.”

Available in big numbers, the Shahed drones have shown their capability to oversaturate air defenses and inflict painful damage. And while the Shahed flies slowly at 180 kph (just over 110 mph), it can range as far as 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles) and carry a relatively big load of 40 kilograms (88 pounds) of explosives.

The US military has typically operated complicated reusable drones that fire off missiles and return to base, such as the Predator. But Ukraine has shown that relying on large numbers of cheap drones, which carry their payloads directly into the target and become warheads themselves, can be extremely effective.

“There is going to be a learning curve, but the more that the Ukrainians can provide us in terms of guidance and expertise I think the better off we all are,” said Brandon Blackburn, who is a former CIA targeting officer who conducted counterterrorism operations throughout the Middle East.

Ryan Brobst, a scholar focused on US defense strategy at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank, said social media posts by the US military and allies have indicated the use of relatively cheaper weapons, like aircraft machine guns or laser-guided rockets, to destroy drones in Iran.

“The United States has made significant strides in counter-UAS warfare over the past few years,” Brobst said, referring to unmanned aerial systems. “But it’s also true that we can still learn more from Ukraine.”

Looking ahead to focusing on the ‘cheap stuff’

Northwestern University professor William Reno, who researches Ukraine’s military training for the Pentagon and visits the country regularly, noted that Ukraine has found cheap ways to shoot down drones with .50-caliber machine guns mounted in the back of a pickup or other fast-moving drones.

“The long-run effect will probably be that it’s going to focus minds wonderfully on thinking more seriously about cheap stuff that comes through the air,” Reno said.

For decades, US military strategy has counted on dominating the airspace above any conflict it got involved in, but the focus was primarily at higher altitudes where fighters and bombers fly. Now drones will force the military to think about what it does to control low-altitude airspace.

“Ukraine was the wake-up call,” Reno said.

The US military already has some programs centered on inexpensive drones, according to Jerry McGinn, a former Defense Department official who was focused on manufacturing and industrial base policy and is now a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

One of those programs is the Low-cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System, or LUCAS, which American forces are using in Iran. The US military said in a post on X that the American-made, one-way attack drones were “modeled after Iran’s Shahed drones.”

“It’s not public on how effective they’ve been or how they were used,” McGinn said. “But there’s very much a focus in the US of learning from the experience in Ukraine.”