Search JTA's historical archive dating back to 1923

Key Question in Saudi Contract is Whether There is Job Bias Against U.S. Citizens, Namely Jews

February 12, 1975
See Original Daily Bulletin From This Date
Advertisement

A key question in the Senate’s investigation of the Defense Department’s $77 million contract to a private California company to train Saudi Arabian military forces is whether a waiver had been made on U.S. regulations governing civil rights practices that forbid discrimination in employment of American citizens.

The Senate Armed Services Committee’s chairman, Sen. John C. Stennis (D. Miss.) has asked the Defense Department for a report on its arrangements with the Vinnell Corp. of Alhambra, Calif., but it is possible that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee also may become involved because of its oversight of the Military Sales Act. That act would directly involve the conditions of the contract. Saudi Arabia is the most arbitrary Arab country towards Jews, regardless of their nationality.

“Theoretically, the Armed Services regulations on procurement should apply to this contract but who knows whether a waiver had been made,” a specialist at the Capitol on defense matters told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “The procurement regulations are so broad that it would be hard to know what would be binding regarding minority practices.”

Sen. Henry M. Jackson (D.Wash,), who said he was “completely baffled” by the Vinnell contract, had asked Stennis for an investigation and Stennis agreed that the arrangements raise questions. They have been joined by Sen. Hubert Humphrey (D.Minn.) and Iowa’s Senators, Richard Clark and John Culver, both Democrats, Culver said “The possibility of having “American forces training another country’s troops in the Middle East is fraught with danger.”

No mention of Saudi Arabia was made in the Defense Department’s announcement of a series of routine contracts on Jan. 8, that included the one with Vinnell. A Pentagon spokesman, Major General Winant Sijle, said the announcement was made “in a rather ambiguous way” because the U.S. is obliged to abide by a foreign government’s request for anonymity.

Recommended from JTA

Advertisement