Just how seriously does Saudi Arabia monitor where its âÂÂcharitableâ contributions wind up?

Attention of late has been focused on the status of a Saudi Arabia princess whose charitable output might have helped finance the terrorists who struck in America on 9-11.

Princess Haifa bin Faisal gave money to a sick Jordanian woman living in Los Angeles who petitioned her for aid in early 2000. Reportedly, the Jordanian passed the money to the wife of a Saudi who then helped bankroll two of the Sept. 11 assassins. The princess denies she had any intent of aiding terrorists, and evidence is that she may not knowingly have done so. But there is good reason to discuss how Islamic gifts and materials can be diverted through channels to foment violence and murder.

As columnist Trudy Rubin of the Philadelphia Inquirer points out, Muslims have a religious duty to give at least 2.5 percent of their income for âÂÂzakat,â or charity. That, it appears, is the religious obligation that the Saudi princess was attempting to meet. Such contributions often are given to trusted community leaders or institutions. But such institutions, columnist Rubin says, often are unregulated and seldom audited and can be abused. This, of course, is no different from American charities that have encountered serious auditing and abuse problems over the years.

But the real or imagined Muslim influence in the current âÂÂjihadâ along with AmericaâÂÂs struggle to combat terrorism takes on added significance.

âÂÂThis (the charitable philosophy) creates huge cash pools that can be misused by murderers,â writes Rubin. Funds from al-Haramain financed terror cells in Bosnia and Southeast Asia. An official of the Saudi Rabita Trust was allegedly a close associate of terror expert Osama bin Laden. The executive director of the Saudi-based Benevolence International Foundation allegedly conspired to give material support to terrorists. And so on. âÂÂ: Prince Salman, governor of the Saudi capital of Riyadh, recently argued that âÂÂ’it is not the responsibility of the kingdomâ if one bad apple misuses charitable donations. But if Saudi rulers let this happen, by omission or commission, they bear responsibilities.âÂÂ

Saudi Arabia claims to be an ally of sorts with the United States, yet its close ties to practitioners of terrorism, including the 9-11 tragedy, are not reassuring. âÂÂGiftsâ such as those of the princess arouse suspicions. America has set up a group to study the issue of the Saudis and their role in possible mayhem and murder aimed at the United States.

Meanwhile, the Saudis claim they have started an auditing system for their charities and have imposed tighter controls over commercial and Islamic banks.

Concludes Rubin: âÂÂThe test will be whether Saudis set up a transparent system that monitors where charity money goes. And doesnâÂÂt leave loopholes for favored organizations whose reputations have already been sullied. Until then, America will suspect Saudi intentions. And some will suspect that Princess Haifa knew where her money went.âÂÂ

Too often Saudi Arabia talks one way and covertly acts another in regard to its relationship with America. Regardless of hurt feelings in Riyadh, close scrutiny is required to make this linkage that is to the benefit of the United States.