Posted on 03/27/2004 1:49:21 PM PST by RWR8189
Does U.S. support for democracy in the Middle East extend to Riyadh?
ON FRIDAY, MARCH 19, President Bush reiterated his commitment "to encourage reform and democracy in the greater Middle East as the alternatives to fanaticism, resentment, and terror." Anyone following the American media lately might actually believe that this policy is showing signs of success in Saudi Arabia. In the last six months, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and a host of other papers have carried articles claiming that the Saudi kingdom is liberalizing. On March 18, NPR's All Things Considered added its voice to the pro-Saudi chorus. In a story typical of its kind, veteran reporter Mike Shuster asserted that the Saudi religious establishment had lost power to reformers. In addition, Shuster suggested that next fall the kingdom would hold elections in which women might participate.
This glowing discussion of Saudi reform failed to mention one unpleasant fact: Two days before, the Saudi authorities had arrested 12 prominent reformers, charging them with "endangering the unity of the country." One of the detained men, the respected intellectual Abd al-Kareem Al-Juhaiman, is almost 90 years old. Another, Mohamed Saeed Tayeb, is one of the leaders of the Saudi democracy movement. The U.S. consul general in Jeddah, Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, on at least two occasions tacitly recognized Tayeb's stature by attending the weekly political salon held at his home.
The producers of National Public Radio are not the only ones turning a blind eye to the anti-reform activities of the Saudi government. Secretary of State Colin Powell, in a Riyadh press conference with his Saudi counterpart on March 19, downplayed the arrests. Powell expressed concern, but stressed the strong U.S.-Saudi bond, calling the two countries "united in the war against terror." This nonchalant attitude shocked many Saudis who--given President Bush's commitment to democracy in the Middle East--had expected an American call for the release of the detainees.
The arrest of these reformers casts serious doubt on the claim of the Saudi government that it will stick to its promise and hold elections in the country's 13 administrative regions in October 2004. With little over six months to go, there is no concrete evidence that the Saudis actually mean business. The authorities have not made any preparations for the elections: They have not formed an election commission, registered voters, or written an election law. Saudi officials cannot even agree on which branch of the government will oversee the elections.
Against this background of administrative ambiguity, the rumor mill among the Saudi opposition attests to the hostility of senior members of the ruling family toward elections. For instance, on December 28, 2003, interior minister Nayef bin Abdel Aziz privately coached a Saudi delegation headed to the United States on what to say to the American media. Two members of the delegation told me separately that, in the course of the meeting, Prince Nayef scoffed at the elections, stating, "We can hold elections and fake them like other Arab countries."
On Sunday, March 21, minister of defense Sultan bin Abdel Aziz said Saudi Arabia is not yet ready for an elected parliament because voters may pick illiterate and unqualified candidates. In November 2003, he reportedly told close associates at another private meeting that all the talk of reform was simply smoke and mirrors designed to keep the Americans off the royal family's back until the storm passes by.
In an interview with a Saudi newspaper in February, Hamoud Al Bader, secretary of the Consultative Council (a powerless 120-member body appointed by the king), denied that the council has jurisdiction over women's participation in elections.
It is easy to pass off statements like these as mere gossip spread by the Saudi opposition. The problem is that this "gossip" conforms much better to reality than do the reports being issued by credible organizations such as NPR.
If the attitude of the royal family toward reform is difficult to determine with certainty, the hostility of senior government clerics to elections is a matter of public record. For instance, Sheikh Saleh al Fawzan said in October that elections are a Western innovation that contravenes the basic tenets of Islam. Al Fawzan is not only a member of the Senior Council of Clerics, but also an author of the Saudi religious curriculum. How is the royal family going to blunt this kind of opposition from the religious establishment?
If by some miracle elections are held this year, it is clear that, as Prince Nayef reportedly said, they will be all but meaningless. To begin with, the government plans to hold popular elections for only 50 percent of the seats on the regional councils. Giving the people a partial say in the collection of garbage and the maintenance of sewers is something short of full-fledged national democracy. Moreover, as long as the secret police remain in control of the other half of the seats, the popular vote will remain a sham. And if the police can arrest reformers for such nebulous crimes as "endangering the unity of the country," then even a regional government chosen entirely by popular vote would remain under the thumb of the royal family.
The notion that women will take part in the elections is also laughable. How can women vote if they cannot be identified? To date, more than 90 percent of the women in Saudi Arabia carry no form of identification. Although the government announced the issuing of ID cards to women last year, only a few cities followed through. The female portion of the population will not be allowed to participate in the elections.
We shouldn't be fooled by conciliatory statements emanating from the Saudi establishment. Actions speak louder than words, and it is obvious to any seasoned observer of Saudi affairs that the reform movement to date has been little more than talk. It is to be hoped that President Bush will know better than to base his plans for democracy in the area on the Saudi model.
Ali al Ahmed is director of the Saudi Institute in Washington, D.C.
Another unpleasant fact: Saudi authorities still refuse to allow clergy to establish a Church in the country, and from what I hear relentlessly persecute anyone found to be practising Christian or Judaic faiths.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.