Professor Madawi Al Rasheed

By Madawi Al-Rasheed

Fear may induce acquiescence. But Saudis still surprise many observers. While their participation in Jihadi adventurism at home and abroad has now become notorious, there is a small minority that does not get enough sound bites, simply because it consists of peaceful political activists who dream about a better future. While they live in the most closed political systems in the Arab world, they are not intimidated by real violence exerted on them by state agencies nor fear of imminent terrorist attacks, by which these agents hope to deter activism and silence daring voices. .

Caught on film

In April 2007 Saudi Arabia announced the capture of 172 terrorists, tons of ammunition and weapons, and millions of Riyals hidden in distant desert locations and modern apartment blocks. The Ministry of Interior claimed that the arrested terrorists were trained to fly planes to crash them in vital oil fields and key sites in the kingdom. The terrorists received support from abroad and pledged allegiance to a key ring leader in Mecca, according to the Ministry’s spokesman.

The Ministry of Interior operation video failed to name a single terrorist, release the location of the flying schools where they had allegedly received training lessons, explain how and where the terrorists were captured and whether there was any resistance to arrest. Viewers of the video were baffled by how peaceful the arrest was and one got the impression that the 172 terrorists were either fast asleep or in a state of coma when security agents surprised and captured them.

Regardless of the authenticity of this success video, the ministry disseminated important messages.

First, it wanted Saudis to believe that the security solution is more efficient than its own intellectual rehabilitation programme, in which Jihadis are re-educated in true Islam and accepted as having renounced violence. A couple of months ago, the same Ministry celebrated its rehabilitation programme and organised lavish weddings for reformed Jihadis. Senior princes attended these wedding parties and rewarded a group of rehabilitated terrorists. The conclusion to be drawn was that fear of imminent attacks is still real and the role of the Ministry is paramount. At such turbulent times, political reform should be dismissed.

Second, the Ministry wanted Saudis to temper their growing criticism of the performance of the Ministry especially its abuse of human rights, torture of prisoners, curbing freedom of expression, interference in the judiciary, tarnishing the reputation of reformers and critics of the regime, and many other unbearable measures, justified under the pretext of the ‘war on terror’.

Notwithstanding the amateurish nature of the media campaign launched by the Ministry of Interior, there is no doubt that Saudi Arabia is still hostage to an internal war between the regime and Jihadis. Whether this war justifies the excesses of the Ministry of Interior has become subject of debate. Whether this war should delay reform is equally unacceptable. Many Saudis are not intimidated.

Looking for answers

Since the beginning of 2007, the Ministry has carried out a campaign of arrest targeting academics, professionals, activists and lawyers. In February, ten public figures disappeared in Jeddah after security agents detained them. The Ministry announced that they were supporters of terrorism. No video of the arrest was released and no trials were held.

Later it transpired that the prisoners’ only crime was to engage in the preparation of a document calling for the curbing of the ministry’s excesses, and describing it as an all-too powerful body that used the pretext of the ‘war on terror’ to terrorise the population. The document was released on the Internet and many Saudis signed on-line before the infamous branch of the City of Technology and Science censored the web site.

In April, another long document, prepared and signed by academic Abdullah al-Hamid, his brothers and another activist was sent to the King urging him to deal with the excesses of the Ministry of Interior.

This lengthy letter was one of the most open and daring petitions so far sent to the highest authority in the Kingdom. The tone reflected the anger and frustration. It called upon the king to bring the Ministry of Interior to a judicial review, to send those responsible for the abuse of human rights to trial, to dismantle the terror networks of the Ministry, to deal with torture in prison, to stop spying on citizens, to free innocent activists from jail, to halt the campaign of abuse where sorcery and other unacceptable measures are regularly deployed against innocent citizens and many other demands.

It also called upon the king to act on an unbearable situation by implementing general reform that includes changing the basis of government and rule. The signatories saw the solution in the implementation of constitutionalism, real shura (an elected council), separation of powers, and a halt to abuse of human rights.

The short summary report by Human Rights Watch, following a recent visit to the Kingdom, confirmed some of the abuses referred to in the reformers’ letter to the King. In addition, a short video clip showing serious torture of prisoners in the infamous al-Hayer prison was released on the Internet. A spokesman for Human Rights Watch confirmed on al-Jazeera channel that regular beating of prisoners is common in Saudi prisons.

With the exposure of the excessive abuse of the Ministry by both Saudis and independent agencies, the Ministry faces mounting. Its announcement regarding the capture of terrorists comes at an important moment for this powerful institution and its head, Prince Nayef. The latter’s reputation inside Saudi Arabia has reached a low level.

Under pressure

While the Ministry of Interior remains under scrutiny and open criticism, its sister institution, the Ministry of Defence under Prince Sultan is equally under pressure.

Thanks to vigorous journalism in the British press and al-Jazeera, the al-Yamama scandal undermined Prince Sultan, now dubbed by many as the Prince of Thieves. Saudis were mesmerised in front of their television screens watching The Dove of Corruption, a documentary supported by evidence revealing the extent of the corruption of individual princes and princesses. Invoices for lavish holidays, luxury purchases and nicorette chewing gum, all incurred for the noble and glorious purpose of defending the kingdom against real and imaginary enemies did not amuse Saudis.

The Saudi press remained silent, as expected. Away from the press, defenders of Prince Sultan dismissed the scandal as a conspiracy by neighbouring Gulf state, Qatar, and its biased media channel to undermine the integrity of the symbols of the Saudi nation. The film relied on the testimony of many British ex-officials, journalists, spokesmen of Transparency International and many other experts. The fact that not a single Saudi or Arab appeared in the documentary did not matter. It was still a conspiracy orchestrated by the enemy of the nation.

The scandal prompted yet another official media campaign, similar to the Ministry of Interior security video. The Saudi press reported the establishment of a committee to fight corruption, defined as wasting the resources of the nation. Under the guidance of the Guardian of the Two Holy Mosques, Saudis will no longer be able to get away with corruption, according to official reports. So far the committee has not investigated a single corruption case, has not interrogated a single official, and has not brought to justice a corrupt commoner or prince. Its fate may be similar to the already existing committees, especially the official Human Rights Committee, headed by an appointed member of the Sudayri clan, the maternal uncles of both Sultan and Nayef. It may busy itself with investigating domestic abuse but the abuse of the nation and its resources remains taboo.

Abdullah under scrutiny

While fear of terrorism may provide short-term justification for abusing society and corruption may remain beyond investigation, the king proved to be incapable of stopping both. Since August 2005 he was dubbed as the new reformer who would lift Saudi Arabia from the political stagnation of his predecessor. His performance over the last two years proved that he too was a media phenomenon, orchestrated by both the West and his coterie at home.

The West wants him to play a specific regional role while not concerned with his performance at home. His role is to cool off the hot spots in Palestine, Lebanon, Sudan, and Iraq. He capitalised on the symbolic significance of Mecca and vast oil wealth to hold a series of meetings between warring factions in Iraq and Palestine. However, neither the sanctity of Mecca nor the financial resources made available were capable of putting an end to old and new conflicts. In March the Riyadh Arab summit delivered an old Saudi initiative in a new garb, still subject to controversy by both Israelis and Palestinians.

At home the king’s record remains controversial. With the exception of limited municipal council elections, increases in salaries, the release of old reformers from prison and the veneer of economic development; serious political change remains a dream. He will not sack his Minister of Interior or Minister of Defence. He will not call for an elected national assembly. He will not bring corrupt high officials to justice. He will continue to raise the flag of reform, without impressing a group of Saudis active in writing petitions calling for serious reforms. The King’s reforms are still far away from their aspirations. If anything, these petitions demonstrate the King’s impotence at the home front.

Next steps

Saudi Arabia is hostage not to terrorism or corruption but to an ageing leadership whose excesses proved resistant to change. Neither fear of terror (both that of the regime and Jihadis) nor prosperity stop them from dreaming at a time when only nightmares of violence, corruption, regional insecurity and sectarian wars dominate the scene.

They vent their frustration in many ways.

Some youth degenerate into aimless consumerism, petty crime, drugs, and car jacking and skidding: all signs of the emergence of a troubled youth culture. This generation has no legitimate outlet to release its energies, participate in making the future of the country or take part in projects that channel it towards more productive pursuits. On the one hand, unemployment, marginalisation and poverty create violent young men. On the other hand, excessive wealth and luxury in the hands of the privileged create idle young men and women who take refuge in escapism.

A small minority looks for Jihadi adventurism at home and abroad. While channels of participation remain blocked, Jihadi violence absorbs energies and wastes lives. Neither preaching nor tightening security will bring back those who have gone astray, to use a Saudi cliché, or prevent others following their path.

Intellectuals, academics and activists draft letters and petitions while accepting that the price is a possible raid by the security agents of the Ministry of Interior or an “indefinite leave to remain” in a Saudi prison. Life goes on while dreams are shattered, freedoms are curtailed, human and natural resources are wasted, and fierce media battles are fought.

Rule by fear has its own limitations. While awaiting the next success security video or a real terrorist attack, many Saudis are not willing to give up the fight for basic dignity. There will be a small minority who seriously believes in its right to live in a state that respects its citizens rather than abuses them under different pretexts.

Unfortunate for this minority, the world occasionally mentions them but most of the time ignores their demands. Perhaps this is a blessing, as today no one in Saudi Arabia feels proud of Western patronage, at least at this particular historical moment. Opposition to the Saudi regime will remain unheeded abroad. At the level of governments, the west is not interested in the reformers’ dream or plight. It remains focused on the War on Terror and the Saudi government’s performance in the war.

It is this indigenous minority that will pave the way for serious reform rather than a wounded USA in Iraq or an aging clan incapable of controlling the excesses of its own members.