Professor Madawi Al Rasheed

The establishment of an Allegiance Committee, a closed circle of senior Saudi princes last year and the nomination of its members in December 2007 are desperate attempts to save the House of Saud, not from Jihadi violence, reformers’ pressure or external threats, but from the hazards of demography and natural aging.

The House of Saud has had a solid shield against the winds of change. It was not the backward, ignorant and fragmented masses, the constant military support of Western governments, nor the pietist-quietist religious scholars, who kept the House’s firm grip on power.

It is a redistributive system, whereby patronage and clientlism operated among a coterie of princes. Big princes, very much like the famous Big Men of New Guinea, described by French anthropologist Godelier, amass wealth and social capital to be redistributed among princes of a lesser God, thus creating in the process circles of loyalty within a state that is today a headless tribe. The House of Saud remained immune against internal dissent because it patronised its own family members, divided wealth among senior princes, who in turn formed circles of clients among less prominent ones. The county and its wealth are vast, allowing aspiring princes to preside over mini-fiefdoms within the state.

The state has become like a traditional African polity, for example the type that Britain struggled to pacify among the headless Nuer tribe of the Sudan in the early 1940s. Within the polity various segments co-existed, co-operated and competed, while keeping the polity working as a result of a precarious balance and equilibrium. Even without a head, the headless tribe resisted British penetration of its land and staged several solidarity and resistance contests. At the end the tribe was pacified and conquered and British rule prevailed.

For the balance and equilibrium to work, the segments need to be equal. But Alas, we live in a world where inequality, even between princes is the norm. Therefore, institutionalising the semblance of equality in an archaic but resilient absolute monarchy serves many purposes. In addition to the media fascination with matters Saudi and the unique Saudi version of democracy, the Allegiance Committee is meant to insert elements of routinisation, bureaucratisation and rationalisation in power, Weberian Style. As traditional authority lost its Charisma under international pressure and internal dissent, the House is now seeking the last solution, hoping to salvage its grip on power.

The Allegiance Committee is a secret association, a cult of elders, activated only after King Abdullah and his Crown Prince Sultan pass away. The Committee consistes of thirty five princes and is headed by Mishal ibn Abd al-Aziz. Three very ill descendants of the founder of Saudi Arabia are absent, Bandar, Musaid and Nawaf. Their eldest sons represent them. Dead ancestors, for example deceased kings and other collateral members of the group, are also represented by their eldest sons. Khalid al-Faisal represent deceased King Faisal. Current King and Crown prince are represented by their sons too.

The only non-royalty is the clerk, the keeper of secrets, a member of the al-Tuwaijiri family, a loyal group from al-Majma’a who produced several technocrats and bureaucrats currently supporting the King as advisors, consultant and National Guard personnel. They are part of the circle of clients beyond the royal circle.

The allegiance Committee invokes the Quran and Sunnah and stipulates that shura (consultation) is the foundation of this secret committee. Appealing to shura here is rather limited and unconvincing. Although shura was not practised historically in any era of Islamic history after the four Caliphs- even then there is a debate about whether it was practised- the House of Saud tries hard to convince its subjects that it upholds this Islamic tradition. More importantly, the House raises the flag of shura against outside criticism of its political system and misguided calls for democracy. How could the West, ignorant of the authentic Islamic tradition, calls upon Saudis, if ever it does, to endorse an alien concept such as democracy in a country faithful to its Islamic tradition? The secret committee is shura Saudi style, above and beyond alien Greek concepts and their hazards.

 

The House of Saud adds a secret committee to its very long list of secret affairs. No appointed or elected shura council, no Grand Mufti, no ahl al-hal wa al-aqd (those who loose and tie- meaning those who know), nobody else is part of a decision that has always been an al-Saud prerogative. It is interesting that the House has gone beyond paying lip service to its long lasting loyalist al-Sheikh Muftis and ulama and excluded them all together from being spectators of the baya, (oath of allegiance), as they have always been. In the new committee they are simply not there to oversee and observe. Yet when time comes they will be called upon to approve, together with notables, commoners and clients.

The committee does not guarantee a smooth transition to the second generation. Unfortunate for the House, the facts of demography seem to be triumphant here, thanks to polygamous and serial marriages over the years. Among the second generation committee member princes, there is a large number of warrior princes, heritage princes, security guards, foreign affairs specialists, media tycoons, and so on. As the senior ones have shared the polity through their fiefdoms, the second generation is already in place to inherit the fathers. The future head of the circle will always remain difficult to choose. The balance an equilibrium will have to be respected in future elections.

What has triumphed so far is the prospect of an elected king in a royal headless gerontocracy.