Ever since King Abdullah announced a sweeping Cabinet reshuffle two weeks ago, Saudi liberals have been in a rare holiday mood. Many have hailed the changes — including the replacement of some major conservative figures and the appointment of the first female deputy minister — as a “mini-revolution” and proof that the king is at last willing to tame this country’s hard-line religious establishment.
But there is a larger, more conservative, constituency here, and its members tend to dismiss those liberal hopes as fantasies.
“These are merely dreams and wishes for things that will not happen,” said Sheik Sulayman al-Daweesh, a prominent conservative cleric and staunch defender of the country’s feared religious police.
The reformers, al-Daweesh said, “would like to weaken Saudi Arabia’s Islamic identity, and they will not succeed.”
Who is right? It may be too early to say. But even with all the political will in the world, King Abdullah’s Cabinet shakeup — his first prominent attempt to rein in the power of the conservatives since he assumed the throne in 2005 — will not succeed quickly or easily.
Saudi Arabia’s judiciary and vast educational establishment are mostly populated by men much closer in outlook to al-Daweesh than to the small liberal elite. And while the king seems sincere in his desire to bring more moderation and openness, he is 84 years old and has opponents within the royal family.
Some of King Abdullah’s new ministers have already disappointed the liberals, who hope the changes will be the first steps toward modernizing the legal system and moderating the religious influence in the schools. After a newspaper published a photograph of new Deputy Minister for Women’s Education Noura al-Fayez wearing a head scarf but with her face uncovered, she complained bitterly that she had not approved its release and would never allow herself to be seen in public that way.
Advocates of change concede that the scale and difficulty of the task are daunting, and that the steps may come too late for the current generation of people under 25, who make up 60 percent of the population. Unemployment is high — especially among the young — and the schools continue to nourish the same culture of extremism and xenophobia that helped spawn the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Saudi analysts say.
“The Ministry of Education has been kidnapped by extremists for decades,” said Mshari al-Zaydi, a journalist and political analyst. “I don’t think we’ll see any real change there for 15 or 20 years.”
Still, the reformers have some reasons for optimism. King Abdullah fired some major conservative figures who had been obstacles to change, including the chief of the religious police and the country’s senior judge. He installed people in influential positions who are known for their loyalty to him, including new Minister of Education Prince Faisal bin Abdullah, the king’s nephew and son-in-law.
In another landmark change, the king installed more moderate and diverse members in an important committee, the Council of Senior Ulema, that is influential in determining how judges can interpret Islamic law. A broad effort is under way to discipline and modernize the legal system, in which judges are now unrestrained by anything but their own, usually severe, interpretation of Islamic law.
“The king’s message is that he is bringing new blood — legal, not religious,” said Abdul Rahman al-Lahem, a reformist lawyer who has been jailed for his advocacy.
More generally, the reform agenda has drawn momentum from King Abdullah’s personal popularity and a growing public dissatisfaction with radical religious figures. The radicals had seemed to pose a real challenge to the royal family after a group of them mounted a deadly attack on the Grand Mosque in Mecca in 1979. Caught off balance, the kingdom’s rulers tried to outflank their Islamist opponents by imposing an even more draconian code of public morals.
The radicals’ popularity began to wane in 2003, when a series of brutal terrorist attacks here killed Saudis as well as foreigners. At the same time, public anger at the intolerance of the cane-wielding religious police has grown, fueled by a younger generation that is more exposed to the outside world.
“The sacred image of these people was destroyed,” said Awadh Badi, a scholar at the King Faisal Center in Riyadh, the capital. “Before, even the state couldn’t touch them.”
King Abdullah began to popularize the language of reform as regent during the reign of his predecessor, King Fahd, who was incapacitated by a stroke in 1996. Pressure was rising both from internal critics and from the US, where the Saudi role in the Sept. 11 attacks — in which 15 of 19 hijackers were Saudi — brought new attention to some of the hatred routinely preached in schools.
Some changes have been made. But the problem goes well beyond textbooks. Saudi Arabia has 25,000 public schools that educate more than 90 percent of all students, run by deeply conservative Islamists who have successfully thwarted changes in the past. Some refuse to teach materials they view as insufficiently Islamic.
To many Saudis, the issue of extremism is less important than the fact that the schools are not providing enough math and science or the broader view of the world that their children need while the country struggles to diversify its economy and oil prices fall.
“Seventy-five percent of what my 13-year-old daughter studies is religion,” said Fawziah al-Bakr, a professor of education at King Saud University. “We are all in favor of religion, but we don’t have to make all our children into clerics.”
Even if King Abdullah succeeds, it would not necessarily advance democracy. In a sense, domesticating a threatening religious establishment would merely continue the Saud family’s march to absolute power.
But many reformers scarcely seem to care.
“Without changing the cultural infrastructure here, there is no point in elections or anything of the kind,” said one ardently reformist member of Saudi Arabia’s appointed Shura Council, which advises the king, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “The extremists here are well organized, but the liberals are not organized at all. They don’t have channels of communication with the people.”
ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY MUHAMMAD AL-MILFY
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers