Although al-Qaeda’s leadership, beliefs and ideology are rooted in Saudi Arabia, the organization has been all but crushed in the Kingdom by a government policy that combines a big carrot and an even bigger stick. The attempted assassination in Jeddah last month of Prince Muhammad bin Nayef, the deputy interior minister for security affairs, demonstrates both elements of the Saudi strategy, and how a bold attempt by al-Qaeda to revive its fortunes has failed.
The bomber was Abdullah Asiri, a Saudi citizen and al-Qaeda member who had returned from Yemen, claiming to have renounced terrorism and wishing to surrender directly to Prince Muhammad in his palace. Earlier that day, the prince had the bomber flown in on his private jet from the Yemeni-Saudi border and reportedly ordered that he not be carefully searched. Yet, Asiri had indeed hidden a bomb inside his body, a 0.45kg explosive that he detonated near the prince. However, the bomb was not encased in metal and the terrorist was the only person killed.
To an outsider, the episode looks like a colossal security failure, as if the head of the FBI personally greeted one of Osama bin Laden’s lieutenants at a garden party. But it is just this highly personalized form of politics that the Saudi royals have adopted with defecting al-Qaeda’s members. Indeed, this policy, even with its risks, partly explains al-Qaeda’s defeat in Saudi Arabia. Highly personalized politics form part of what might be called Saudi Arabia’s theater of state, which keeps the royals firmly in power.
Since 2003, the prince has been in charge of a successful campaign against violent Islamism in the Kingdom. In terms of armed security action, he has developed a strong domestic intelligence and police service that is both efficient and brutal in its tactics. At the same time, the prince has cannily used deeply rooted cultural and religions norms to pressure al-Qaeda’s recruits to give up violence.
For example, he offers significant financial inducements to individual jihadis, as well as their families, in return for political obedience. In effect, by not accepting Saudi largesse the militant will be keeping food off his own family’s table — a powerful restraint in a culture and religion in which parents are highly regarded and respected.
Prince Muhammad has also established a rehabilitation program that seeks to de-program the jihadis from their radical beliefs through a course of study that teaches that Islam requires obedience to a Muslim ruler. Repentant jihadis are taught that violence undertaken by individuals — not by the legitimate ruler — is sinful and will be punished by God. These lessons do not rule out all violence, focusing instead on al-Qaeda’s justifications for its attacks and the forms that the violence takes. As such, both fighting without the ruler’s explicit permission and suicide bombing are unlawful.
Entry into the program often involves a personal audience with the Saudi prince, in a ceremony that emphasizes the paternalistic and personal nature of governance in the Kingdom, where all subjects are regarded as well-cared-for children of the royals.
Finally, Prince Muhammad has launched an Internet monitoring and disinformation campaign that keeps close tabs on jihadi Web sites and online forums. As a result, the Saudi security services have a feel for the pulse of jihadi debates, as well as for the radicals’ recruitment strategies.
Al-Qaeda has also damaged itself with the Saudi public, which has been repeatedly victimized by terrorist attacks. Suicide bombings of public buildings and attacks on oil and other government installations have alienated many Saudis. With at least 80 percent of the population dependent on government salaries or grants, the attacks have proved very unpopular.
In addition, ordinary Saudis see the chaos next door in Iraq and do not want the same turmoil at home. For most people, stability, even if imposed by authoritarian means, trumps disorder.
In the last two years, al-Qaeda’s increasing failures in the Kingdom have forced the surviving members to regroup across the border in Yemen. The rugged mountain terrain, a religiously conservative population and a weak government with a history of collaboration with al-Qaeda have created a relatively sheltered haven. As a result, al-Qaeda has had a respite to try to rebuild itself and to organize attacks in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. With two ongoing domestic rebellions, a large population and the rapid disappearance of oil and water resources, Yemen is quickly emerging as a Western policymaker’s nightmare.
For now, however, the Saudi royals have a prince who is seen as a courageous hero for having survived an assassination attempt while offering the hand of generosity to an unrepentant zealot. Saudi King Abdullah chastised Prince Muhammad for recklessness, but the King must also be thankful that his family has produced a security chief who has broken the back of al-Qaeda, at least inside the Kingdom.
Bernard Haykel is a professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS