לשם שמ’’ם

‫לשם שמיים‬

Authoritarianism and Democracy

Can Similar Interests Outweigh Differences?

Zoe Kaplan, ’24 and Haley Zabusky, ’24

Full diplomatic relations between the United States and Saudi Arabia were established in 1933 as the desire for oil increased.1 As a democracy, the US typically does not align itself with an authoritarian government like that of Saudi Arabia, but many factors pushed for the relationship to stay strong. In 1940, the US sent an ambassador to Saudi Arabia, signaling the degree to which the nations associate, and in 1951, a Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement was established, initiating the promise instituted by the nations to protect each other when necessary.2 For the past 90 years, this relationship has been sustained as the two countries have aligned more aspects of their policy with each other. Even though the authoritarian Saudi government is highly corrupt, the US must maintain its alliance with Saudi Arabia due to mutual material benefits and common educational and military interests and goals.

As an authoritarian country in which a single family holds all of the power, Saudi Arabia is corrupt on many fronts.

Firstly, the Saudi regulatory agencies are highly secretive.

Many government-run organizations and companies have been known for bribery and irregular payments, and the lack of transparency within the Saudi regulatory system has made it difficult to speak out against fraud. However, they are left unconvicted due to the complete control held by the government. While freedom of speech and freedom of expression are supposed rights of the Saudi Arabian people, excessive control of the government completely removes the ability to question such fraud.3 Unlike the US, where people are able to use social media and peaceful protests to expose important information, Saudi Arabia carefully manipulates its media to only present the government in a positive manner. Just last year, a major anti-corruption demonstration was shut down by the Saudi government, which feared that the realities being presented might expose the unprincipled regime. Even further, the government had over 200 of the protest’s leaders arrested on the claim that they were allegedly involving themselves in private matters that supposedly did not concern the people. On top of this mass arrest, there have been many more examples to prove how freedom of speech is highly limited, including the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, an innocent journalist. After criticizing the Saudi Arabian government in one of his articles, Khashoggi disappeared, and was later found to have been violently killed by Saudi agents. In addition, the judicial branch holds a disproportionate amount of power compared to the executive branch, corrupting this side of the government too. Punishments are assigned selectively, and laws are not enforced uniformly, encouraging illegal behavior by the higher-ups. Moreover, various reports via Saudi citizens

Page 19

have proven that upper-class Saudi administrative bodies settle disputes, not trained judges, causing major injustice and bias.4 As almost all authoritarian governments are, Saudi Arabia is filled with corruption, and the people—deprived of many fundamental liberties—are left helpless.

Despite the widespread corruption of its government, Saudi Arabia provides the US with many material resources, enforcing the maintenance of a diplomatic relationship.

America is Saudi Arabia’s second-largest trading partner, and Saudi Arabia is a crucial partner to the US since they exchange technical and educational ideas and goods. The country is America’s number one export exchange in the Middle East.5 They exchange technical and educational ideas and goods with each other, and both have the common goal of maintaining safety and sustainability for their countries.6 If the alliance was broken, then it would be detrimental to the US economy because as of now, the partnership between the two countries is effective on many levels including the economy and security. Saudi Arabia is one of the main providers of strategic information regarding peacemaking in the Gulf Region since they are located near a lot of important countries and know a lot of data which will ultimately strengthen the government and its relationships.7 Likewise, Saudi Arabia depends on the US as a mainstream trading partner, making the bilateral relationship a valuable asset that provides it with much-needed technical and military support. With the US’s help, Saudi Arabia was able to increase its security and sustain programs such as the Ministry of Defense, the National Guard, and the Ministry of Interior. All of these programs are part of the military that provide forces, serves the community after war, and deals with public land. 8 It is clear that this is not a onesided relationship—each government helps and needs the other, and maintaining the relationship is beneficial for both sides. The nations’ mutualistic relationship is evident from their fossil fuel trade: both countries are major oil producers, which is an additional reason why they need each other. Oil is used by the majority of Americans, every day, making it an essential resource, and Saudi Arabia is the third-largest and least expensive oil provider to the US, supplying half a million barrels per day.9 Without this alliance, the US would have significantly less oil, which would drive up the cost of gas. Moreover, Saudi Arabia is the US’s largest foreign military sales customer, currently using one hundred billion dollars worth of security and weaponry.10 If the relationship was terminated, the US would lose a major customer, and Saudi Arabia would have a weaker military and less protection, making the country less safe. Although the Saudi Arabian government is guilty of corruption, the US government must think about the country and consider what will make it better and keep it safe. The two countries produce necessary resources for each other, so the corruption in the Saudi government is counterbalanced by the benefits of the relationship.

The American relationship with Saudi Arabia is not only reinforced by the countries’ mutual material benefits but the desire for an even stronger allyship is also driven