36
Muslim Views . November 2017
Discussions with Dangor
Is a floundering Saudi regime choosing nationalism over sectarianism? The attack on the Twin Towers, in 2001, in New York, for which the Saudis are being held responsible has had a huge impact on world opinion, writes EMERITUS PROFESSOR SULEMAN DANGOR.
SAUDI Arabia is constantly in the news. More often than not, it is on the receiving end of negative publicity. There are many reasons why the kingdom is being criticised, even by Muslims, across the world. Some of them include corruption of the leadership; destroying most of the heritage of Islam in Makkah and Madinah; wasting billions of dollars on the purchase of arms (though they have never protected Muslims who are being massacred in various countries) and treating foreign workers poorly. They are also accused of extravagance e.g. construction of palaces; following an extremist ideology; killing civilians in Yemen; depending on the US for survival; making deals with Israel, and ignoring the plight of poverty stricken Muslim countries and communities. The attack on the Twin Towers, in 2001, in New York, for which
the Saudis are being held responsible (19 of the alleged attackers were Saudi citizens) has had a huge impact on world opinion, including in the United States. Much of the criticism relates to the violation of human rights in the kingdom, and funding and supporting extremist groups in various regions of the world. To be fair, the Saudis have supported humanitarian causes globally. They have established mosques and institutions and financed community projects. KS Relief has provided food security, shelter, health care, water, mother and child health and community programmes in several countries. Also, there are said to be over 900 charities in Saudi Arabia and its humanitarian gestures have been acknowledged by the United Nations. As we know, the Saudis have been supporting the coalition forces led by the United States whereas the Iranians, in conjunction with the Russians, have been supporting Bashar Al Assad, in Syria. Over the past few weeks, the Saudis have been applauding Donald Trump’s threats against Iran. The Saudi stand-off with Iran began with the Iranian Revolu-
tion. Saudi rulers feared the expansion of the revolution, which could have led to their downfall. And so began a campaign of vilifying the revolution. The Saudis were joined by other Arab regimes who, likewise, feared their own fall from grace. Iranian support for groups fighting the regimes in Yemen, Bahrain and Iraq added to Saudi apprehension of the spread of Iranian – and Shia – influence throughout the region. Then came the Arab Spring. The Saudis (and their allies) were shattered. They immediately funded the coup in Egypt, which ousted Mohamed Morsi and brought Abdel Fattah Sisi to power. The Ikhwan, to which Morsi belongs, is now viewed as a serious threat, not only to Egypt but to all Arab regimes. The Saudis have gone to the extent of classifying the Ikhwan as a terrorist organisation. The Saudis, sensing that they are no longer viewed with the same favour as before by the US, began looking elsewhere for patronage. Not surprisingly, they began investing billions in China as well as in Russia, the traditional enemy of the US.
Currently, the Saudi regime is fostering a close alliance with Israel, despite the fact that Israel is loathed by its own people let alone by the majority of Muslims worldwide. King Salman visited Israel recently. Naturally, Muslims have condemned this latest move by the regime in the strongest terms and accused it of abandoning the Palestinian cause. But the Saudis are an enigma. It is reported that Muqtada al-Sadr, Iraq’s influential Shia leader, visited Saudi Arabia where he met with Crown Prince Muhammad ibn Salman. According to Sadr’s office, they reached a ‘positive breakthrough in Saudi-Iraqi relations’ and hope that this will be ‘the beginning of the retreat of sectarian strife in the Arab-Islamic region’. It has now emerged that meetings between representatives of the two countries have been going on for the past six months. What does this portend? Since Muqtada al-Sadr is known to be critical of Iranian involvement in Iraqi affairs, do the Saudis view him as a natural ally? Have they come to realise that the conflict in Syria and Iraq is destabilising the whole Middle East region? Do they fear that the continued conflict between some Sunni and Shia groups will embolden the Shia in the eastern province? Does Muqtada al-Sadr’s condemnation of the killing of Sunnis in Iraq provide them with an op-
portunity to mend fences with Iraq? Finally, is Arab nationalism taking precedence over theological considerations? Until recently, Arab Shia were living in harmony with Arab Sunnis in Iraq. This current rapprochement between the two countries is intended, many believe, to reopen border crossings, rebuild destroyed towns and cities populated mainly by Sunnis (Mosul, Ramadi, Fallujah and Tikrit), and to return Iraq to the ‘Arab fold’. According to Ihsan alShameri, head of the Political Thought Centre in Baghdad, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi’s willingness to cooperate with the Saudis is because he is non-sectarian, unlike his predecessor, Nour al-Maliki, who has the backing of the majority of the Shia population and was responsible for the persecution of the Sunnis. The two countries have already entered into several bilateral trade agreements. This will include developing ports and highways. Flights between the two countries are to resume soon. The Saudi oil minister, Khalid al-Falih, made an appearance at Baghdad’s International Fair where he was in consultation with his Iraqi counterpart, Jabr al-Luabi. The United States welcomes this development – which it has supported – since it views it as a way of reducing Iranian influence in the region.