| |
One
fewer reformist voice in Saudi Arabia
By Ian Urbina
While many people have been fixated on Qatar and the firing of television
station al-Jazeera's director-general, Mohammed Jassem al-Ali, due to
allegations of ties to Iraqi intelligence, another perhaps more consequential
firing was taking place in Saudi Arabia. The sudden ouster of Jamal Khashoggi,
editor of the anti-extremist al-Watan newspaper may have lasting and dire
repercussions for the prospects of reform in that country.
Above all, the move is meant as a message from right-wing clerics that they
will not tolerate the growing tide of criticism against them. Ever since
September 11, there have been pointed questions about the role of these clerics
in breeding radical and armed fundamentalists. Khashoggi was one of the few
critical voices coming from within the kingdom itself, and in many ways he
hoped that al-Watan would push the envelope toward increased press legitimacy
so that other papers might follow the lead.
Choosing to act now, many conservative clerics probably foresaw that the recent
bombing in Riyadh would kick up additional criticism at their expense. But the
more immediate impetus was a number of articles published in al-Watan about the
Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, the religious
police in Saudi Arabia. The "vice" police are notorious for stalking the
streets searching for any form of "un-Islamic" activity. Inappropriate
chit-chat on cell phone text-messaging, women with any exposed skin, men not at
work - all of these could invite the wrath of these stick-wielding officers.
But al-Watan was striking a more challenging posture toward these behavior
police. The paper ran an article about the attempted suicide of a man who was
detained with his children for 12 hours for the crime of having been caught
smoking. Also stoking the ire of authorities was an article about the desire of
many women to attend soccer games. Especially irksome were al-Watan's cartoons,
which often depicted scraggly clerics in full-length garb equipped with rolled
up fatwas (religious decrees) resembling sticks of dynamite.
Having joined the paper only two months ago, Khashoggi had already written
numerous editorials critical of clerical influence. Subsequent to the recent
Riyadh bombing, he cited religious extremism as the cause of such violence.
In his column Khashoggi wrote of the bombings: "Those who committed yesterday's
crime, which will have a painful impact on the peaceful nature of our nation,
are not only the suicide bombers," he added, "but also everyone who instigated
or justified the attacks, everyone who called them mujahideen, even everyone
who ignored this irregular direction in our religion and nature, or tried to
find excuses for it."
But, according to the Guardian of London, the final straw for the clerics was
an article which pitted Ibn Taimaya, a famous 14th century Muslim philosopher,
against Saudi nationalism itself. Ibn Taimaya is famous for having taught that
religious scholars could assume the task of declaring holy war even if their
rulers opted otherwise. Taimaya is considered a main inspiration for the
conservative and austere Wahhabi brand of Islam rooted in the kingdom. An
article titled, "Who is more important - the nation or Ibn Taimaya?"
intellectually threatened Wahhabi clerics with the implication that they may
not be the exclusive bastions of national heritage.
As a result, one day before Khashoggi's firing, a prominent cleric released a fatwa
making it a sin to buy al-Watan. The fatwa implored law-abiding and
ethical citizens not to buy the paper.
Officially, al-Watan - which means "The Homeland" in Arabic is classified in
Saudi Arabia as a private newspaper. It is, however, largely owned by members
of the royal family and the government is in charge of hiring and firing.
Khashoggi, for example, received his dismissal notice from the Minister of
Information.
Saudi Arabia is clearly facing a political turning point. But at the same time
society is being torn from two different directions. On the one hand, the
government is increasing its domestic crackdowns. To win favor with the United
States, arbitrary round-ups are not uncommon. Such are the public gestures
which prove government resolve to root out terrorists. To question the
propriety, ethics or legality of these hasty and shady round-ups is to risk
accusations of sympathy for indiscriminate and fundamentalist murderers. On the
other hand, conservative clerics (some of whom support radical elements) are
tightening their squeeze on society. These clerics demonize reformists as being
in legion with foreign enemies.
On both fronts, the losers are average working Saudis and proponents for
reform.
What fledgling attempts there may have been for a more critical press in Saudi
Arabia took a big step backwards with the loss of Khashoggi. And unfortunately,
this action does not seem to be an aberration. When asked about the firing and
the possible legitimacy of criticism against the conservative clerics, Prince
Nayef, the interior minister who oversees all press matters, lambasted
reporters for even raising the matter. He was quoted as saying, "As a Saudi,
you should be ashamed to be asking this question."
Many will watch to see if any of the country's other papers dare to rally
behind al-Watan. On principle, they should. But the consequences could be dire.
It is also an open question whether other Arab news outlets will step up to
criticize the events within the Arabian Peninsula's political heavyweight.
Their reaction, too, may be an indicator of just how chilly reformist politics
will get in the desert kingdom.
(Copyright 2003 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact
content@atimes.com for information on our
sales and syndication policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
