JEDDAH, 3 November 2004 — “Look at our true friends,” Sheikh Zayed ibn Sultan Al-Nahayan, the emir of Abu Dhabi, pointed from the window of the jeep in which we were making a tour of Al-Ain, an oasis that he loved all his life. Since there was no soul around in the road, we wondered who the “friends” were.
“The date trees,” Sheikh Zayed explained, “they are our true friends.”
The year was 1970 and Abu Dhabi, then a little-known sheikhdom on what was called the Trucial Coast, had just entered the era of prosperity fueled by oil revenues. A year later, Abu Dhabi was the leader of the newly created United Arab Emirates. A decade later, it had been transformed into one of the world’s richest states.
The sudden change, however, did not overwhelm Sheikh Zayed, as might have been the case with lesser men.
He did not become the “oil-sheikh” who thinks of nothing but outlandish pursuits. Instead, he set to work to turn his emirate, and along with it the UAE as a whole, into a modern nation-state while maintaining its traditional identity. He knew how to channel the oil wealth in ways that would not turn it into a flood that sweeps all ahead of it.
Over the years Sheikh Zayed showed his political and diplomatic skills on a number of occasions.
The first challenge that Zayed faced was to organize a smooth transfer of power from his brother Sheikh Shakhbut’s tribal rule to a more structured form of government. This was no easy task. The tiny sheikhdom lacked the personnel necessary and, for years, Zayed was obliged to use expatriates in key positions.
The next major challenge that Sheikh Zayed faced was to bring together a number of small sheikhdoms that had a long history of internecine feuds and transform them into a single nation-state with federal structures.
The next tough test he faced was to persuade the shah of Iran to lift his veto against the formation of the UAE. This he did with persistence and patience, winning the grudging admiration of the shah and his aides. Apart from Sheikh Rashed of Dubai, Sheikh Zayed was the only Gulf emir who was always received with full pomp and ceremony by the shah even before the UAE was born. In his memoirs, the shah’s long-time Court Minister Assadollah Alam recalls the special deference that the Iranian monarch showed to Zayed.
Over the years, Zayed built his image as the wise old man of Arab politics, a father figure who could always be depended upon to find a way in situations of crisis.
On countless occasions Zayed played a crucial behind-the-scenes role in ironing out differences among various Arab leaders, at times bringing them back from the edge of open conflict.
While he was well enough to attend Arab and Islamic summits, Zayed always acted as a force for moderation and prudence. He had no time for typical Arab hyperboles and deeply resented the Arabs’ treatment of complex political issues within the prism of emotions. At times he would not hesitate to treat some troublesome leaders as naughty children, giving them a piece of his mind as would a stern but kindly father.
At the same time, however, Arab leaders and other senior political figures knew that, at times of adversity, Zayed’s door would remain open to them. Forced into exile in the late 1970s, Abdelaziz Bouteflika, the veteran Algerian foreign minister, was retained by Zayed as an adviser for almost 20 years before returning home to be elected president of Algeria. Adnan Pachachi, a key member of the Governing Council in post-liberation Iraq, had also been retained by Zayed as an adviser and minister for years.
To many Arab politicians, Zayed was “the father” whose wise advice, strong support, and, when there was need, frank criticism was always valued.
Because of his personal integrity Zayed acquired a moral authority that few other Arab rulers have attained in recent decades. That enabled him to introduce radical reforms that in most other places would have either been blocked by conservative forces or triggered conflict and violence. Such reforms as opening secular schools and universities, giving girls a chance to have an education, introducing elected organs of government and letting women vote and stand for office were achieved over many decades of struggle even in the advanced Western societies. In the UAE, however, Zayed’s charisma made sure that they happened within the lifetime of a single generation.
Zayed proved something that conventional wisdom excludes a priori. It is that a traditional ruler with no modern Western education may well be better equipped to lead a traditional, conservative Arab society into the modern world. He knew that one could change without aping others. He had not read Hobbes, Tocqueville, and Hegel. But he had been able to develop a keen understanding of the nature of politics by reading classical Islamic texts. The model he aspired after was “The Virtuous City” as described by Muslim philosophers over a thousand years ago.
He succeeded where so many self-styled Arab Socialists, Pan-Arabists, and so-called liberals failed. The reason? He was authentic and they were not.
But when all is said and done, Zayed’s greatest achievement, perhaps, was that he made himself dispensable. Having built institutions and allowed a whole new generation of leaders to form and come forward, he was able to gradually script himself out of the UAE’s decision-making. He had never tried to turn the UAE into a one-man show that disintegrates as soon as the “strongman” is taken away.
This means that the succession will be as smooth as in any modern state. Zayed is one of few Arab leaders whose death does not trigger civil wars, coups d’etat or palace intrigues. He knew that while changes are transient, change is permanent. He also knew that if a ruler does not turn into a friend it would become his deadliest enemy.