One of the most frequently heard words in the Kingdom these days is “reform.” It is used in many different contexts and has become a major subject of discussion since King Abdullah’s accession to the throne.
The story of the king’s agenda of reform, however, began three years ago when he was still crown prince. He encouraged gradual change in many government institutions. He was well aware that changes must happen through consensus so he often held discussions and made detailed plans before taking any concrete action. And so the previously taboo subject of internal political reform in Saudi Arabia came out of the closet in 2002. This occurred when a group of well-known Saudi writers and intellectuals, who are considered representative of the liberal element in Saudi society, presented a petition to the crown prince. The petition requested changes in certain laws and ways of doing things.
“Your demands are my project,” the crown prince told the petitioners. Thus began open discussions of subjects which heretofore had only taken place in private salons where democracy and transparency were frequently mentioned.
Since then, it has been clear that reform is high on the agenda and will be an important focus for the government. In order to push forward the debate on reform, the King Abdul Aziz Center for National Dialogue was set up in August 2003. Its announced goals were to expand citizens’ participation in open discussions of national issues related to economics, society, culture and politics.
During the last two years the National Dialogue Center has held four meetings in Riyadh, Makkah, Madinah and Dhahran and, most recently, this month in Abha. At the meetings a wide variety of topics were discussed with religious scholars, intellectuals and young people.
Many Saudis and others eagerly watched the live broadcasts of the meetings in Abha. The discussions were meant to deal with Saudis’ relationships with the outside world but there were significant digressions to domestic problems such as the situation of Shiites in the Kingdom and women’s issues. Bringing up domestic matters in such a bold fashion was not the only thing that made this forum unusual; it also illustrated changes in the way that conservatives as well as liberals were dealing with reform in the Kingdom. The Saudi press was not alone in noting these changes. Dr. Thurraya Arrayed, one of the women participants, noted that many participants held the same opinions they had always held and their agendas had not changed. At the same time, they were markedly “more diplomatic in expressing their opinions.”
Along these lines, Dr. Tawfiq Al-Gusayer, who is identified as an activist, said in an interview with Arab News that some so-called liberals made “illogical and rather emotional” speeches whereas some of the conservatives were more reasonable and calm. Despite his liberal credentials, Dr. Al-Gusayer then went on to say that this particular forum was not the place in which to raise domestic Saudi problems.
When asked whether the activists would continue producing petitions which raise questions on the Saudi street and resentment from the government, or if his participation in the dialogue amounted to a change in his position, Dr. Al-Gusayer said: “Petitions were just a tool, never a goal for us.” He explained that perceived defects in the Saudi system had led to the petitions.
The conservatives, contrary to the liberals, stuck together and conveyed their message in a more united way. The conservatives felt that the claims that they planned their steps very carefully before taking any action, or that — regardless of their differences — they came together as a team, were “naive” and “very much exaggerated.” Dr. Mohsen Al-Awaji, an Islamic scholar participating in the forum, said that he did not know the other conservatives at the forum and that he had just met them in Abha. He commented: “I only knew one of them before.”
In talking about political change in Saudi Arabia, the picture is necessarily hazy. The very act of attempting to classify the political map is unclear and hazy.
“I personally think the matter of political divisions in the Kingdom is not clear at all,” said Dr. Sulaiman Al-Hatlan, who is editor in chief of Forbes Arabia and who was a participant at the forum in Abha. He pointed out that the “conservative” voice in the Kingdom is more dominant because it is older and more organized.
According to Dr. Al-Hatlan, the heated discussions at the forum were a clear sign that “more realistic voices are emerging as enlightened groups are taking greater roles and speaking out.” Though he acknowledged that all the reforms people want could not be accomplished “overnight” since, after all, the same group has been in control for 40 years. He stressed that, regardless of whatever ideology different groups are promoting, “the majority of Saudis are for openness.”
Political analyst and columnist, Dr. Turki Al-Hammad, noted that the whole political map in the Arab world was changing and he referred to changes in the political rhetoric of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
“The atmosphere is certainly different now, without even mentioning the WTO entry” he said. “We talk about liberals in the Kingdom as if they represent one solid party but the fact is that they do not.” He clarified that everyone is automatically classed as a liberal if he or she differs from the conservatives. He said that every stage in the history of a country required a certain agenda and thus changes in the conservatives’ views were a kind of adoption of what the current situation requires.
