Smooth transition unprecedented

The transition of power following the demise of one of the top ruling leaders in the Kingdom was extremely smooth. It ruled out any possibility of a contest for the position. The view that differences of opinion and contesting for top positions are unethical or politically incorrect is not a correct attitude, because contesting is a sign of vitality and ambition, which are part of human nature. Lack of competition or disagreement in views and absence of any possibility of political crisis are signs of weakness and lethargy or rather a deviation from the human nature.
On the other hand, a government should have a constitutional and political mechanism to absorb the differences and conflicts and to control the contesting process so that the final result would be acceptable to all. When such a mechanism is implemented it will ensure unanimous acceptance of the result and thus guarantee the stability of the government with a smooth transition of authority from one person to another and from one generation to the next. This is true of any country whether a kingdom or republic.
Even during the time of the first generation of Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) there were differences of opinion in the succession to the caliphate according to the early historian Al-Tabari.
The conflicts on the caliphate during the early Islamic history could have been avoided if a political and legal mechanism to contain the disagreements was resorted to.
Al-Tabari wrote while narrating the early history of Islam, when the Shoura (consultative body) was set up by second Khalifa Umar bin Al-Khattab, Abbas told Ali: Don’t sit with them (the consultative body). However Ali did not want to have any difference of opinion among the Muslims and attended the Shoura.
After the first deliberations of the Shoura and Umar’s issued instructions on how a caliph should be chosen after him, Abbas asked Ali about what happened in the Shoura. He replied Umar instructed, ‘you be with the majority (when choosing a caliph). If there is a tie, join the group Abdul Rahman bin Auf is with.’ Then Ali added: ‘Saad bin Abi Waqqas will not oppose his cousin Abdul Rahman bin Auf and Abdul Rahman is a brother-in- law of Othman. They do not have any differences. Abdul Rahman will approve the rule of Othman and Othman will approve the rule of Abdul Rahman.’
Then Abbas reminded Ali about how Ali discarded his advice to ask the Prophet, peace be upon him, about who should be the ruler. Abbas also advised Ali that he should not accept any position in the government but the position to rule, Al-Tabari said.
Let us come back to the situation in the Kingdom. Crown Prince Naif passed away after devoting most of his life to strengthen the country’s security and ensure its stability. The late prince was known during the past three decades as the foremost security man and he was also a key figure in Kingdom’s political decision making. The prince was fully aware of the role of security in the building a nation. While justice is the foundation on which a government is to be established, the country’s security is more important because without security the supports of the government would be shaken. That is why there should be a balance between government, justice and rule.
Two major interests of Crown Prince Salman, who succeeded Prince Naif, are the Kingdom’s government and history. Interest in the government is quite natural for a person who was born into a family that has been ruling the land over more than four centuries. Prince Salman is one of the sons of the Kingdom’s founder King Abdul Aziz and was born in the Hukum (Government) Palace in Riyadh. He also spent more than half a century in the same palace as governor of Riyadh province, which included the Kingdom’s capital. This also brought him close to all the kings and to the center of governmental operations.
His interest in history is likely to be personal. This interest, apparently, offered him an opportunity to view history from a political perspective.
The smoothness of the transition of the crown prince’s position first to Prince Naif after the demise of Prince Sultan and now to Prince Salman reflects stature of the two leaders in the Kingdom. It also reflects the strength of the tradition of passing ruling positions among the rulers of the second generation. This tradition was followed scrupulously after the death of King Abdul Aziz in 1953. Smoothness of the present transition was expected and also needed. But what is new is the shortness of the time gap between the first transition to Prince Naif and later to Prince Salman. This is a development that suggested the need to have a new transition mechanism in place. The needed mechanism was introduced by Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah with a decree establishing the System of the Allegiance Commission in 2006.
One hypothetical question is: Would this mechanism have led to a different result in the two recent transitions. Never. Because Prince Naif and Prince Salman belong to the second generation of rulers who are contemporary to the Kingdom’s establishment and participated in its building. They launched the process of social and economic modernization during the first and second economic booms in the Kingdom. Therefore, they have achieved very high esteem and vast acceptance among the members of the Allegiance Commission. So, if the transition process were to be implemented by the commission on them at the same time each one of the two princes might not have received a unanimous support of the commission — this is just a possibility. But one thing is certain each one of them separately would have got a huge majority.
Now one pertinent question is why the commission’s mechanism is being implemented when the leaders are undoubtedly acceptable. There are many justifying factors for the implementation of commission’s process. Most important among them is that the activation of the commission’s political role in the second generation of rulers will create a precedent for the third generation and thus ensure a smooth transition in the next generation in line with the conventional method that has been adopted since the Kingdom’s early period. The implementation of the transition procedures also agrees with the nature of the present generation represented by King Abdullah and his reforms. The commission’s process and commitment to its decisions reinforce the legitimacy and validity of the new system and makes it binding on all. What is binding on Prince Naif and Prince Salman should be more binding and valid for the next generation.
Another justifying factor is the entry of the Kingdom to an age of institutions. It is clearly indicated in the emerging institutions of education, court system, and the codification of the Shariah law. These developments require that the transition of rule should also take place under an institutional and constitutional framework.
The third factor justifying the Allegiance Commission’s importance is implied in a narration of Amin Al-Rihani, an American writer of Lebanese origin, about King Abdul Aziz when he met the king in the twenties of the last century. Al-Rihani told the king that he read a line of poetry written in the House of Commons. “We build as our predecessors did and we do what they did.” But, the king interrupted saying “We build as our predecessors did but we build on what they built.”
The second generation leaders of the Kingdom have been implementing the spirit of this idea in all fields.

- The writer is a Saudi academic
(Courtesy of Al-Hayat newspaper )