Saudi makes a landmark Olympic u-turn

Regular readers of this blog will be aware that I have been unimpressed but unsurprised with Saudi Arabia's decision not to allow women to compete in London 2012. I was therefore delighted to read the following headline written by Frank Gardner for the BBC website: 

London 2012 Olympics: Saudis to allow women to compete

According to Gardner since the latest public announcement that Saudi women will not be allowed to compete there has been furious negotiation behind the scenes of the Riyadh power houses. It seems the ageing King Abdullah can be credited with leading the charge against the country's vociferous conservatives in his calls to lift the ban on Saudi women competing in the Games. 

The significance of this decision should not be underestimated but, unfortunately, its short term impact should not be overestimated. 

Salma Rushdi Malhas - Saudi's 20 year old show-jumper

The London 2012 opening ceremony is one month tomorrow which does not allow Saudi's budding female athletes any time to enter the qualifying rounds for their chosen sports. Indeed many of these qualifiers have already taken place and the sought-after Olympic places filled. The only likely Saudi female contestant, show-jumper Salma Rushdi Malhas, today discovered that she had not qualified, bringing an end to any hope of Saudi women heading to London next month. Salma's mother confirmed the young athlete's disappointment at not being chosen for the Games but re-confirmed the show-jumpers determination to compete in future Olympics. Salma's sights are firmly set on Rio 2016. This is a strong sign that, whilst there will be little short term impact to Saudi's decision to allow women to compete in the Olympics, the potential long term impact is quite exciting. 

In a country where women's rights development happen at the slowest imaginable pace, this is a fantastic step forward. Good luck Salma, and all the other Saudi female athletes who currently train outside the gaze of the world's sports enthusiasts. We look forward to cheering you on in Rio.

A new Saudi heir...but don't expect any change

On Saturday 16 June Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud died during surgery in Geneva. Prince Nayef's death left vacant the position of heir to King Abdullah's throne, although the position was not left vacant for long. By 18 June the world's press reported that, following an announcement on Saudi state television, Prince Salman bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, a younger brother of Prince Nayef has been named as the new Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.

Newly appointed Crown Prince Salman

As the current Saudi defence minister (since 2011) and longstanding governor of Riyadh, Prince Salman is used to holding positions of responsibility. This is fortunate indeed, especially as King Abdullah is now 88 years old; Prince Salman could be king before too long.

What can we expect from a Salman-led Saudi Arabia? News reports seem unanimous in reporting that Salman is seen as more progressive and liberal than his late brother. I find this particularly interesting, especially as the world's press seem not to have challenged this image of the new Crown Prince. In the absence of any challenge from the world's more established journalists, I am going to have a go with a very simple line of argument. Salman has been the governor of Riyadh since 1963. Under his governorship Riyadh became progressively stricter and stricter until it eventually earned its status as the strictest city in Saudi Arabia, the Arabian Peninsula, the Middle East and the Muslim world. Riyadh is now a strong contender for the accolade of "most oppressive city in the world". I would argue that the man who has governed the city through this transformation seems neither progressive nor liberal.

Despite the world's journalists branding the Crown Prince Salman as a progressive liberal, they have also almost unanimously stated that they don't expect his eventual succession to the Saudi throne (assuming he outlives King Abdullah) to bring about any significant change in the way the country is ruled. On this point the journalists and I are in agreement.

Saudi Arabia's Got Talent: contestants welcome - excluding women

There were a few potential things to write about Saudi Arabia in recent news headlines including oil production hikes and more developments with the Saudi Olympic team's participation in London 2012.

Instead, I couldn't resist using the following headline as the source for today's blog:

Saudi Arabia launches no music, no women, 'Arab's got talent'

 

This show is definitely going to be interesting! Instead of the more common acts that we are used to seeing in a "[insert county here]'s got talent" contestants will be encouraged to recite prayer, poems or engage in sport in an attempt to win. Given how generic a lot of these national talent programmes have become, I do not think it is a bad thing that Saudi Arabia's incarnation of the competition will be somewhat unique. However, their decision to ban women from taking part in the show, whilst not at all surprising, is quite abhorrent.  

However, this decision may actually have a positive impact on the quiet but persistent calls for improved women's rights in the Kingdom. Headlines like the one above have appeared on news sites and publications throughout the world, again putting the spotlight on the way women are treated in the largest country in the Arabian Peninsula.

So we will not be seeing women on the stage as the programme airs later this year, but the optimist in me hopes that the global coverage of this story will play some part in progressing improved rights for women in Saudi Arabia.

More drone attacks in Yemen

Today I read an article in the Washington Post which reported that a U.S. drone strike killed five al-Qaeda fighters on Thursday night last week. (Readers should note that al-Qaeda report that only 2 of their fighters were killed). This report of a US-led drone attack in Yemen is not the first I have read in recent months. Indeed, it seems there is a growing trend of drone attacks in the troubled country

Last week I posted on the intervention in Yemen led by the US and Yemen's Arabian Peninsula neighbours. At the time I commented how, whilst there are no US troops on the ground in Yemen, there is a increasing contingent of military advisers sent from Washington to Sanaa to help President Hadi in his fight against al-Qaeda. We should definitely keep an eye on the frequency of these US-led drone attacks in Yemen as it will provide an indication of the current scale of foreign intervention in the troubled country. It is also interesting to note that such drone attacks certainly point to the fact that the US role in Yemen is more than that of military consultant. I would argue that launching drone attacks against al-Qadea on Yemeni soil does constitute full-scale military intervention, irrespective of the presence of any US ground troops.

It is hard to see how Hadi could be anti the drone attacks. By accepting US help, the Yemeni president has diversified his military capabilities to include cutting edge military technology, surely a useful addition to one's arsenal when trying to fight al-Qaeda?

Benefits aside, the US and Hadi should remain savvy of the risks associated with drone attacks. If an error is made which kills civilians rather than al-Qaeda fighters this could play into the terrorist network's hands. An off-course drone could give al-Qaeda a trump card in the battle for hearts and minds as they could convince local civilian populations that Hadi's alliance with the US means more to the President than protecting his own people. 

For the time being, the regular news reports of drone attacks in Yemen would suggest that despite the associated risks, the decision has been taken to progress full steam ahead with the drone attacks.

Russia riled by a Saudi-Qatari alliance



Today I read an article on PressTV.com in which the Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin strongly criticised Qatar and Saudi Arabia for their financing of and supplying weapons to the “armed opposition” in Syria.



Ever since violence erupted in Syria, international support for either the rebels or the regime has come from predicable sources. Iran (and subsequently Russia) has unsurprisingly supported Asad’s Shia regime whilst the Middle East’s Sunni-led countries have sided with the Sunni rebels or “armed opposition”.

Churkin’s outburst is arguably a tell-tale sign that Iran and Russia are now genuinely concerned that Asad’s regime in Syria will fall. If Syria’s “armed opposition” prevails I am certain that Syria will opt for Sunni leadership. This would be a major blow for Russia and Iran who rely heavily on Syria as a satellite control centre for Shia interests in the Middle East. Damascus is also used by Shia political leadership as a driving seat for controlling Lebanon’s Shia population.

As the conflict in Syria continues (and I like the rest of us hope very much it comes to an end as soon as possible to prevent the occurrence of yet more brutalities) I’d expect Russia and Iran to continue criticsing any Sunni Muslim country providing material support to Asad’s opposition. For from being perturbed by Churkin’s complaint, I imagine Saudi Arabia and Qatar are pleased at ruffling the feathers of their Russian and Iranian nemeses.  

Bahrain, it is time to practise what you tweet

Nabeel Rajab, pictured left, is confronted by a police officer

Today I read in the BBC that Bahrain's prominent rights activist Nabeel Rajab is again in police custody, arrested on suspicion of posting tweets criticising the ruling Sunni regime. In response to his arrest, Rajab stated that: "I was targeted because I was exercising my right to defend human rights, which is a right that is stipulated by the Bahraini constitution." Unfortunately, throughout the Arabian Peninsula it remains commonplace for public critics of ruling parties to receive a knock on the door from the officers of the peace, irrespective of constitutional stipulations. Bahrain is clearly no different. 

Interestingly, it is worth reminding readers that not long ago Bahrain publicly stated its ambitions to become the regional "social media" leader. At the time of this statement the small island's rulers called on all members of parliament to open twitter accounts to help set the trend of widespread social media use.

Once it encouraged citizens to use twitter the Sunni leadership should have been prepared for both critics and supporters alike to follow its direction. Unfortunately, considering Nabeel Rajab's arrest, it seems that Bahrain is not quite practising what it tweets. 

In reality, I am pretty sure that when Bahrain's ruling regime encouraged its members of parliament to start tweeting away it intended for their tweets to set an appropriate tone of conformity for the rest of its citizens to follow. Considering the ongoing political and religio-sectarian tensions in Bahrain, this was a dangerous (and arguably very blinkered) social media strategy. It seems Rajab and his fellow activists are pushing the bounds of cyber-free-speech as far as they can and I doubt this will be the last time Rajab falls foul of Bahrain's twitter police.

Time for a light touch intervention in Yemen

There is no doubt that President Hadi took on a challenge when he received handover from Saleh as Yemen's leader. Almost every day since Hadi's presidential inauguration Yemen has featured in the international headlines, headlines that relentlessly report on violence between the country's armed forces and Al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). On top of this backdrop of violence, the country is facing famine and a crippling lack of resources to solve its long list of problems. Cue international commentators branding the country a "failed state".

Yemen is now sufferin

However, it appears Yemen's international "allies" have realised there is too much at stake to write off Yemen as a failure. Today I read an article by Reuters entitled As violence rises, U.S. and allies pulled into Yemen. In the article Reuters' Peter Apps writes that the US, having lost its appetite for Afghanistan/Iraq-style full-scale on-the-ground intervention, is now trying a more subtle approach to meddling in Yemen (drone attacks aside). Whilst there are no US troops officially on the ground in Yemen, there is an ever increasing presence of US military advisors attempting to guide Hadi and shape his anti-al-Qaeda strategy. One can easily understand the US motivation for wanting to crush al-Qaeda and help Hadi gain control. From a US point of view a "failed" Yemen is a potential petri dish for anti-US terror plans. Indeed, it is already widely assumed that several recent terror plots were conceived and developed in Yemen.

The US is not the only foreign country providing support to Yemen. Saudi Arabia and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) have provided Yemen with financial aid to help restore order in the troubled country. As much as the idealist in me wants to attribute these donations to the GCC's sense of Arab Nationalism I know this is unlikely to be the case. Located in close proximity to Yemen, the GCC countries will all share a common concern of having a "failed state" as a neighbour. 

The GCC may soon be adding a 7th seat at its table

In fact grumblings are already surfacing: Saudi Arabia has expressed its concern that violence in northern Yemen could spill over the border into its territory. The mutterings from within the GCC to provide a chair at its mahogany table for Hadi are, I'm sure, an attempt to help provide more unrestricted advice to and influence the otherwise stricken state. Why else would affluent countries such as The UAE and Oman wish to welcome Yemen into their rich-mans-club? After all, there is little Yemen can offer in return. For me the answer is not too tricky: whether it be members of the GCC or western superpowers, all countries trying to "save Yemen" are motivated by a desire to safeguard their own national security.

Considering this, how should Yemen respond to its foreign "saviors"? Potentially somewhat controversially, I think Hadi should welcome all the help he can get. To put it simply, things are not going well for Hadi. Crucially, he does not have the resources to bring the country back on its feet. It these resources are now being offered to Yemen's leader he'd be foolish not to accept the offer. The danger is that Yemen's new president will surrender some of his country's autonomy by receiving outside help but the consequences of not accepting help could be much worse.  In short, I think it's time for a light touch intervention in Yemen.