< continued from - Reform
in Iraq, Reform in Saudi Arabia
[Part 5] >
The Religion Card
Given that Saudi Arabia defines its national identity in predominantly religious terms, and that sectarian differences have emerged as the major factor in domestic Iraqi security and politics, it is inevitable that religious issues will be an important part of the Saudi-Iraqi dynamic. Under Saddam Hussein, to the extent that religion mattered to the relationship, it normally served to bring the two countries together. The Sunni aspect of Sunni Arab dominance of the regime was at least as important as the Arab aspect when it came to the Saudis' choosing to back Iraq in the war against Shiite Persian Iran. While the royal family did not care for Saddam and the Baathists -- indeed, they were so frightened of the prospects of Iraqi aggression in 1990 that they invited large numbers of non-Muslims into the country to defend them -- it was always quite clear that if the choice were between Saddam and a Shiite-run Iraq, they would take their chances with Saddam. Meanwhile, the Saudi policy of propagating its radically fundamentalist Wahhabi brand of Sunnism did not extend to Saddam's tightly controlled Iraq. In short, neither government had any religion-based concerns or grievances regarding the other. That has all changed in the aftermath of regime change in Baghdad.
Just as they said that democracy in Iraq does not concern them, Saudi officials initially insisted that the kingdom has no worries about the empowerment of the Iraqi Shia. From the standpoint of Shia-ruled Iraq as an external threat, Saudis would point out correctly that most Iraqi Shiites have consistently seen themselves as Iraqi first and Shii second, and have not been receptive in the past to moves from Teheran to use them as surrogates for Iranian agendas. Moreover, the mainstream leadership of the Iraqi Shia community, such as Ayatollah Ali
al-Sistani, has never advocated Ayatollah Khomeini's extreme doctrine of velayet-e-faqih (the rule of the supreme religious leader), favoring instead a more quietist approach to the role of clerics in government.
This optimistic assessment was never a candid statement of the Saudi government�s assessment of the challenge of Shia empowerment, and it has now been superseded by Foreign Minister Saud's frank expressions of alarm at the prospects for sectarian violence and division in Iraq and for the assertion of Iranian influence there. In contrast to what they were saying a year ago, Saudis now seem to assume that the moderation characteristic of the traditional leaders of the Iraqi Shia community will ultimately be overcome by the radical elements, such as that led by Muqtada
al-Sadr, that advocate a Khomeini-style Islamic republic. Given that moderate Shia Islamists dominated the January 2005 elections for the Transitional National Assembly, the Saudis' pessimism now may be as unjustified as their optimism was before those elections. What is quite realistic, based on the outcome of the Iraqi constitutional referendum, is their assessment that the political trend in Iraq is not in favor of the stable, orderly Sunni Arab dominance that is the Saudis' preferred end-state. What is new, however, is not this trend -- a Zogby International survey conducted just before the January 2005 Iraqi elections indicated the direction quite clearly [22] -- but the Saudis� recognition of it as a reality to be dealt with.
The real issue, for the Saudis, must be the demonstration effect that the achievement of even moderate Shiite majority rule in Iraq turns out to have on other Shiite Arabs in the Gulf. This effect will be mitigated somewhat by the different traditions within Shi�ism that are represented in the various states. Without recounting the entire schism-ridden history of Shia Islam, it is a matter of practical political importance that the dominant form of Shiism in Iraq is that expounded by the Usuli school. This strain of thought, which also prevails in Iran, accords a prominent role to eminent, seminary-educated jurist-clerics known as
mujtahids; each believer is obligated to select one of these scholars as a "model of emulation" and to follow his guidance on questions of law, religious practice, and morality. By contrast, the Akhbari Shiites of Bahrain and the Shaykhis of Saudi Arabia�s Eastern Province do not have this same tradition of deference to clerical authority. As a result, it may not necessarily be the case that Saudi, Bahraini, and other Shiites will automatically follow the political lead of the Iraqi Shiite leadership.
Nevertheless, with Shia majoritarian rule having come to Iraq, there would seem to be a very real prospect for a broader Shia political awakening throughout the Arab countries bordering the Gulf. The results of the municipal elections in Saudi Arabia�s Eastern Province this past spring, which unmistakably showed the strength of Shia consciousness there, are only the first bit of evidence that such an awakening may well be in the works. If Iraqi Shiites succeed in attaining their own large Shia province within a federal Iraq, as they have been discussing in the context of the new Iraqi constitution, the power of this model will only be reinforced. For the first time in centuries, Shiite Muslims will be in complete political control of the territory over which the Sunni-Shia split occurred in the first place. Both Sunni and Shia throughout the Gulf region will understand this to be an epochal shift away from the centuries of Sunni domination, and it is difficult to believe that either community will refrain from reacting accordingly.
In this context, Saudi Arabia�s own self-perception as leader of the Islamic world is a formula for friction with the newly empowered Shiite majority in Iraq. The standard Saudi response to any religiously based challenge is to assert the King's status as Servant of the Two Holy Mosques and therefore a natural voice of the Muslim community. Unfortunately, the Saudis' claim to leadership and legitimacy as custodians of the sanctuaries of Mecca and Medina undoubtedly carries less weight with Iraq's Shia majority than Riyadh might believe. In the first place, the very origin of the Shia branch of Islam lies in its denial that the mainstream succession to power following the Prophet was legitimate. For centuries, the guardianship of the Two Holy Mosques was claimed by Sunni caliphs whom the Shia by definition considered illegitimate. Shia today are therefore unlikely to be impressed by the claims to guardianship asserted by a dynasty that has controlled Mecca and Medina for a mere eighty years.
Furthermore, Iraqi Shia vividly recall that in the early nineteenth century, the Wahhabi predecessors of the modern Saudi regime not only "purified" the shrines at Mecca and Medina of all traces of Shia practice but also sacked the shrines of the Imams Ali and Husayn at Najaf and
Karbala, sites that for the Shii rival Mecca itself for holiness. Indeed, as Yitzhak Nakash observes, these attacks did much to reinforce the Shia identity of the people of these areas, and their clerics� determination to co-opt the previously Sunni tribes of the region to serve as a defense force for the holy cities.[23] Although an Egyptian army under Mohammed Ali suppressed the Wahhabis in 1818, Wahhabi pressure against the Shiite community and its interests was renewed with the rise of the new Saudi state under Abd al-Aziz Al Saud in the early twentieth century. Abd
al-Aziz�s brotherhood of warriors, the Ikhwan, conducted a series of raids into southern Iraq in 1922 and, upon seizing Mecca and Medina in 1925, again destroyed a number of important Shiite shrines in the two cities.[24] If added to this historic mixture the continuing official discouragement of Shii rituals at the tomb of the Prophet Muhammad in Medina and restrictions on the religious practices and civil rights of the Shii of Saudi Arabia�s Eastern Province, it is obvious that the Saudis can expect little or no deference from the Iraqi majority on religious grounds.
For their part, Saudi officials are insistent that whatever happens in Iraq will have no bearing on the Shii of Saudi Arabia, who, they say, are already playing a more active role solely because of internal Saudi dynamics. It needs no demonstration effect from north of the border for Saudi Arabia's Shii to be brought into the evolving Saudi political system. This may be true, but another component of the equation also needs to be taken into account: the inherently anti-Shiite nature of traditional Wahhabi ideology. Anti-Shiite attitudes may be expressed most virulently among those who back the armed challenge to royal authority, but the broad middle ground of Saudis almost certainly share the Wahhabi presumption that Shiites, whom they consider to be heretics, are worse than infidels. The royal family may find itself facing a difficult task reconciling its hard-line populace to the easing of restrictions on "heretical" practices,[25] a task that will only be made more difficult if the Shia themselves, with or without incitement from their Iraqi brethren, become more assertive in their aspirations.
It is not only from north to south that the flow of religious feeling will be felt, however. For exactly the reason that Wahhabism and Shiism are so mutually antagonistic, the export of Wahhabi attitudes from Saudi Arabia into Iraq is now a growing concern for the government in Baghdad, as it will be for any successor government. As an immediate issue, all three governments -- Riyadh, Baghdad, and Washington -- share an interest in preventing Wahhabi jihadists from filtering out of Saudi Arabia into Iraq and continuing to foment violence there. Although the main jihadist leader in Iraq, Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi, is Jordanian and not Saudi, he clearly has a large number of fighters of Saudi origin within his organization and has benefited from the flow of funds given by Saudi citizens in the past to promote the spread of the Wahhabi form of Islam.
Even assuming that Zarqawi and his ilk are eventually defeated, the question of exporting Wahhabi influence into Iraq will remain. Several possible scenarios could lead to contention between Baghdad and Riyadh in this area. First, in casting about for ways to influence developments in Iraq, it would be characteristic for the Saudis to seize on religion as the way to do so. The only viable card for Riyadh to play in that respect would be with the Sunni Arab community. The kingdom may not intentionally seek out opportunities to meddle in internal Iraqi politics, but there is still likely to be strong pressure in influential circles for the kingdom to serve as patron and protector of what Saudis will see as a Sunni Arab community at risk of Shia domination.
In theory, one might also expect Saudi Arabia to see tribal connections as a potential instrument of influence over Iraq's Sunni Arabs, and Gulf Arabs do indeed consistently emphasize the need for U.S. policy to take greater account of Iraqi tribalism. The large tribal confederations, such as the
Shammar, spill across Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria, and there may well be the possibility that these kinship ties could provide an avenue for shaping developments across regional borders.
But if past performance is any guide, the Saudis' reflex would be to look to religious rather than tribal affinity as the key instrument at their disposal. Whether the Saudi objective in Iraq is thought of as building influence or protecting clients, the means on which the Saudis would rely would be the same: assisting in the building and staffing of mosques, providing Sunni "religious" education, and disseminating "religious" information. Unfortunately, any Saudi efforts along these lines will be entirely colored by Wahhabi fundamentalist doctrine; Saudi Arabia has no other form of the faith that it can propagate. Even apart from the broader pernicious effects associated with Wahhabi indoctrination, the intense anti-Shia bigotry with which Wahhabi doctrine is imbued would give such missionary work a potentially serious destabilizing effect and could well provoke a backlash against the Iraqi Sunni community that would be directly contrary to Riyadh's objectives in the country.
< continued - Working
with Washington
[Part 7] >
<
Notes contained in Part
8 >
Complete Report (PDF):
Saudi Arabia and Iraq: Oil, Religion, and an Enduring Rivalry
Joseph McMillan
Complete Section:
Iraq and Its Neighbors - USIP
