In Saudi Arabia, a Revolution
Disguised as Reform
By Dennis Ross
Washington Post
September 8, 2016
Today, it’s hard to be
optimistic about anything in the Middle East. And yet having just visited Saudi
Arabia, in which I led a small bipartisan group of former national security
officials, I came away feeling hopeful about the kingdom’s future. That may
seem paradoxical when some portray the Saudis as both “arsonists
and firefighters” in the struggle with radical Islamists. While Saudi
funding of madrassas internationally has contributed to the spread of a highly
intolerant strain of Islam, I wonder whether a lag effect is causing the Saudis
to be singled out for behaviors their leadership no longer embraces. In any
case, that is certainly not the Saudi Arabia I just encountered.
In fact, the Saudi Arabia I just
visited seemed like a different country from the one I’ve been visiting since
1991. There is an awakening underway in Saudi Arabia, but it is being led from
the top. As one Saudi told us, there is “a revolution here disguised as
economic reform.” While political change may not be in the offing,
transformation is nonetheless taking place. Stylistically, one sees it in the
candor of the conversations with Saudi officials — not the hallmark of
previous interactions — as well as a new work ethic, with several ministers
telling us 80-hour workweeks are now the norm. When we asked how those in the
bureaucracy were reacting to the new demands, we heard that not everyone is
happy but that younger, junior officials now feel they are part of something
important and have embraced the new reality. Symbolically, the presence of women
was notable in our meeting with the foreign minister and our visit to the
College of Entrepreneurship, where half of the group we met were women.
Practically, the Saudis’ plans
for transformation are ambitious, designed to diversify the economy, end
overreliance on oil, keep capital in the country for domestic investment, and
foster both transparency and accountability. “Transparency” and
“accountability” are not terms one would have used in the past to describe
Saudi Arabia. But plans to take a small part of Aramco public will require
opening the books of the giant Saudi oil corporation, meaning, if nothing else,
that if members of the royal family have used it as a private ATM, they will no
longer be able to do so. The minister responsible for arranging the initial
public offering likened it to “doing an IPO for a country,” given the
complexity of the undertaking. But there was no going back, and Mohammed
bin Salman , the deputy crown prince, was emphatic in telling us that
Saudi Arabia no longer has an ideology other than national development and
modernization. For him, there is no choice but to pursue the ambitious targets
specified in the “National
Transformation Plan” and Vision
2030, which include tripling non-oil revenue by 2020, building a public
investment fund to exploit other minerals, promoting the Saudis’ petrochemical
and alternative energy bases, and developing their domestic tourist industries
and entertainment centers. (The latter, we were told, was especially important
so that Saudis would not feel compelled to leave the country because there was
so little to see or do.)
Can this young prince save Saudi
Arabia from itself?
Skeptics have questioned whether
Saudi Arabia can fulfill these goals, either because of a traditional culture
that limits women too much, a workforce lacking key educational skills or
resistance from the conservative religious establishment. But the deputy crown
prince and others argued that all these impediments can be overcome: A
comprehensive reform of the educational system is being carried out, 80,000
students are studying abroad and returning to the kingdom with modern skills and
a new mind-set, and women are being increasingly integrated into jobs across all
sectors. About 70 percent of the Saudi
population is under 30, they noted, and these young people are not just open
to change; they seek it.
No one we saw minimized the
challenges of transforming the country. But the leaders conveyed a sense of
mission and urgency. As Mohammed bin Salman told us, the government must do what
it says it will do — and to that end, he took pride in pointing out that
already the government has succeeded in generating 30 percent more revenue,
reducing the deficit beyond expectations, introducing discipline in the
budgeting process and, importantly, ending the authority of the “religious
police” to interrogate and arrest Saudi citizens.
Will the Saudis succeed in
producing a national makeover? There will be opposition, and any stumbles will
be exploited by forces of tradition. Moreover, the war in Yemen may drain
resources and, in time, public support. Or the preoccupation with Iran, or
Iranian efforts at subversion, could prove distracting and hard to overcome.
But the United States surely has a
stake in the success of the Saudi transformation process. Aside from ensuring
stability in the kingdom, its success could at long last demonstrate an Arab
leadership capable of remaking its society from within, without terrible
upheaval. The next administration should offer technical assistance with the
Aramco IPO and economic reforms more generally. Similarly, because the Saudis
have two priorities — modernization domestically and countering perceived
Iranian adventurism externally — our next president should propose a strategic
dialogue as well as contingency planning for dealing with security threats. Such
planning would do much to reassure the Saudis at a time when their leadership
believes the United States fails to understand the threat from Iran and its use
of Shiite militias to undermine Arab governments.
The Saudis are not imagining
Iranian troublemaking in the region or their financing of Hezbollah and other
terrorist groups. Ironically, it may be the Saudis who have the better chance to
transform their country and truly develop: Unlike the Iranians, they may not be
inhibited by ideology, they have a plan for modernization and their leaders —
in contrast to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — want to open up their country. I
wouldn’t bet against them.