There are a few things about Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a.k.a. M.B.S., that Tom Friedman fails to mention in his profile of him in his New York Times column. Here’s the meat of Mr. Friedman’s column:
It’s only a matter of time before King Salman turns over the reins of power to M.B.S., who’s already the effective ruler. M.B.S. is not a democrat, nor is he interested in promoting democracy. He’s a modernizing autocrat. The most we can expect from him is the modernization of Saudi Arabia’s economy and religious/social structure, but given how badly the country has stagnated from years of tentative reforms, this is deeply significant.
M.B.S. is definitely bold. I can think of no one else in the ruling family who would have put in place the profound social, religious and economic reforms that he’s dared to do — and all at once. But I can also think of no one in that family who’d have undertaken the bullying foreign policy initiatives, domestic power plays and excessive personal buying sprees he’s dared to do, all at once. They are two halves of the same M.B.S. package. Our job: help curb his bad impulses and nurture his good ones.
and here
If Saudi women are empowered (which will be fully true only when the rules of “male guardianship†over them are lifted), and the kingdom becomes a more normal, connected and productive society, Saudi Islam will naturally become more moderate and inclusive. Given how Saudi Arabia sets the tone for Islam globally, this will isolate extremists and empower moderates everywhere. Again, huge.
This will take time to play out, though, and reverse the supply chain of extremist books, madrasas and clerics Saudi Arabia exported across the globe — but the whole world will be better for it.
I wish someone with more knowledge of Saudi Arabia than I were painting a more realistic picture of the country, the situation, and the individual. All I can do is tell you how I see it.
First and foremost M. B. S. is not a liberal. He’s a cruel bungler who’s trying to consolidate power. He’s the architect of KSA’s war with Yemen which should have been over in a week but which has really confirmed just how hollow the Saudi military is.
The second is that historically Saudi Arabia has not been an autocracy, at least not an autocracy as it would be imagined in the West. It teeters between being a theocracy (like Iran) and being a monarchy in tenuous balance between the monarch and the great lords, something like England of the 13th century. Basically a big family squabble with dynamics that I can’t possibly understand.
All the Saudi princes who are no longer billionaires this year compared to last are a mark of the consolidation that’s going on. I’m concerned that it can only lead to a spreading war.
I don’t quite understand the modest liberalization in the treatment of women. Is he trying to be more like the cool kids? Is he trying to seize power from the clerics to wield it himself? Clearly, it obsesses Tom Friedman but I can’t help but think there’s more to it and more to the man than Mr. Friedman is leading us to believe.
