Origin Of
Saudi-Qatar Spat: What Lies In The Future
Saeed Naqvi
The western media, which
was shy of mentioning the Muslim Brotherhood as a threat to the Saudi regime,
has now started describing it as a threat to Riyadh quite as potent as Shia
Islam. This change is a major fall-out from the Saudi-Qatari spat.
Qatar for quite some
time has patronized the Muslim Brothers, a powerful grass roots force in Egypt
and Turkey. It is sufficiently powerful to keep King Abdullah of Jordan on
sixes and sevens. Also, one must not forget the Muslim Brotherhood uprising in
Hama, north west Syria, in 1982, which Bashar al Assad’s father, Hafez al Assad
quelled with such brute power that the death toll exceeded10,000. In 2011 when
Tayyip Erdogan took a more benign interest in Syrian affairs his advice to
Assad was straightforward: accommodate the MB in the establishment.
Unbridled MB power is
anathema to both: Israel and Saudis. That is why Saudi’s placed $8 billion in
Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s hand when he ousted the MB’s Mohamed Morsi. Today,
Sisi’s job is on the line.
Israel has nightmares
because it fears the MB weed in Egypt and elsewhere will link up with Hamas,
another strong MB outfit. When the western media, protective of Israeli
interests, list the “Shia axis” inimical to the Jewish state – Iran, Hezbollah,
Syria – it mentions Hamas in the same breath without the essential
qualification: Hamas is True Blue Sunni. The link up with Iran is political or
ideological not religious.
Saudi anxieties are more
profound. Remember, from January 1980, the Saudi began to play down the
monarchy and focus more on the King’s role as the “keeper of the holy shrines at
Mecca and Medina.” This show of humility followed two events, one after the
other, which shook the house of Saud.
The Iranian revolution
which brought the Ayatollahs to power in Tehran in 1979 coincided more or less
with the siege of the Mecca mosque by Juhayman al-Otaybi and hundreds of his
supporters, demanding the overthrow of the House of Saud and an end to the
“anti Islamic” monarchy in Saudi Arabia.
Taking advantage of
these eruptions, the oil bearing Eastern province of Saudi Arabia, the Shia dominated
Qatif and al Hasa region rose in rebellion in 1979 against Riyadh’s anti Shia
sectarian bias and arbitrary arrests. The uprising lasted a week. Over 100 died
in police action.
This regional uprising
magnified itself a 100 fold in Saudi eyes because of the emergence of the
Ayatollahs in Iran. This also became the source of anxiety to Bahrain where 70
per cent of the population is Shia and locked in a tussle for more rights from
the Sunni rulers – the House of Khalifas.
While pointing at the
Shia menace, Saudis seldom express their worries about Qatif and Bahrain where
they sent their troops to quell the Arab Spring. Those issues could possibly
invite a Human Rights scrutiny. Focus on Iran, Hezbollah, Alawite power in
Syria is much more beneficial because this axis invokes Israel’s deepest
anxieties. The western media is so much more sympathetic for this reason. If
the past is any guide, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times should be on his
way to Riyadh for yet another exclusive interview with the new Crown Prince.
That Qatar has relations
with Iran is disliked in Riyadh, ofcourse, but what causes much deeper
anxieties is the material and moral support Qatar can provide to MB which
represents all the tendencies that the Otaybi rebellion in 1979 represented.
Riyadh-Doha differences
go back to the days when the aging Emir, was ousted by his son, Hamad bin
Khalifa. The ousted Emir’s attempted counter coup failed but it had Saudi
support.
Osama bin Laden’s war on
the house of Saud had a declared reason: Saudis had accorded hospitality to the
troops of the “infidel US”. Qatar took advantage of situation and hosted
CENTCOM,
Then came another
affront to Saudi pride: Al Jazeera TV. When the BBC shut down its Arabic
service, trained TV hands became available in the market. At the time the BBC
was also in search of funds for its World Service TV. BBC had been left behind
by CNN which stole the limelight during Operation Desert Storm in 1992.
Saudi King Fahd’s
cousin, Khalid bin Faisal al Saud’s Orbit Communications hired the BBC hands
and launched a channel. But it lasted no more than 18 months because editorial
freedom clashed with Saudi’s abiding restrictions on issues anchored to Sharia.
Riyadh would not allow the new channel to telecast a documentary on public
“beheadings”.
That is when Qatar moved
into the breach and launched Al Jazeera, first in Arabic. As BBC retirees like
Sir David Frost became available, Al Jazeera English made rapid recruitments.
At a time when Osama bin
Laden was a news source, Al Jazeera became the channel for all bin Laden
interviews and audio statements. Coverage by BBC, CNN, Fox News of all the 9/11
wars acquired a uniformity which strained credibility. Al Jazeera livened up
proceedings by bringing into focus “the other” perspective as well. This was
not “cricket” for the authors of the new world order. Scholars like the late
Fouad Ajami, supportive of George W Bush’s invasion of Iran and Afghanistan,
wrote academic papers on Al Jazeera’s perfidy. Allied aircraft even bombed the
channel’s offices in Kabul and Baghdad. All of this boosted Al Jazeera
viewership sky high.
The late Saudi King
Abdullah, much the most supple ruler in recent decades, mended fences with
Qatar. We have to be together, otherwise the “spring” will blow away the
region’s monarchies, he argued.
Moreover, CNN, BBC
propaganda was not being believed in the region during the Syrian and Libyan
operations. Al Jazeera’s priceless credibility was commandeered. Qatar
succumbed. Both the operations, Syria and Libya have been a disaster from every
angle. Additionally they have taken a toll of Al Jazeera’s credibility.
The present spat however
has the potential of restoring Al Jazeera’s credibility should deft editorial
hands take up the anti establishment position which was Al Jazeera’s forte and
which it surrendered under the personal pressure of the late Saudi king.
The larger game now must
impinge on Qatar, Iran and Russian gas reserves, the energy of the future. To
keep the cohesion of this triangle or to break it must be the preoccupation of
regional combatants now and in the foreseeable future.
#
#
#
No comments:
Post a Comment