(Thank-You Google Images)
Most of the world was shocked when Saudi Arabia’s ruler King Abdullah annouced that in the 2015 muncipal elections democratizing some of the autocratic country’s power – Saudi women would be permitted to vote. The announcement came as a suprise – not the least because Saudi Arabia has so far appeared to be the exception to the Arab spring of Revolutions but also because Saudi Arabia is the home of Islam and by far the most conservative Islamic nation in the world. Sharia law is imposed, women are required to wear the full abiyah, human rights is an alien concept – so the announcement that women would have the right to vote in municipal elections was of course a shock from a government that is married to the state religion.
As I primarly news surf on MSNBC I came across a lead story yesterday Oct 1 2011 that clerics and conservatives in the Saudi Kingdom were reacting with opposition and anger towards the new move – http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44741555#.TokL_tQdzIU The article was created by MSNBC Editors focused on a report that “Saudi Arabia’s clerics, who are generally conservative, are said to be less than pleased about the reformist ideas of the king. A senior cleric criticized the kingdom’s first mixed-gender university after its launch in 2009 and was immediately relieved from his position.” This message was however only created in part by MSNBC – Saudi government also had a hand in its creation by not simply introducing the reform but also allowing the cleric to speak out.
Not many creative techniques were utilized in the story – the history and socio-culural situation alone already provided the sensationalism required to attract an audience. In understanding this message different groups of people are bound to interpret in the following ways. For those that view Saudi Arabia as an opressive country MSNBC’s news report alters this image. American and western audience often associate Women’s suffrage with a more liberal and reformist minded political alignment – and the news story clearly indicates that there is a divide between Islamic clerics and the government on the issue. Liberal American’s will see it as a sign of diplomatic success by the Obama administration while conservative American’s will see it as a sign of Saudi Arabia finally realizing the need to pander to America and modern ideas to stay afloat in the Arab spring and avoid a revolution.
American women may view this as a long over due step.
Historians and political scientists however may views this move with concern and perhaps alarm. Contrary to the stereotype of Women’s Suffrage as a liberal and reformist idea – an idea that MSNBC is clearly banking on with American audiences – women suffrage is generally a prequisite of totalitarian dictatorships and harsh anti-reform/liberal democratic movements.
The reason for this is that women voters while often economically liberal are more often then not socially conservative. Political scientists and historians analyzing this may well see this as a step-backwards in Saudi reforms by bringing in a voter demograph that may in fact be more likely to oppose reforms.
The values and lifestyles presented in this message are a clear constrast – that of the liberal and reformist idea of democratizing political power and the more traditional idea that political power should be reserved for social certain groups. Additionally Islamic lifestyle enteres in to the matter as well. What is ommitted from this message is that the limited actual political participation of Saudi citizens in government life (there is no national legislature or national elected officials and political parties are banned) means that granting women suffrage will do little to change the status quo at the national level. What is further ommitted is that women are more likely to vote against freedom than for it.
In the United States the opposition to women’s suffrage for years was led by a loose coalition of anarchists, capitalists and advocates of limited government while womens suffragettes such as Susan B. Anthony were active advocating that women should have the vote to impose social restrictions – such as prohibition of alcohal on American society by government making the sale, transportation and manufacturing of alcohal a crime. Women’s suffrage was largely granted in the States due to Wilson’s promotion of democracy during the First World War and seperation from the social organizations and political cliques that had pursued it in the first place. AFter the First World War the democratic wave resulted in the extension of political power to women – a move that historians have now realized not only allowed but was responsible for the election of Adolph Hilter and the Nazi Party in 1932 Germany. In his campaigns Hitler main target demograph for his media messages were women who in one election cycle elevated the Nazi Party to the nations ruling party. More recently the election of the late Benazir Bhutto to Prime Minister of Pakistan in the 1990′s did not see any tangible change in human rights or political reforms. Granting women rights in Iran resulted in a massive religious revolution in which women actively supported social restrictions.
The reason that this message is being sent from two sources – the Saudi’s and MSNBC – is to give Saudi Arabia an image make-over. Saudi Arabia has had a notoriously negative image in the west – a fact that matters considering virtually all the nations surrounding the Kingdom are going through political revolutions and the West is the largest consumer of Saudi oil. In the past middle-east government survival depended on assistance from Western governments – particularly the United States. The success or failure of a regime change often depends on whether it can gain legitimacy in the eyes of U.S. government and people – whether the revolution or the existing government is more compatible with Western values. The Islamic terrorism on 9/11 ten years ago had a dramtically negative impact on U.S. – Saudi relations due to the fact that Saudi Arabia is the birthplace of Islam and is essentially to Islam what the state of Israel is to Jews and Christians. With the current revolutions sweeping the middle-east in Libya, Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, Syria and even Iran – replacing age old regimes with new organizations the Saudi government that has so far prevented the revolutionary craze is attempting to pre-empt a revolution from gaining sympathy with the American public by appearing as a stable source of reform and liberalism that has to work slowly due to being hampered by religious clerics and the religious nature of the country – a process that could be disrupted by a violent, unstable and un-predictable revolution.
In doing so the Saudi’s are basically doing what could be called – handling the American public. Re-making their image, giving American’s an impression that is not necessarily reality, defusing criticism of the Kingdom and pre-empting a revolution’s ability to gain traction via using the media to develop support with Americans by using an American political stereotype.
(Thank-You Google Images)
By creating the impression in American’s mind’s that the government is liberal and reformist – any revolution in the tightly media-censored/media-controlled region could easily be painted as the product of a common enemy such as Al-Qaida and aborted before it was even started. The granting of women’s suffrage in Saudi Kingdom and carrying of the story on MSNBC boils down to a move to be more relatable to American audiences and appear open to reform – nothing more.
A savvy public relations move by a regime struggling against the revolutionary tide.
