Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the UK, Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz, has complained in an article for the Daily Telegraph that his country is being unfairly picked on in Britain. It is, he claims, “an alarming change” in tone. His words reflect a puncturing of the mystique that has traditionally protected the wealthy, secretive Gulf kingdom from rigorous scrutiny.
But the ambassador’s discomfort may also stem from the Saudi regime’s raised profile in regional affairs, which makes it more of a target for attack, and from a sense that the kingdom’s unelected, uninspiring rulers are increasingly vulnerable.
Successive British governments have treated the Saudi royals with exaggerated respect bordering on obsequiousness. This was primarily down to the Saudis’ unmatched oil wealth, rather than any natural affinity. The motive was self-interest, not affection.
In the 1980s Margaret Thatcher assiduously courted King Fahd during negotiations over the £43bn al-Yamamah arms deal. In an echo of today’s row, Thatcher personally apologised to Fahd in January 1985 for criticism of the Saudis in the British press.
“I attach the very highest importance to maintaining and improving [warm and friendly relations],” she wrote. “I am particularly encouraged by Your Majesty’s welcome assurance that British press reporting on Saudi Arabia will not be allowed to influence our bilateral relations.”
David Cameron’s government has also tried to keep in the Saudis’ good books, playing down a recent spate of shocking human rights cases. The prime minister had to be pushed into intervening over the sentencing to death and crucifixion of Nimr al-Nimr, a Shia religious leader, and six others for speaking out against the regime.
Cameron was similarly slow to take up the case of a British grandfather, Karl Andree, jailed in Jeddah and condemned to 350 lashes for possessing home-made wine. Only after the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, strongly objected did the government cancel a £5.9m contract to help run Saudi prisons. Downing Street says the prime minister has since written to the Saudis about Andree’s case and the foreign secretary, Philip Hammond, has said he does not expect the flogging to be carried out.
In his piece, published on Monday, Abdulaziz makes brazenly clear why, in the Saudi view, British politicians should toe the line. Saudi Arabia employs tens of thousands of Britons, has commercial contracts worth billions of pounds, and private investments totalling £90bn, he says. The kingdom is also a “vital” strategic, security and intelligence ally, he writes.
But such claims are increasingly open to question. The falling oil price has put the regime under severe strain. Its petro-dollar power is fading. Despite its large sovereign reserves, Riyadh will run out of cash in five years if prices stay low, according to the IMF. Could Britain do without Saudi investment? It may have to.
The bitter, region-wide rivalry between predominantly Sunni Muslim Saudi Arabia and Shia Muslim Iran is increasingly inimical to western interests. Riyadh’s insistence, for example, that Syria’s Iran-backed president, Bashar al-Assad, must be replaced is an obstacle to an interim peace deal as favoured by Washington and London.
The Saudi blitzkrieg against Tehran-backed rebels in Yemen has increased, not decreased, regional instability. And while the US, backed by Britain, has been mending fences with Iran, the Saudis are pulling in the opposite direction. Meanwhile, wealthy Saudi citizens, promoters and funders of intolerant Sunni Wahhabist beliefs, undermine the west’s fight against spreading jihadism in Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.
The perceived weakness of King Salman, who ascended the throne last January, is also contributing to changing attitudes in Britain. There is open, mutinous talk of a palace coup among disaffected princelings. Hopes of reform have fizzled, while the number of executions has soared.
Economic strains, controversial political appointments, inept handling of the recent hajj disaster, in which hundreds of pilgrims were killed in a stampede, and rumours about the king’s health have fuelled speculation about regime change, or collapse.
Abdulaziz’s insistence that Britain must treat Saudi Arabia with respect, or face “serious repercussions”, ignores these shifting realities, including the new light shone on the kingdom’s medieval judicial practices by the advent of global social media. The days of automatic deference are long over. Respect has to be earned.
