The year 2006 was not a bad one for everyone in the Middle East. According to a 2006 earnings report by the McKinsey Quarterly, Saudi Arabia boasted a surplus of 71 billion dollars in oil revenues. Following OPEC's 2003 decision to boost oil production to 9 million barrels a day, it is estimated that Saudi Arabia's oil revenues have topped an extra 1 billion dollars a week.

This scenario is starkly different from a mere fifty-five years ago when the Saudis did not even have a central bank or paper currency. Early records from ARAMCO, the Arab American oil company, show the logistical nightmare of ordering trucks of silver riyals to pay workers every week. Today, Saudis can check stock portfolios at any ATM, and can make international transactions for millions of dollars from their cell-phones. From glitzy malls selling Coach purses and Chanel sunglasses to the cavalcades of sports cars on the streets of Riyadh and Jeddah, signs of unprecedented economic prosperity abound across Saudi Arabia.

But while economic prosperity and its attendant manifestations have come to the kingdom relatively easily, financed by the oil wealth, religious, socio-cultural and political reform continues to be rejected. Even as countries around the kingdom open up, giving political and social freedoms to their citizens, the Saudi society continues to writhe under the weight of anachronistic laws and medieval social ethos. The discrepancy between the modern and the medieval, evidenced everywhere in Saudi Arabia, has split the country down the middle and created a schizophrenic society.

These internal factors combined with external pressures post-9/11 for restructuring and opening up have thrown Saudi Arabia in a tailspin.

On the one hand is a tribal-patriarchal society which also manifests itself in the way the state is configured; on the other is the austere literalism of Wahhabism. Between these two poles lie the technological trappings of modernity without the culture of free inquiry that produced them. Indeed, Saudi Arabia today seems to be an experiment in whether the tangible aspects of modernity can be embraced while shunning the intangible ideas that sustain them in modernised societies.

While Wahhabi austerity never touched the Saudi elite at any time, it was always a useful device to configure the state. Over the years, however, two things have happened. The Salafis produced by Wahhabism have come to challenge the monarchy's lax ways and its pro-western bent; and the advent of technology has begun to change societal attitudes. The two strands are diametrically opposed to each other but agree on one thing: the current order must change.

The state (tribal-patriarchal monarchy) has to deal at one end with the Salafis; and on the other with new social voices (women, media, rights groups etc). One strategy to deal with the Salafis would be to dilute the literalism of Wahhabi Islam but that would come with the risk of de-legitimising a royal family whose own power stems from the co-optation of Wahhabi Islam. The obvious strategic turn would be to enlist the support of pro-reform elements and embark on a modernisation campaign; however, this route risks empowering the very groups that are already expressing their discontent through demands for reform and shares in governance.

The state's response so far has been haphazard and ham-fisted. Using piecemeal tactics, it has attempted to deal with the problem by combining patronage (bribes etc) with the simplistic moral tools derived through the tribal-religious ethos. This approach has met with limited success and the apparition of its failure is most visible in the increasingly garish juxtaposition of capitalism and oil wealth. One visible example is the new Abraj Al Bait housing and hotel complex being planned in Mecca. The towering mall that opened its doors last December will soon make it possible for pilgrims to get a Starbucks and even buy lingerie while enjoying a view of the Ka'aba.

This points towards a larger attitude: the moral crisis between a pre-oil ideology and a post-oil consumer culture has been reconciled by Saudis through the tragic reduction of Saudi morality to only those acts that are publicly culpable. Reaping the benefits of a collectivist society where family and tribal identity still holds immense clout, Saudis have embraced mass-consumption and acquisition but rejected the individual conscience that would be a check on them. Morality exists only as a fa�ade: Saudi women don austere abayas over their haute couture gowns; government-owned TV channels show religious programmes that are never watched; alcohol is banned in public places but flows in private parties; and while men and women cannot socialise in public, female servants are regularly used for prostitution.

Stubbornly denying the existence of these private sins, Saudis refuse to embrace any changes in religious and cultural mores that would acknowledge the necessity of moral innovation in the wake of progress. Undaunted by the appeals of human rights organisations and Muslim reformers, they continue to chop off the hands of thieves, inflict public punishment on adulterers and refuse women any place in the public sphere.

A closer look at the religious 'devotion' of Saudi authorities reveals a reprehensible hollowness. Take the example of seven Somali migrant labourers who were executed without trial in 2006, their heads and hands chopped off to illustrate the Saudi commitment to Sharia. Sadly, most chopped hands and heads belong to the most disenfranchised and powerless within Saudi society.

Beneath a carefully cultivated fa�ade of piety and devotion to Islam lies a nation in deep crisis regarding its own moral identity. While the chopped off hands of migrant labourers and the black abayas may allow Saudis to deny that they are affected by their oil wealth, it does not eliminate the reality of a troubled state and society.

Rafia,
just out of curiosity, was wondering if u had lived in Saudi? Although I wouldnt quite label the confusion that it is Saudi culture as exactly "schizophrenic" [ :) ], the socio-economic "consciousness" or "conflictg eruption thereof" emerging in the country in the past 2 decades [fueled in large part by exposure to foreign influences through 3 principal means:opening of the country for jobs 2 expatriates since the "oil boom" of the l8 70s/early 80s,sending Saudi students 2 univs mainly in the UK or US,& attractg foreign businesses esp retailers] certainly continues 2 b faced with pressures & contradictations, resulting in numerous (& tragic) problems.There have been small steps taken recently,but a lot of uncertainty remains.

Motazz,

I have lived in Saudi Arabia. Rafia is correct in these assertions. I personally think Saudis are no more or no less hypocritical than say Indians, or Americans. But what makes it very dangerous is that this hypocrisy takes on violent turns if one happens to be on the wrong side of this hypocrisy in Saudi Arabia as against in America or India (for the most part).

Once, when I worked in Aramco Dhahran I had a truck in my fleet that had an expired fire extinguisher. We needed a new one because of Aramco rules and I asked our Arab sponsor, Dafur, to go buy a new one. Instead, he blatantly stole the fire extinguisher hanging on a nearby wall from the Aramco facility itself and gave it to the another driver and told him to go give it to the driver of the truck stuck outside! 'Yullah!' he said, 'now there is fire extinguisher!' He told the driver to bring the old one in and put it on the wall where the good one used to be!

I am not sure what would have happened to the driver if he had been caught with that, but sure enough, Dafur would pray dutifully on the dot every day!

contrived anecdotes vasan .. you're a series of contrived anecdotes.


Islam starts with the heart and ends with the heart and if you harden the heart you will defeat Islam in yourself.

I certainly did not intend to bring light to this discussion from a racial sensitivity side,& I hope & trust that it wont decline towards that path. I too have livd in Saudi--& in Riyadh [acknowldgd privately as the "tougher" or "stricter" part of Saudi society among natives & expats alike]-where ive witnessd some instances (sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly) that were very disturbg.But I see a broader problem that may eat away @ the society,no less important,& one which labor or ethnic relations may be a part or symptom of. I think it will take a lot more than pointg fingers or bashing (which I DONT suggest is the aim of this article)--an approach that DOESNT excuse the culperability of various actors (incl Saudis),but also one that doesnt reduce exchange into simple "for or against" animosity that can engulf all.

Secondly, i appreciate your input & Ghulam's input. I would also like 2 hear from Rafia.

Ghulam,

Depending on what you have already decided in your mind, an anecdote can appear to be contrived or it can appear to be an epiphany. Obviously, you are a 'good Muslim' and I am not a Muslim. But that does not make me not good. However if you think so - it is your prerogative. If you have already decided that I am lying, all I can say is you are not that different from those people in Saudi Arabia who go to prayers on Fridays, and after the prayer, attend a beheading in the neighboring soccer field! All in the name of 'Islam' Peace!

Yes, you can call it contrived, but when I was in Arabia, my crew used to regularly come back to camp, after a Friday prayer, and report amputations or beheadings and speak about with great admiration; saying this was why Saudi Arabia was so 'pure' as opposed to India where criminals get away scotfree!

My point of mentioning my experience in Saudi Arabia was to agree with the author regarding schizophrenia of the Arab culture today. While there is corruption, hatred, violence, deception etc in every country in the world, there is no illusion of self-piety in most countries like there is in Saudi Arabia. You may not like to hear about it, but then, who is hiding his head in the sand?

----"to agree with the author regarding schizophrenia of the Arab culture today"

Reading the article & response, one could be led to assume that the discussion/topic only concerned Saudi Arabia. Why then a broader generalization in the response?

2ndly: ----"While there is corruption, hatred, violence, deception etc in every country in the world,there is no illusion of self-piety in most countries like there is in Saudi Arabia."

I agree that many problems (& some deeply troubling ones) exist in Saudi,but couldnt this qualify as too much of a sweeping statmt?

>> I agree that many problems (& some deeply troubling ones) exist in Saudi,but couldnt this qualify as too much of a sweeping statmt?

Not if you think Muslims have it coming from the get go. Its called prejudice. Very effective. Calls for ignoring the facts, avoiding introspection, being partial, biased .. lacking credibility. Still if you can make a story believable .. why worry about the facts.

>> Depending on what you have already decided in your mind, an anecdote can appear to be contrived or it can appear to be an epiphany.

Well then mystic liar. What makes your anecdotal and prejudiced perspective somehow equal to an objective and CLEAR assessment of the truth? Its a matter of opinion and endless debate that the Saudis are delusional and impious. To make them especially shows disregard for the facts. You love disregarding facts because you believe in the truth. Round and round you go.

Ghulam,

The answer to your question is in the question itself! My 'ancedotal and prejudiced' perspective is only so because of your preconcieved dislike of me. For someone who is not prejudiced against me, the very same story is - to quote you - 'objective and CLEAR assessment of the truth'.

Just as beauty lies in the eye of the beholder, so does the willingness of the reader impart qualities of truth and falsehood to what he reads! Like the poster about aliens - "I want to believe!" You see my point?

You just don't want to believe anything I say because you think everything I say is a lie. Yet, as anecdotal as they may be, some other person's views may appear fascinating and wonderful to you because you like that person. A lot of 'intellectuals' like to think they are above such common mistakes, but nobody is above human failings - including you.

You don't like the implications of my experiences in Saudi Arabia? No problem. But don't call me a liar, mystic or otherwise. Talk to more people who have lived in Saudi Arabia before refusing believe how extraordinarily hypocritical that country is. I wonder if you know that while preaching the equality of all mankind, Saudi Arabia issues Muslims with IDs of one color, and the rest get IDs of another color (or at least that was the case when I was there)! That is your first introduction to the impending 'festival of equal treatment' awaiting you in Saudi Arabia!

yada yada yada .. all you have to do is read how you soften mass murder when its Muslims being killed. You need someone to tell you yours is the humble lot of this world so you can be overtly racist and biased? I won't do it. You want your opining about the immature passions of Arabs .. I won't do it. Because its not my place to.

>> Saudi Arabia issues Muslims with IDs of one color, and the rest get IDs of another color (or at least that was the case when I was there)! That is your first introduction to the impending 'festival of equal treatment' awaiting you in Saudi Arabia!

You want to be judged under the Islamic law of the Arabs I wonder? You certainly want Hindu mass murderers to be not judged at all. You never said it. But you may as well have excused it .. yet some people aren't excused are they?

Legal underpinnings aside. You know .. India has a far larger economy than Saudi. Who goes to poorer country to make money especially when his much more advanced and ethically astute nation has so much more to offer? Did you even have an ethical problem when you got paid? Did you get paid less than Muslims? Because Hindus got paid more during the Gujerat massacres than Muslims did. And noone had to carry a card to identify themselves as a muslim to be prejudiced. Strange person. Your use of logic defies factual observances. You only lying to yourself.

Ah, Mr. Ghulam - you have at last resorted to the most cowardly argument of all, that people the world over resort to in the face of an immigrant's complaint of abuse! 'If you don't like it here, why don't you go back where you came from?!'

Fortunately for me, I could afford to leave the stifling atmosphere in Saudi Arabia as opposed to the many Indian laborers who are trapped in debt spirals. And you are right. I should have never gone there to earn money. It was my stupidity that led me there - I have no hesitation in admitting!

Only a fool goes to Saudi Arabia knowing all this but in my defense, I had no idea how pathetically hypocritical the society in Saudi Arabia was.

Let me tell you another anecdote you will hate - I was nicknamed the 'Mutawwa' by the Aramco security guards because I was such a stickler for rules with my staff! Funny huh?! Dafur could not wait to get rid of me as soon as my contract expired because I would never agree to his nefarious ideas! But he had to keep me for the duration of the project because the Aramco people loved my high standards!

I could also tell you many humanistic stories of how I helped many Muslim laborers who worked for me. I could also tell you how many Muslim laborers used to come to me - a strict Vegetarian Brahman - and complain against our Muslim boss from Hyderabad (who used to lead them in Namaz everyday!), but then it would hurt your tender sentiments to learn that a man with an illustrious name like 'Sirajuddin' could team up with bloodsucking agents in Hyderabad and extort money from poor laborers; whereas a man with an infidel name like me could stand up and say it was wrong and get fired for it!

Mr. Ghulam, shame on you for trying to browbeat me. When you say that though I never said it, somehow I implied that I am supporting the massacre in Ahmadabad it is a reflection of what you WANT me to say!

I don't need you to agree to anything I say nor do I need your endorsement of me in anyway. I know I am a good man ; and that sounds immodest, but it is just self-awareness.

>> Mr. Ghulam, shame on you for trying to browbeat me. When you say that though I never said it, somehow I implied that I am supporting the massacre in Ahmadabad it is a reflection of what you WANT me to say!

Blah blah blah .. yet again .. you're pitying yourself and not offering an objective view. Has India given many Arabs jobs? Oh no wait. I'm the one who's "browbeating". You are sincere in self flattery and even more sincere in demonizing muslims. I wonder what your muslim confidantes would say about your obviously indiscriminate view of their "ego" and "pride" .. what with then actually being poorer and more destitute by an increasingly racist India.

Actual as in like true .. as in having nothing to do with how I view myself and love myself and congratulate myself .. as in fact .. and impartial observation .. you remember that point?