Women can drive in Saudi Arabia but is it really a big change?

Saudi Arabia is not the place from where one can expect good news for women. It is the most restrictive country for women in the world. It's not for nothing that it has been called the most masculine state and anti-woman kingdom. Though many blame Islam for women plight in Saudi Arabia, there are around fifty other Muslim-majority countries in the world and none of these countries control and regulate women lives as much as the Saudi state.Those blaming Islam for the Saudi state's misogyny, however, have one powerful supporter inside the kingdom, the Saudi state, which justifies its invidious discrimination of women on the basis of Islam, Sharia and tradition.

So, knowing Saudi state's general puritanism and its stance on gender equality, it was a surprise to read a series of news that advance the empowerment of Saudi women. Following are the positive news received over the last two months:

• King Salman issued a historic decree removing the ban on issuance of driving licenses to women. Women will be able to drive by June 2018 (See King Salman’s decree allows women to drive in Saudi Arabia):
• Iman Bint Abdullah was appointed as Assistant Mayor of the Al-Khobar municipality, with special responsibility for information technology. She is the first Saudi woman to hold such a senior position (See First Saudi woman appointed as assistant mayor);
• Fatimah Baeshen was appointed as the first female spokesperson for the Saudi Embassy in Washington DC (See First spokeswoman appointed at Saudi embassy in Washington);
• As part of the independence day celebrations, Saudi women were allowed to enter the King Fahd International Stadium (Riyadh) for the first time to attend a pageant operetta. They were also allowed to attend a concert in Jeddah (See National celebrations open Saudi sports stadium to women for [the] first time);
• Saudi Ministry of Education issued a decree that will allow girls to participate in physical education classes for the first time. The government also agreed, again for the first time, to issue female gym licences. Female gyms previously operated as salons and faced threats of closure (See Saudi Arabia will finally allow girls to take PE — that's a big deal).

Besides openings for Saudi women, the Saudi government also proclaimed at least one future relaxation for foreign women. In August, it was announced that a new 50 island Red Sea luxury resort would be built and this resort would be “governed by laws on par with international standards.” The government did not explicitly say it but the meaning of "international standards" was mostly interpreted as freedom for women to wear whatever they like, including bikinis, at the resort (See Saudi Arabia to open luxury beach resort where women can wear bikinis).

So, why this change and why so fast? This was the kingdom which believed in evolution, not revolution. This was the kingdom where tradition and Wahhabi style Islam reigned supreme unfettered by modernity. Most analysts have pointed out that the force behind these changes is the new Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Since his father ascended to the throne in January 2015, he has gradually acquired more and more power. In the first cabinet of his father, Prince Mohammed was appointed Minister of Defense and he was also the head of the Royal Court. Also in January, he was named the chair of the newly established Council for Economic and Development Affairs. In April 2015, he was appointed Deputy Crown Prince and Second Deputy Prime Minister, just two heartbeats away from the throne. So after April 2015, he was controlling both economic and defence policies of the kingdom (For his pivotal role in the Yemen war see Saudi Arabian Nationalism, Religion and Yemen War, an earlier blog post).

A year later, "Mr. Everything," a name given to Prince Mohammed because of his all-pervasive influence (See Why Saudi's Mohammed bin Salman is 'Mr Everything'), presented Vision 2030, a roadmap for the Saudi economy and society for the next 15 years. In his final promotion, Prince Mohammed bin Salman was made Crown Prince and Deputy Prime Minister by his father in June 2017. 

There are several reasons why openings for the Saudi women are being linked to Prince Mohammed. First, he has said many times that he favors women joining the workforce. In 2016, when he was asked, "Do you think having a greater proportion of women in the workforce would be good for Saudi Arabia?" He replied, "No doubt. A large portion of my productive factors are unutilised. And I have population growth reaching very scary figures. Women’s work will help in both of these issues." Second, he is the main force behind the Vision 2030 which declares:

Saudi women are yet another great asset. With over 50 percent of our university graduates being female, we will continue to develop their talents, invest in their productive capabilities and enable them to strengthen their future and contribute to the development of our society and economy.

Third, the timing of the reforms is too difficult to ignore. In late June, Prince Mohammed vanquishes his last major rival (cousin and former Crown Prince Mohammed bin Naif) and becomes Crown Prince and in the next two months, a series of reforms happen. Finally, because of his failure to deliver a victory in the Yemen War, he wants a big win to consolidate his power and these changes can give him that, if he can manage the conservative Wahhabi religious establishment. 

Source: Saudi Arabia to allow women to obtain driving licences

The question is whether these changes are going to be a game changer for Saudi women or not. The major change is, of course, permission to drive. Many analysts have pointed out that while important, this change still does not give freedom to drive to Saudi women. After June 2018, Saudi women will still need to have consent from their male guardians:

The key change is that there is no longer any legal prohibition for women to drive. And nor, according to the statements of the formerly reluctant clerics, is there a basis for a ban in sharia law, which governs most aspects of Saudi society. The onus of decisions about whether women can sit behind the wheel has been shifted from the state to families.

Under repressive guardianship laws, male relatives have veto over whether wives or daughters can leave the home unaccompanied. While a woman can be granted a licence and is allowed to drive, a male family member can still stop her from doing so. (See Saudi Arabia: Prince Mohammed plays his biggest card yet)

Madawi Al-Rashid, a Suadi Arabian scholar, has argued not much is going to change. According to her, it is a "public relations stunt" and women are still going to be oppressed in Saudi Arabia and the changes have been solely done to mollify Western critics and get their support:

The Saudi state is one of the most male-dominated in the world. Now it is compelled to look as if it is treating women better to win over critics in the west. As a result, it has embarked on a series of cosmetic reforms...History is littered with dictators who have promoted women, from Turkey’s Atatürk, the Iranian Shah, Habib Bourguiba of Tunisia, and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. Appearing to support women has won dictators applause, especially in the west, where women’s rights have become an axis against which to measure nations and evaluate regimes.

Today’s authoritarian regimes will win extra praise when they appear to be liberating Muslim women from the oppression of Islam. Saudi Arabia is no exception. Here, Muslim women are depicted either as survivors of their patriarchal religion or as heroes who are challenging such a dominant and primitive culture. Like their counterparts in Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan and elsewhere, Saudi women had been framed in this binary image. Dictators conveniently depict themselves as liberators of these downtrodden women while society is shown to be the oppressor. In particular, in recent times, Islam and sharia law are portrayed as the cause of women’s suffering.

Such a narrative is appealing to both Arab dictators and certain constituencies in the west. But allowing women to obtain a driving licence is little more than a public relations stunt designed to cement this notion of the Saudi regime as the liberator of women. (See Women are still not in the driving seat in Saudi Arabia)

Al-Rashid is correct in her assessment that Saudi women lives will not transform because of these few changes. However, she also argues that Saudi Royals are following Ataturk, Muhammad Reza Shah and Bourguiba and like them trying to please the West. If she is correct, this is a big change. It may not be a big change for the Saudi women but it is a metamorphosis for the Royals. Saudi Arabia is based on religious nationalism and Ataturk, Muhammad Reza Shah and Bourguiba were enemies of religious nationalism in their countries. These leaders derived their power by standing against the religious conservatives and Shariah while Saudi Royals justify their rule on the basis of Shariah. So, I would argue that the hold of religious nationalism on Saudi Arabia has loosened a bit because of these changes. If Prince Mohammad keeps on (slowly) moving away from religious nationalism, Saudi Arabia will feel the changes in other areas too. One should be thankful for the small mercies.

Women, Religious Extremism and Nationalism

International Civil society Action Network (ICAN) recently published a report on mainstreaming of extremism in Muslim majority countries (MMCs) and its effects on women (See Extremism as Mainstream: Implications for Women, Development & Security in the MENA/Asia Region).

After clarifying that religious extremism is not limited to one religion, the report argues that religious extremism is mainstreaming in many MMCs recently. The following reasons are given for this dangerous development:

• The extremist movements appear to be the ones who care for the young, disenfranchised and unemployed. As states refuse to accept their responsibility, these movements offer answers, values, a sense of community and economic support
• Militarized responses by from Muslim majority states and the West, such as drone attacks, makes these movements and their narrative acceptable and increases their support.
• States in MMCs have grown weaker and the instability and conflict in the MENA region have resulted in power vacuums that extremist groups have used to spread their violent message
• Rich countries and individuals, mainly from Persian Gulf, continue to finance these movements and their regressive social message. People employed in these countries are also influenced by their repressive message
• Modern extremists are adept at using latest technology to their advantage. They are using television and social media to spread their message
• Women are deliberately targeted to limit their civic, legal and political rights. Violence is frequently used to silence women and men speaking against these movements
• Decision-makers at international and national level ignore opposition to the extremist movements and do not openly condemn them as these movements 'have accrued so much political and economic capital'.
• Islam is increasingly being meshed up with nationalism and anti-West/US feelings

Although there is no data provided in the report, there is evidence of mainstreaming of anti-women message. The authors of the report should be applauded for the first two recommendations they give for countering extremism. The relevant section is reproduced below.

Challenging the monopoly of religious authorities over definitions and interpretations of Islamic text: Activists are expanding awareness of Islam and its many interpretations. Recognizing that it is very difficult to de-radicalize youth, these initiatives focus on prevention through education. They aim to disentangle patriarchy and culturally-specific practices that condone violence or the subservience of women from religion. They also attempt to separate fiqh (human constructed texts and interpretations) from the statements of the Qur’an. For example, the Malaysian-based network Musawah uses religious texts and women’s life experiences to deconstruct the idea of male authority and start a new discourse on gender. “Musawah believes that religious authorities and governments do not have the monopoly to define what Islam is and how it should regulate citizens’ lives, in private or in public. In a society where Islam is used a source of law and public policy, everyone has the right to speak out on Islam.”

Infusing rights-based approaches to religious discourse and texts: There are also many ongoing efforts to identify the commonalities between Islamic teachings and values and universal human rights frameworks. Women’s initiatives engage religious scholars and clerics in such discussions to raise awareness of universal human rights norms and dispel notions that human rights are Western and therefore an anathema to Islam. These programs share the roots of plurality and democracy in Islam.

Without using a religious discourse and legitimizing women rights through Islam, it would be difficult to decrease extremism and misogyny. Report also calls for more open support for women movements from international community. This is not surprising as the report is prepared by an international NGO. The important thing, as far as I am concerned, is that international community has to accept that religion/Islam can be pro-women. If it continues to hold its preconceived notions, shared by many Muslim women activists, that Islam is anti-women then it will lose the war against extremists. As the report acknowledges, West has not much legitimacy in the MMCs and international human rights discourse is assumed as a way of the West to colonize Muslims again. Islam has been nationalized and has become an important part of the national identity. Decrying Islam will not help and will be used by extremists to prove that the agenda of pro-women movements is not women but Islam. Therefore, West and Western NGOs have to decide whether they wants to liberate women or they wants to defeat Islam. 

Pakistani Rulers and Council of Islamic Ideology

In states based on religious nationalism, guiding religious discourse and decisions is extremely important for the state. As national identity is based on religion, religious decisions have widespread implications, affecting the economy, social relations and political set-up.

Looking at Iran and Saudi Arabia, we see a religious establishment closely aligned with the state, safeguarding its interests. In Iran, religious establishment controls the state so state interests are well-protected. Since the Revolution, Iranian religious establishment has changed its religious preferences many times keeping in view state needs. Religious establishment has even rejected marjas and Imam Khomeini's own family to protect what it perceives as interests of the state (See Khamenei vs. Khomeini).

Family planning is just one example of prioritization of state needs over religious rules. After Revolution, Imam Khomeini called for more children so that there is a bigger Islamic nation. However, by the end of the 1980s, the state had realized that it cannot cope with the population explosion resulting from this policy. So, the religious establishment changed its stance and started propagating family planning and this resulted in the most successful family planning project in human history.

The election of current Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was another example of how loyalty to the state was preferred over religious credentials. Ali Khamenei was not a Marja or Grand Ayatullah at the time of his election as Supreme Leader and Iranian constitution required the Supreme Leader to be one. The religious establishment had the option of electing a Marja or Grand Ayatollah but it elected Khamenei and went for the more problematic course of amending the constitution to make Khamenei's lesser religious credentials acceptable/legal. 

In Saudi Arabian religious establishment has been so close to the monarchical state that members of the establishment have been called bureaucrats. In the 1990s, when there were protest and misgiving in Saudi Arabia about the presence of the US forces, religious establishment supported the state wholeheartedly. This was the main reason why the state was able to defeat the opposition to its rule and policies. Previously, religious establishment supported state against puritanical Ikhwans in the 1920s despite Ikhwans being very religious. Again, in the 1960s, it supported state when television was first introduced in the kingdom, despite its own misgivings and protests in the kingdom, in which even a prince (nephew of the king) was killed. 

Pakistan is perhaps the only state based on religious nationalism that does not have a religious establishment. There is only one body, Council of Islamic Ideology (CII), of less than twenty members that can be termed as state's representative on matters pertaining to religion. As in the case of the countries discussed above, the purpose of this small religious establishment/CII  is to advise the government on religious injunctions and to vet laws passed by the Parliament. However, as is clear from above, one of the unwritten purposes of the religious establishments is to defend the state policies from an attack from the right. Like in other states based on religious nationalism, CII has largely supported state's decisions, However, more recently, CII  has been ambiguous in supporting state policies. In the last one year, it has given three decisions that are completely at odds with the vision of the state. Following are the decisions in brief:

1. In September, CII decided the DNA cannot be the primary evidence in rape cases (See CII rules out DNA as primary evidence in rape cases). This was completely out of tune with international practice and with the trend of increased protection of women. 
2. In March, CII decided that first wife's permission is not necessary for second marriage. This was a major concession won by Pakistani women back in the 1960s (See First wife's nod for 2nd marriage un-Islamic: Council of Islamic Ideology). No major political party supports this decision. In fact, this issue was not even on the radar of religious parties.
3. Again in March, CII decided that there is no minimum age for marriage. Children can be married at any age. The only issue is the consummation of marriage and that should be delayed until puberty of both parties (See Laws prohibiting underage marriage not Islamic: Council of Islamic Ideology ). This is again a major step backwards. According to CII decision, children can be married in their cribs and marriage can be consummated in early teens. 

Why this is so? And what is the solution?

The recent decisions of the CII can be seen in terms of short-term politics. The CII is currently chaired by Maulana Sherani, who is also the provincial head of Jamiat Ulema Islam-Fazal-ur-Rehman Group (JUI-F) (See CII Chairman Profile). Since the May 2013 elections, JUI-F pressure was rejected by the Federal Government headed by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in at least three areas. First, JUI-F wanted Nawaz Sharif to form a coalition government with them in the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province. Nawaz Sharif rejected their overtures and allowed the majority party, Tehreek-e-Insaf, to form a government in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa. Second, JUI-F wanted to join both the central/federal and Balochistan government. While Nawaz Sharif invited them to join federal government, he accepted the request of Baloch nationalists (heading the coalition government in Balochistan) not to be forced to accept JUI-F as a coalition partner. Finally, Nawaz Sharif didn't give importance to JUI-F chief Fazal-ur-Rehman in his negotiations with Taliban. All these factors might have forced JUI-F to make life difficult for Nawaz Sharif by coming up with such decisions. However, this theory flounders when we take into consideration the fact that three JUI-F members joined the federal cabinet just a month ago (See JUI-F Represented: Three new ministers take oath).

Source: Slice of cake: JUI-F demands share in Balochistan cabinet

A more plausible explanation of what is happening is the change in the chairman's education. Maulana Sherani is only the second person appointed as chairman CII, who does not have a Western styWestern-style Earlier Maulana Kasur Niazi remained chairman CII for only four months in the mid-1990s. However, Maulana Niazi had a much more pluralist outlook and criticized conservative ulema all his life and was in turn criticized by them. So, from 1962 to 2010, when Maulana Sherani became chairman CII was headed by men who were not only scholars of Islam but also had  knowledge of the modern world and requirements of the state. Maulana Sherani was first one to break this trend. 

The next logical question is how Maulana was able to break the trend. The answer lies in the ineptness of the last government. while chairmanship of CII had been used as political largesse to be distributed to supporters before, it was never given before to traditional ulema. This was the first time a traditional alim was made chairman CII and the state and the people of Pakistan will suffer the consequences. 

It's time Pakistani rulers realize that chairman CII is not like the chairman of a steel mill or president of a university. It is a much more important position. Without a religious establishment, this is the only institution that protects the state from any attack from the right or the left. When national identity of  a state is based on religion, it's better for that state and its rulers to give importance to religious institutions. 

Even before these decisions, there were calls to abolish the CII (See DNA Controversy: Abolition of Council of Islamic Ideology demanded). However, as discussed above, state needs CII. A far more easier step and the right step is to appoint such members and chairmen who have a more anti-traditional and pluralist outlook. More women members will definitely decrease the bias and misogyny that one can see in the latest decisions of CII. It is worthwhile to mention that the constitution stipulates that there should be at least one woman member of CII and the only member of present CII died in August last year. So, these decisions are illegal as CII is incomplete according to the Constitution of Pakistan.