Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Monday November 06 2017, @04:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the cleaning-house dept.

Something is definitely going on in Saudi Arabia:

Saudi authorities arrested at least 11 princes, several current ministers and dozens of former ministers in a sweeping move reportedly designed to consolidate power for the son of King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud. According to media reports citing Saudi-owned television network Al Arabiya, an anti-corruption committee ordered the arrests hours after King Salman directed the creation of the committee, headed by his favorite son and adviser, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

The committee was established by the royal decree, The Associated Press reports, "due to the propensity of some people for abuse, putting their personal interest above public interest, and stealing public funds." Billionaire investor Prince Alwaleed bin Talal is among those detained, The Wall Street Journal reports. Alwaleed holds stakes in some of the world's major companies, including Apple and Twitter.

Remember Prince Alwaleed? Bitcoin could outlive him.

It's unclear what those arrested are accused of doing, but Al-Arabiya reported that new investigations into the 2009 Jeddah floods and 2012 MERS virus outbreak have been launched.

Separately, the heads of the Saudi National Guard and Saudi Royal Navy have also been replaced.

BBC notes that the reform faction is in control here:

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says Prince Mohammed is moving to consolidate his growing power while spearheading a reform programme. [...] Prince Mohammed recently said the return of "moderate Islam" was key to his plans to modernise Saudi Arabia. Addressing an economic conference in Riyadh, he vowed to "eradicate the remnants of extremism very soon". Last year, Prince Mohammed unveiled a wide-ranging plan to bring social and economic change to the oil-dependent kingdom.

Some Soylentils have been skeptical of Saudi Arabia's recent moves towards liberalization (some listed below). Has this apparent purge of internal political opposition changed your mind about the viability of these reforms?

Also at NYT and Recode, which notes that the arrest of Prince Alwaleed bin Talal is a potential setback for Saudi Arabia's tech ambitions (Alwaleed has had stakes in Apple, Twitter, and Lyft).

Previously: SoftBank May Sell 25% of ARM to Vision Fund; Chairman Meets With Saudi King
Saudi Arabia, UAE to Donate to Women Entrepreneurs Fund
Saudi Arabia to Lift Ban on Online VoIP and Video Calling Services
Saudi Arabia Will Lift Ban on Women Drivers Next Year
Saudi Arabia Planning $500 Billion Megacity and Business Zone
Robot Granted "Citizenship" in Saudi Arabia, Sparking Backlash
Saudi Arabia Announced Plans to Extract Uranium for Domestic Nuclear Power Program


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @04:27PM (14 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 06 2017, @04:27PM (#593146) Journal

    Some Soylentils have been skeptical of Saudi Arabia's recent moves towards liberalization (some listed below). Has this apparent purge of internal political opposition changed your mind about the viability of these reforms?

    As a whole, it's a positive move. But true liberalization will only happen when the Saud family is replaced by a democracy.

    Let us also keep in mind that the people who are down and out now, may be back in power later (or a revolution may sweep away all the current players). It sounds like we're close to a transition in power (from the death or abdication of King Al Saud), and who ends up on top may be very different from who is on top now.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday November 06 2017, @04:36PM (2 children)

    by Sulla (5173) on Monday November 06 2017, @04:36PM (#593153) Journal

    Also in the news is the helicopter that was supposedly shot down by Yemen and being blamed on Iran. One of the princes died in the crash.

    --
    Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
    • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday November 06 2017, @06:28PM (1 child)

      by Thexalon (636) on Monday November 06 2017, @06:28PM (#593222)

      Given ongoing hostilities between Saudi Arabia and Yemen, that story is at least plausible. Or it's possible that the king sent said prince to a known dangerous location in the hopes that he might get killed off by the enemy, even if he didn't actually arrange for him to be killed.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 2) by choose another one on Tuesday November 07 2017, @10:57AM

        by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 07 2017, @10:57AM (#593593)

        Also possible said prince was trying to skip the country and was stopped, hard, with Yemen / Iran being an awfully convenient way to point the blame. I doubt we'll ever know.

        What is clear is that being a Saudi royal has suddenly become awfully tricky and probably a lot less fun. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people.

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @04:47PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @04:47PM (#593158)

    They should not try to go too fast or too far.

    For one thing, if they allow women into stadiums now, they should separate the men and women sections, and have separate entrances for both. The women will thank you.

    • (Score: 2) by driverless on Tuesday November 07 2017, @03:18AM

      by driverless (4770) on Tuesday November 07 2017, @03:18AM (#593434)

      They should not try to go too fast or too far.

      Exactly. It's one thing to let women ride on the inside of the bus, but not requiring homosexuals to wear blue hats might be a step too far.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by looorg on Monday November 06 2017, @04:58PM (2 children)

    by looorg (578) on Monday November 06 2017, @04:58PM (#593163)

    Some Soylentils have been skeptical of Saudi Arabia's recent moves towards liberalization (some listed below). Has this apparent purge of internal political opposition changed your mind about the viability of these reforms?

    I'm less certain this is anything positive about this or a move towards liberalism. I think this is the usual or some normal "Game of Thrones" like schemes where all the royalties and pretenders are trying to off or outmaneuver each other to attain, more, power.

    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @05:28PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @05:28PM (#593178)

      The crackdown is from the king. And the people he's cracking down on are some of the most egregiously corrupt individuals. And he's privatizing the country's oil resources. I also remain cynical, but only because it's Saudi Arabia. Outside of my own personal biases, all evidence directly supports the stated purpose of these actions.

      And, I don't think many people appreciate the Saudi system of succession. There are currently 15,000 [economist.com] living highnesses and royal highnesses. And those are people with direct lineage from the king. Start adding in cousins and increasingly distant connections and you probably have hundreds of thousands of players. Gotta remember the whole have 30 wives and 100 children trick. It multiplies fast. The Al Saud sequence own the Fibonacci sequence. In spite of regular succession and even an occasional critical event, anything on this scale is completely unprecedented. So again, I think the onus of arguing why this is not what it seems is on the people making such claims - even if they're the one naturally want to believe as it certainly confirms our own biases.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @06:24PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 06 2017, @06:24PM (#593219) Journal

      I'm less certain this is anything positive about this or a move towards liberalism. I think this is the usual or some normal "Game of Thrones" like schemes where all the royalties and pretenders are trying to off or outmaneuver each other to attain, more, power.

      I guess that depends on whether you think an increase (slight, but still an increase) in personal freedom as part of these games is a move towards liberalism or not. Some people don't, choosing instead an imaginary "communal" freedom [soylentnews.org].

  • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by bob_super on Monday November 06 2017, @05:44PM (3 children)

    by bob_super (1357) on Monday November 06 2017, @05:44PM (#593190)

    > But true liberalization will only happen when the Saud family is replaced by a democracy.

    True economic progress will only come to China when the PCC is replaced by a democracy, for sure.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @06:02PM (2 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 06 2017, @06:02PM (#593203) Journal
      Is there a reason you chose to conflate liberalization with economic progress?
      • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday November 06 2017, @06:44PM (1 child)

        by bob_super (1357) on Monday November 06 2017, @06:44PM (#593234)

        Am I conflating those two, or pointing out that undemocratic rulers can deliver benefits for their people in ways our propaganda doesn't predict?

        • (Score: 2, Touché) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @07:09PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 06 2017, @07:09PM (#593254) Journal

          Am I conflating those two, or pointing out that undemocratic rulers can deliver benefits for their people in ways our propaganda doesn't predict?

          Conflating. Else you would have written something different in the first place. Economic progress is very different from liberalization. You can have a great deal of economic progress in an authoritarian government - numerous countries have shown how (Japan, China, Taiwan, etc). You can't have a great deal of liberalization, that is freedom, in an authoritarian government by definition. True liberalization requires the political freedom of democracy.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by HiThere on Monday November 06 2017, @05:58PM (1 child)

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 06 2017, @05:58PM (#593201) Journal

    Sorry, but when there's a lot of power concentrated together in one place, the elimination of potential rivals to the top post isn't exactly "liberalism". It's being portrayed as such, and that's a good PR move, and may indicate the potential for an "enlightened monarch", but the politics looks like "get rid of my rivals for power".

    As to what it actually means, I'm going to wait for actual changes before deciding. This isn't exactly either a hopeful or a disastrous sign. To me this is a sign that normal monarchy politics is going on. Read your MacBeth and understand that that was a historical novel. The actual events took place over a span of around 20 years, but it's a page from Scots history. Richard III is a play that Shakespeare wrote to whitewash a particularly nasty piece of political maneuvering that had taken place a generation or so earlier. Etc. (Nobody really knows what Richard III looked like, or whether he was particularly vile. He could have been, or that could just have been propaganda.) Even regicide by the crown prince isn't that uncommon. And it doesn't mean that the new monarch will be either good or bad as far as his actions towards the populace of the country...though if he's blatant it means he'll be needing to put down a bit of extra unrest.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 06 2017, @06:08PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 06 2017, @06:08PM (#593209) Journal

      Sorry, but when there's a lot of power concentrated together in one place, the elimination of potential rivals to the top post isn't exactly "liberalism".

      Nor did I say it was. My view is that the actual liberalization, things like allowing women to drive, is more likely to stick if it's being done in conjunction with a successful transfer of power to the next generation of rulers.