Kuwaiti ‘royal
family’ trying to mend a bursting dam with sticky tape
By Khalil
Osman
Like autocratic
rulers everywhere, nothing is more loathsome to Kuwait’s
‘royal’ family than accountability. Another mainstay
of autocratic rule is a determination to avoid relinquishing
key positions of power. The recent resignation of the
cabinet of crown prince and prime minister Sa’ad al-’Abdallah
al-Sabah is a case in point.
On February
4, just one week after accepting their resignation,
Kuwait’s Emir Shaykh Jaber al-Ahmad al-Sabah asked the
crown prince to form a new cabinet. In this way the
Emir put an end to speculation that he was going to
give the premiership to the crown prince’s arch-rival,
Shaykh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah. The 72-year-old Sa’ad,
who is ailing, has already lead ten successive Kuwaiti
governments since he was first named crown prince in
1978.
The Emir
had a week earlier accepted the cabinet’s resignation.
Sa’ad, justified the move as being prompted by "obstacles
hindering the government’s functioning." This was
seen as an indirect reference to longstanding internal
differences that have reduced the cabinet to an arena
for political in-fighting between rival branches of
the ‘royal family’. Many members of parliament have
long argued that lack of harmony within the cabinet
is responsible for governmental inaction, thus hindering
the proper functioning of the various branches of government,
including the legislative branch. For instance, the
rifts plaguing the cabinet are believed to have been
responsible for its inability to tackle an economic
slow-down that has gripped oil-rich Kuwait despite a
sharp increase in state revenues.
The main
rift is between the two senior branches of the ruling
family, one is headed by the Emir and his brother Shaykh
Sabah, the other by their cousin, crown prince Sa’ad.
The rift is aggravated by the absence of a definite
rule governing the succession. Usually the two or three
members of the Emir’s immediate family with the strongest
personalities become rivals for the throne. The health
problems of Shaykh Sa’ad during the last three years
have also intensified the rivalry between the two branches.
In 1997 the crown-prince spent seven months outside
Kuwait for colon surgery.
The latest
political crisis came about when the foreign minister,
Shaykh Sabah, resigned during a regular weekly cabinet
meeting. A dispute is reported to have arisen between
the two arch-rivals, after which the foreign minister
declared that he no longer wanted to remain in office.
Sabah’s resignation encouraged other ministers present
to announce their intention to quit. Sa’ad wanted to
avoid a crisis and reportedly tried to dissuade them
but they were firm. When they insisted, he said he would
convey their wishes to the Emir.
But for
justice minister Sa’ad al-Hashel the resignations came
at the best time. They saved him from parliamentary
interrogation over the closure of several investigations,
including some into corruption. Just one day before
the cabinet’s resignation, legislator Hussein al-Qallaf
had tabled a motion summoning him to face questioning
in the legislature. There were also rumours that other
cabinet ministers were about to be summoned for parliamentary
cross-examination.
The fact
that the resignations came shortly after Qallaf’s motion
led to speculation that they were a manoeuvre to avoid
Hashel’s being questioned in public. In the past, moves
to take cabinet members to task have repeatedly occasioned
similar political crises. The most recent incident was
in March 1998, when the cabinet was reshuffled to avoid
a no-confidence vote in then-information minister and
outgoing oil-minister Shaykh Sa’ud Nasser al-Sabah.
Meanwhile,
a growing chorus of voices, ranging from the country’s
liberals to the Islamic Salafi movement, have been calling
for fundamental political reforms. Foremost among these
reforms is the separation between the posts of crown
prince and prime minister. One such call was issued
by member of parliament Walid al-Tabataba’i of the Salafi
movement, who was quoted by al-Qabas (February
5, 2001) daily as saying, "The prime minister is
supposed to be different from the crown prince, and
the first must be changed every four years." Combining
the two key posts of crown prince and prime minister
has been a political tradition since Kuwait introduced
a parliamentary system in 1962.
Tabataba’i
also criticised the reservation of "key ministerial
posts for members of the ruling family." Members
of the al-Sabah dynasty have taken for themselves several
government posts, including the foreign, interior, defence
and finance portfolios as well as the governorship of
the central bank. Most notably, Tabataba’i condemned
the government for failing to pursue the formally declared
state policy of bringing all legislation into line with
the Shari’ah. This is a policy commitment that is anchored
in the country’s history. Upon coming to the throne
in 1921, Shaykh Ahmad al-Jabir al-Sabah pledged to abide
by the final decision of the ulama in all disputed legal
cases.
But the
secretary-general of the Salafi movement, Hakim al-Mutayri,
wrote an article in al-Ra’i al-’Am daily (February 5,
2001) in which he called for "implementing a true
democratic system in Kuwait, similar to the one practised
by civilized nations"; "the problem stems
from the inability of the Kuwaiti people to effectively
choose their government, and their inability to hold
it accountable when it fails," Mutayri added.
The Emir’s
decree has, for the time being, resolved the issue of
the powers of the crown prince in accordance with the
"traditional practice" of giving the prime
minister’s job to the heir apparent. But it is expected
that the foreign minister will play a major role not
only in appointing ministers to form a more cohesive
cabinet but also in making important decisions in the
new government. Like misers with a fortune to dispense,
the ruling family is reportedly looking into constitutional
and legal bases whereby Shaykh Sa’ad would formally
and publicly delegate government matters to Shaykh Sabah.
This is a different arrangement from the one worked
out in 1999, in which Shaykh Sabah was given only a
verbal mandate, an arrangement that paved the way for
incessant petty internal feuds as the arch-rivals accused
each other of violating the terms of the bargain. Outgoing
defence minister Shaykh Salem al-Sabah, who belongs
to Shaykh Sa’ad’s branch of the family, has asked not
to be included in the new cabinet. This suggests that
the political bloodletting between the two senior branches
of al-Sabah is being won gradually by the Emir’s branch.
The new
government will face the challenge of a number of long-promised
reforms, including passing laws to privatise the country’s
state-dominated economy, allowing direct foreign investment,
and introducing taxes, thus gradually extricating the
state from the country’s cradle-to-grave welfare system.
These are not small changes: they could fundamentally
change the character of the Kuwaiti "rentier state,"
a state with a one-sided economy based on external rent-income,
the government assuming the dual role of the most important
collector and the biggest distributor of that revenue.
This allows the state to be "independent"
of taxation from its own citizens, who are expected
to lower their demands for political participation in
return for access to the state’s financial largesse.
As in
other Gulf Arab countries, the basis of the Kuwaiti
system is the buying off of popular discontent. Income
from oil-sales accounts for more than 80 percent of
government income. Citizens have grown accustomed to
government handouts. Extricating the state from the
welfare system could well herald the erosion of its
dominant role as the almost exclusive source of economic
and social power. This is the cause of the reluctance
of consecutive governments to implement the numerous
bills on privatization, foreign investment and trade
liberalization that have been passed by parliament since
the end of the Iraqi occupation.
So the
continual political bloodletting is not likely to be
resolved by the formation of the new cabinet. The consequent
atmosphere of political instability and crisis is expected
to linger. The question is how long Kuwait can continue
to muddle through its labyrinth of growing social and
economic difficulties, spiralling political crises and
escalating palace intrigues. Kuwait really needs a much
more radical shake-up than a reshuffle of the same old
royal faces.
|