A Mideast rivalry worth watching

Iran and Saudi Arabia now have reformist leaders bent on granting certain liberties that appeal to young people. That sort of contest of ideas is far better than their violent rivalry in regional conflicts.

AP Photo
Saudi entrepreneur Manar Alomayri, a partner of Dhad Audio Publishing, stands in front of her stand as a part of the STEP Music Conference in April in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

At the heart of many Middle East conflicts lies a fierce rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The two compete for influence as countries, as oil giants, and, most of all, as self-proclaimed guardians of Islam. Yet over the past year, each has also entered a new kind of rivalry, one that is peaceful, perhaps even healthy in possibly setting a model. Both now have leaders eager to win over young people with fundamental reform.

For Saudis, that leader is Mohammed bin Salman, the deputy crown prince who is barely over 30. He wields much of the power in the ruling monarchy and last year set out a strategy called “Vision 2030.” Among other reforms, the plan calls for a more open society and big investments in a non-oil economy that emphasizes innovation, mining, and tourism (such as building a Six Flags theme park and perhaps a “museum of ice cream”).

For Iranians, the leader is President Hassan Rouhani, elected as a reformer in 2013 and now competing to be reelected in a May 19 election that is tightly controlled by the ruling Muslim clerics. He has slightly improved the economy and struck a nuclear deal with the West that weakens sanctions on Iran. In December, he issued a “Charter of Citizens’ Rights” that emphasizes freedom of speech and assembly, a right to access information, and a clean environment. In a speech last month, Mr. Rouhani said, “Are not the people the owners of this country? Shouldn’t the people be supervising the government...?”

In both Iran and Saudi Arabia, more than 60 percent of the population is under 30 years old. This youth bulge is restless from high unemployment and a widening exposure to foreign culture. Young people are eager to challenge traditional authority and even interpret religion in their own way. As historian and journalist Christopher de Bellaigue writes in a new book, “The Islamic Enlightenment: The Modern Struggle Between Faith and Reason,” ideas about the value of the individual, rule of law, and representative government “are now authentic features of Islamic thought and society.”

Both Rouhani and Mohammed bin Salman are struggling against religious conservatives, who remain powerful either in government or in society. In Saudi Arabia, however, clerics who once monitored social behavior have been mostly subdued. Young people are being given access to live music concerts, some with female performers. In February, the country sponsored Comic-Con, a three-day festival about fictional heroes that saw a mixing of young men and women.

In his speech, Rouhani said the government has no “legitimate meaning” unless the people are “satisfied” with their leaders. “All people, regardless of their sex, religion, tribe, or political thought must be equal before the courts and the law, and have the same rights,” he said. Such words are a far cry from the current doctrine of an unelected Muslim ayatollah as supreme leader.

Since 2014, as world oil prices have fallen and Iran suffered from sanctions, each country has had to cut spending yet also appease a rising cohort of youth. Iran saw massive protests in 2009 over election fraud while Saudis saw some unrest during the 2011 Arab Spring. Reformist leaders are now more popular. And among each country’s hardline factions, they are more tolerated in hopes of fending off unrest. 

Most of all, young people are watching the reform efforts in each other’s country. Whichever country begins to make the reform ideas real – and that is still uncertain – can claim a new kind of leadership of ideas among Muslims. Perhaps that will then lessen their rivalry with weapons in Middle East conflicts.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.