INSTITUTIONALIZING THE SALAFI THOUGHTS BY THE STATE: THE SAUDI SALAFISM AS A CASE.

• Author: Rached, Kardo

1. Introduction

   Salafism has been a cornerstone for many past and current Sunni Islamic movements. Its ideology and political thought garnered massive attention among Middle Eastern researchers after September 11. Before those attacks, research mainly focused on different Islamic groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Nahda movement in Tunisia, but afterwards greatly expanded its lens in terms of the groups studied and its geographic focus.

   In this research, we identify the structure and fundamentals of Salafism's organizing political thought by looking at Salafism in Saudi Arabia. We chose Salafism in Saudi Arabia as our case study because modern Salafism's history and its roots go back to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab's Aqida (Islamic theology), which originated in now Saudi Arabia between 1703 and 1792 (Figure 1). Many Islamic religious leaders and scholars consider Abd al-Wahab as the father of modern Salafism (Khatab 2011). He also signed a religious-political agreement with Muhammad bin Saud to establish the Emirate of Diriyah, the first Saudi state. That deal between them resulted in a dynastic alliance and power-sharing arrangement between their families that still exists in Saudi Arabia today (Hourani 1992: 257-259).

   Our goal in this research is to grasp the influence of Saudi decision-makers on the Salafist movement's institutionalization and the crystallization of its political views, in part by reviewing definitions of the decision-making process and its determinants. In our study, we focus on the Saudi state's internal and external decision-making determinants. Moreover, through its decision-making process, we learn how the Saudi state could contain the movement and use it to influence foreign and domestic actors.

   Then we attempt, in chronological order, to shed light on the interdependence/interrelationship between the Saudi state (led by the family of Saud) and the Salafist movement (represented by the Wahhabi movement), especially after the Second World War. We chose this date is because of the emergence on the international stage of the independent Saudi state. In 1945, a public meeting took place between US President Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz bin Saud, which is usually seen when Saudi Arabia emerged onto the world stage.

   The post-Arab Spring era resulted in gaps in the concepts and interpretations of the Salafist movement, its histories, and orientations. In Tunisia and Egypt, intense debates arose among politicians and academics about Salafism, democracy, and the modern State. Those gaps became unmanageable when groups claiming the mantle of Salafism emerged in Egypt and Tunisia's political arenas and participated in parliamentary elections. For example, in Egypt, the newly-created Al-Nour Party was viewed as part of the Salafist movement when it participated in the 2011 post-Mubarak election, winning 22% of the seats in parliament. Before the Arab-Spring, Salafist figure Emad Eddine Abdel-Ghaffour, who became a leading organizer within Al-Nour, refused to talk about politics and denied any attempt to engage in politics in the name of Salafism, but clearly changed his approach following the Arab Spring (Insight & Analysis 2012).

   From this standpoint mentioned above, we classify the Salafist movement, its political views and its deals with the State. The questions that we try to answer can be formulated as follows: How did the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia deal with the Salafist movement? What are the effects of dealing with the Salafist movement's thoughts and political views? To what extent were Saudi decision-makers able to influence this movement's political opinions and behaviors?

   Regarding the methodology of our paper, We first attempt to explain the political decision-making process in Saudi Arabia and the elements involved in forming decisions by analyzing the history of the interrelationship between the state and the Salafist movement. This analysis led to the beginning of the institutionalization of Salafist thought by King Faisal after World War II to use against his opponents, primarily the nationalists and the Nasserites. The relationship between them became healthy and robust until the beginning of Kuwait's occupation by Iraq and the issuance of the famous fatwa by the Council of senior scientists that allowed foreign forces to be present in the Kingdom.

   We rely on the historical-analytical approach as a methodology for this research. Through this approach, I try to analyze the positions and variables of the Salafist movement's political views in Saudi Arabia. How did the Kingdom deal with that movement?

2. Part one: decision-making process in the Saudi monarchy

   The decision-making process in Saudi Arabia will be addressed from two different perspectives:

   2.1. Units/factors involved in Saudi decision-making

   In this part of the research, we try to highlight the processes involved in Saudi society's political decision-making process. We must define the decision-making process before exploring the units upon which Saudi decision-makers are building their decisions. From an academic perspective, the definition of the decision-making process can be explained in this way:

   "Decision-making is defined as a process of choosing between a set of alternatives to deal with a problem or a solution to it by a group of persons, bodies or institutions, and the decision-making is expanded according to the political system of the state (Shahrour 2013)." While Yan Xing has a more coherent definition,

   decision-making refers to the process in which management subjects such as the government or the main political parties specify and select the action plan, and it is the process of selecting the direction, objectives, principles, methods, and steps of the problem. Political decision-making is the process of comparing and selecting the implementing principles, and approaches, and methods to achieve the goals in which a country's political parties, political leader, or leadership conducts practical activities for the purpose, principles, and direction of activities. The process of political decision-making is a dynamic political process related to the formation and implementation of national, political and social interest groups (Yan 2015). According to Waleed Abdulhay, there are two broad explanations for how Gulf monarchies make decisions (Figure 2 and 3): one using internal determinants and relying on external determinants (Abdulhay et al. 2010: 35).

   The internal determinants of Saudi Arabian decision-making consist of the following mechanisms (Abdulhay et al. 2010: 147-226):

1. The King: His role is dominant and central in the decision-making process. He is the Imam (religious leader), the military commander, and the judge of judges. Thus, we focus on the King as the highest executive, legislative, and judicial authority.

2. The ruling family council Conducts discussions on the most critical internal and external issues. The King has the final decision to resolve differences that arise.

3. The religious institution: Consisting of the Council of Senior Scholars, it expresses the traditional Salafist/scientific understanding and represents Islam as one of the fundamental ideological frameworks of the state. Since its establishment, the Kingdom's founder has benefited from the Wahhabi group, commonly referred to as the "Brothers" or Brothers of the Faithful"--a fanatical religious group whose goal is to impose the correct interpretation of Islam and use its war against its enemies.

4. Tribal sheiks: According to Yousef Mekki, the tribes are considered the Saudi state's social base. At the foundation of the Saudi state, King Saud established the National Guard using members of different tribes.

5. Army leaders: They are the protectors and servants of the two holy mosques in Mecca and Medina. The army commanders are considered mechanisms for protecting the King and the regime.

   The external determinants include:

1. Mecca and Medina: The Saudi state is central to Muslims because of the two holy mosques.

2. The Saudi-US Oil Alliance: This alliance is embodied by the largest oil company in the Middle East, Saudi Aramco.

   2.2. Solidarity

   Khaldoun Hassan Al-Naqib argues that the Saudi state's sovereign decisionmaking process is organized through solidarity. The regime tries to establish solidarity among the Gulf countries to find backing and support for its social and economic policies. Through these solidarity attempts, social forces express themselves through individual heads of state or specific recognition by the state.

   The independence of the authoritarian State upon the corporations in the Gulf and the Arab Peninsula environment, and in the absence of parties representing the populace and of social systems facilitating national fusion, necessarily lead to the...