Land without justice

These are neither facts nor truths. Just information, passed on by the offices of faith. For, in Saudi Arabia, justice is strictly unilateral, secretive and frighteningly medieval. It is the sharia, though it is disputable whether the prophet had ever sanctioned such punishments as lashing, beheading and amputation.

It is theology, and in Saudi Arabia, it is inseparable from statecraft. So the ongoing face-off between Britain and the desert kingdom goes beyond the realm of diplomacy. In the words of the Saudi envoy in London, 8220;we are not going to change our system to appease bleeding heart liberals.8221; Britain8217;s choice is limited and practical: save the nurses, stop all that enlightened talk on the system.

Very wise indeed. No more browbeating rhetoric on economic sanctions. It is plain bargain now. Britain cares for its citizens. Britain also cares for its defence contracts with Saudi Arabia. It is a fine balance between human interest and business interest. Since the nurses8217; case has become a national outburst for fairness and justice and British diplomacy is singularly pointed towards saving the nurses without upsetting the system, at the end of it all there may be no lashing and no beheading.

A little mercy from the executioner, a giant victory for a caring nation. Is it a case of the executioner being partial to the white man? No, the white governments care for their citizens whenever they are unfairly punished in lands without justice. Here there is a lesson or two for the former colonies.But the system still remains, a sprawling pause between modernity and medievalism. A kingdom veiled in national schizophrenia. The material might of Saudi Arabia is directly proportional to the antique terror it unleashes on the deviants. The House of Saud keeps its own legitimacy by banning any political activity, restricting free speech and gagging the Press. In terms of Islamic fundamentalism, King Fahd8217;s regime is perhaps second only to Afghanistan.

But Saudi Arabia is strategically significant and its oil wells are overflowing. So it has no place in enlightened America8217;s demonology, which is entirely devoted to Iran. In such a scenario the dissent comes from the wrong sections mullahs who are more fundamentalist than the king. They express their anger against a regime which has struck a Faustian deal with the white shaitan through bombs. The paradox: the idea of the alternative makes the House of Saud the kingdom8217;s redeemer. Let the king be the revolutionary, not the mullah in the basement.