| UK's troubled ties with Saudi Arabia under growing strain |
The relationship between London and Riyadh is valued by both sides but often involves trade-offs between realism and principle
Britain’s relations with Saudi Arabia are based on extensive business and investment links, including defence sales and a secretive security connection that is routinely cited as vital by the UK government – especially when public opinion hones in on the Gulf country’s strict legal system.
The case of Karl Andree, 74, who may face a public flogging for possessing homemade wine, is one of those calculated to set the stiffest of Foreign Office upper lips quivering. Combined, coincidentally, with news of a cabinet row over a now cancelled contract to provide advice to the Saudi prison system, it throws a harsh and officially unwelcome spotlight on the often troubled ties between London and Riyadh.
In bilateral terms, it is a relationship that is valued by both sides. Saudi Arabia is Britain’s primary trading partner in the Middle East; 200 joint ventures are worth $17.5bn (£11.5bn); some 30,000 UK nationals live and work in the kingdom. It is also Britain’s largest arms market by far, receiving almost £4bn from sales between May 2010 and March 2015.
Internationally, Saudi Arabia has the world’s second largest proven oil reserves and occupies a strategic position that has made it a vital partner for the US and other western countries for decades. In its current assertive mood, it is locked in confrontation with its regional rival Iran, leading a controversial military campaign in neighbouring Yemen as well as backing rebels fighting the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad.
It is also, despite recent changes, an absolute monarchy where local elections are a novelty and women are still officially banned from driving. Its sharia judicial system imposes harsh punishments – including beheadings, stoning, crucifixions and lashing – on its own citizens. The case of Raif Badawi, a liberal blogger, has attracted global condemnation. Feelings can run even higher when non-Saudis are in trouble.
Every few years UK-Saudi relations are rocked by scandal. In 1980 the British TV documentary, Death of a Princess, based on the true story of a princess and her lover who were publicly executed for adultery, led the Saudis to expel the British ambassador and impose sanctions.
In 2006 the Saudi government threatened to end cooperation with Britain unless the serious fraud office dropped its investigation into BAE Systems over the al-Yamamah arms deal.
It was shelved by Tony Blair on national security grounds. David Cameron alluded to the same argument recently when asked about UK willingness to rock the Saudi boat over the planned execution of Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr, sentenced for allegedly taking part in a protest when he was 17. “It’s because we receive from them important intelligence and security information that keeps us safe,” the prime minister told Jon Snow on Channel 4.
The Saudis rarely, if ever, give ground. On the Nimr sentence, its London embassy flatly rejected “any form of interference” in the kingdom’s internal affairs, and insisted that its judiciary was independent. The same arguments are doubtless being used in the Andree case, which was being handled discreetly until the family decided to speak out.
British politicians are starting to understand that the public is less instinctively deferential, or less pragmatic, than the government and media.
MPs made a big leap forward two years ago when the all-party foreign affairs committee (FAC) published a report on UK relations with Saudi Arabia – despite a warning from the embassy of “negative consequences” for bilateral relations. And in January, when Prince Charles travelled to Riyadh, as did Cameron, to pay their respects following the death of King Abdullah, there was angry criticism of the decision to fly flags at half-mast on public buildings in London.
The FAC captured the essence of the problem. It saw huge opportunities for British business. But it also honed in on Saudi Arabia’s “very poor” human rights record.
“The absence of civil and political rights and the use of extreme punishments with inadequate judicial safeguards remain of deep concern, as do the rights of women and minorities,” it said.
“Democratic governments such as the UK face a challenge in trying to reconcile their liberal constituencies at home with the need to maintain relationships with undemocratic and conservative regimes that are important to our interests on a regional and global level.”
On counter-terrorism, Saudi Arabia was “a vital but complicated partner”, but it was “also part of the problem”. Care had to be taken to ensure that it did not fund organisations with an extremist message,” MPs warned. There are signs that situation has improved with the alarming rise of Isis and terrorist attacks inside the kingdom.
Jeremy Corbyn, the new Labour leader, has highlighted concerns over the Nimr case.
But there are critical voices on the other side of parliament. Andrew Mitchell, the former conservative international development secretary, publicly attacked the Saudi role in Yemen.
The prisons row between Philip Hammond, the foreign secretary, and a “naive” Michael Gove, the lord chancellor, represents another clash between realism and principle in a relationship where it looks increasingly difficult to conduct business as usual.
| HAVE YOUR SAY!!! - What do you think about this story? Tell us here. |
|
