I hope that the readers will notice that in the following paragraphs, I am not praising nor expressing my support for Saudi Arabia. Instead, I am criticizing the other side and attempting to uncover the falseness of their claims. Like any other professional journalist, I have news sources that range from direct contact with officials, all the way to Western newspapers and think-tanks, and official Western websites, mostly in English by virtue of my residence in London. One of the single largest dossiers at my office pertains to Saudi Arabia, due to the fact that it is the land of the Two Holy Mosques as well as a political and energy powerhouse. In recent weeks, I noticed that the news on Saudi Arabia began to take an odd turn, and in the weekend, I went over the news that had accumulated in my office for over a month or so, and opted to present what I found to the readers. My Western sources published ordinary news such as the story on Saudi Arabia lifting its ban on importing Jordanian agricultural products, or that Saudi Arabia plans to build 16 nuclear plants, and a debate regarding the amendment of Saudi marriage laws. There was also a warning that the proposed restrictions on foreign workers will harm the Saudi economy, and that the Saudi tourism sector intends to attract Saudis to stimulate the sector. There were many news stories of this kind, and these are ordinary and do not raise any questions. However, what I found to be extremely odd after this was that the news about women driving in Saudi Arabia was double in number compared to news stories about oil – although the period in question had included a meeting for OPEC in Vienna, which saw a dispute among its members, and a Saudi decision to increase oil output to curb price increases and the effects this has on the world economy. I read that Saudi production would be in the range of 10 million barrels a day this month. Since that increase, prices fell by 2.5 percent. Nonetheless, the news about women driving remained more significant. The news on women driving surpassed the political news on the official Saudi position on the Arab revolutions of rage. I do not need to take the Arab readers back to the story of how the young Saudi woman Manal Sharif defied the ban on women driving cars, and how she was arrested then released a few days later, as everyone knows what happened. Personally, I support women driving cars, and was never convinced of the arguments of those who oppose it. Women driving cars cannot possibly be worse than Saudi men driving. I would also like to remind the readers that a group of Saudi women led by Aisha al-Manna drove cars in downtown Riyadh during the Kuwait liberation war, and were arrested and then bailed out by their parents. I remember that Aisha, who is an Arab activist, was banned from travel before having this ban lifted later. Why have a thousand news stories, analyses, and reports not been written about the 1990-1991 movement, while now, one single woman driving her car has become the focus of the interest of many a Western newspaper, think-tank and government? (Every single London-based newspaper published in the weekend news and photos about this topic, as though it was as important as the threat by British trade unions to strike in protest of the deteriorating economy). I link all the above to the political situation. Saudi Arabia has survived a revolution of rage, and the protests were extremely limited. This does not suit Israel and the American Likudnik media and lobby, because Saudi Arabia wields large influence across the world. It is the land of the Two Holy Mosques, and is the world's largest producer and exporter of oil. Saudi Arabia has a lot of sway, and so it is better to have its regime being threatened as is the case in many Arab countries, so that the religious, political and economic influence of Saudi Arabia declines. Thus, the so-called revolution in Saudi Arabia becomes epitomized by a young woman behind the driving wheel, or is a counter-revolution. I read headlines such as “American-Saudi competition intensifies”, “Will the Saudis kill the Arab Spring?” or “Arab spring tests US-Saudi relationship”, and also “Saudi Arabia under siege” – but I did not understand who is besieging it. I also read an article describing King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz as a dictator, and if this is true, then I am Hulagu Khan. The article's author is Joshua Norman of the CBS network, which makes me tend to believe that he is probably a Likudnik. The well-known Likudnik Max Boot wrote in the magazine Commentary, which is aligned with Likud, and asked the Obama administration to pressure Saudi Arabia to reform to prevent an explosion, as though America is the Arabs' guardian. I also read an article entitled “Saudi Arabia's no good, very bad year”, but I say that it is a very bad year for the pro-Israeli think-tank that released this article, because the storms of Arab rage have skipped Saudi Arabia. [email protected]
