Saudi Arabia comes in for constant critical reporting in the US and UK, as well as the new media. Search the blogs on Saudi Arabia and see how many are pro-, con-, or as I hope this one to be, neutral.

Ex: Ali al-Dumaini, Dr. Matruk al-Falih and Dr. Abdullah al-Hamid

They have also arrested al Quwai’i for his thoughts ! but saudi does not make the front pages of most papers because of their oil .

Are you serious ? one of the worst if you ask me and im an arab and muslim . but because of the special relationship with the US , the media does not put them in the spotlight .

Today 21/06/06
they have arrested a lawyer , who has already served a year in jail for simply contacting Al Jazeera and airing his view about Al Zarqaoui .

They do not want a prosperous, educated, powerful middle class who might wish to gain power and the Royals will therefore not favor modernity to any large extent. Any reform now is likely a balancing act against the Ulema, who have become very influential and problematic.

You note that the king has to follow constraints to maintain his position. Well, it’s a funny thing, but very few people actually play “King for a Day”. They intend to have long reigns. Doing things which would end their reigns abruptly are generally not in the plans.

While there may be some logic in assuming a plan to send troublemakers abroad, it lacks evidence. It’s particularly difficult to sustain when the new king, Abdullah, is doing exactly what you prescribe: teach youths about difference in cult and culture. His awarding 10K scholarships for study abroad, his opening discourse with both Shi’a and Sufi, with his acknowledgement of regional differences within the country are all steps in the right direction. But he has to fight to get those through, against the opposition who are sure that there’s no merit in anything outside the borders or outside the Quran. Do take a look at the materials that are filling the pages of the Saudi papers. There’s a real war going on, with the government on the side of modernity and tolerance.

The King of Nepal after he had dismissed the parliament had similar powers. There was no legal oversight of his actions when he ordered troops to fire upon the demonstrators.

You are correct it is not inconcievable that appointed officials may choose to defy those that have appointed them, I understand that members of the electoral colleges change sides during Americas presidential elections – not often though.

1. Other family members
2. The Ulema
3. Tribal interests
4. Major business families
6. The Council of Ministers
7. The Shoura Council
8. Increasingly, public opinion

Several of these can be played off each other–sometimes–but they can’t all be ignored simultaneously. The powers of the (appointed) Shoura Council are expanding. They are not yet a fully-empowered parliament, but they do have a voice on the budget and the promulgation of laws.

The Shoura Council is also being expanded (most recently, to 120 members) taking in broader cross-sections of society.

Besides, just because a committee or commission is “appointed” doesn’t mean necessarily that it follows the lead of whomever did the appointing. Unless you’re suggesting that somehow Saudi groups don’t act the same way.

Can find reference only to a consultative council appointed by his royal highness.

Although in theory hrh is constrained by the will of God as expressed through the prophet (pbuh) and defined in Sharia, it is unclear how direct an interest God takes in the affairs of state. And the reliance on the clergy on hrh for funding may allow for an open interpretation of that will if it benefits hrh benefits the clergy.