Fighting for Women's Rights in Saudi Arabia & the rest of the Mideast

I know Saudi Arabia is our close aquaintance that we bregrudily have to rely on for the time being until we don't have to rely on them anymore.I was thinking about how women in Saudi Arabia are stepping out and started driving regardless of the ban against it.I think America and a lot of other nations should be more open about criticizing Saudi Arabia's horrid treatment to their women.I think maybe America should start drilling for our own oil here so when we get to the point when we're self sufficient we can be more able to critize Saudi Arabia without reprucussions.Even before we do that we need more organizations that fight for women's rights in Saudia Arabia.

Yes, women's rights movements in the Muslim world should be extensively supported. The secular world cannot (and should not) compete with muslim birthrates. To avoid being subjected to islamic law, Islamism must be killed dead.

Self-preservation dictates that modern, secular, muzzie-in-name-only Islam should enjoy full support from the Western world whenever it clashes against Islamism.

edited 1st Jul '11 11:10:37 AM by SavageHeathen

Hi, I live in New Orleans.

Not really in favor of local drilling unless it involves a hell of a lot more regulation. ;) That kind of solution has as many drawbacks as the current setup does.

That said, I'm not even sure that America has much moral high ground to criticize other countries from these days.

edited 1st Jul '11 11:14:34 AM by Karkadinn

The oil problem is only a small factor - we get 11 percent of our oil from Saudi Arabia (our third largest importer, after Canada, at 18.2%, and Mexico at 11.4% - Venezuela brings in 10% and Nigeria 8.4%).

And even if America pulls out of the Saudi Arabian market, which it probably could, they're still going to have a market. They'll simply sell to China, for example.

None of that is going to change the deeply rooted patriarchal culture of Saudia Arabia and Wahabist Islam, which nobody in power in Saudi Arabia has any incentive to change. Your father says it's OK, your friends say it's OK, God says it's OK...so there's not even a moral reason to do so, within their culture.

And when the West throws its support behind something that the Wahabists believe is against Islam, they're going to react with even harsher measures against women, because they're reactionaries and that's what reactionaries do. What we're basically talking about here is a slave revolt, and I'm not sure if Saudi Arabian feminism can produce a Toussaint L'ouverture.

tldr: Saudi women are fucked.

edited 1st Jul '11 11:17:35 AM by MatthewTheRaven

If everyone said you don't have the moral grounds to do it then there would be no change or justice in this world.This is not envolving oil or any other precious commodity,this is envolving how we can't gloss over the fact that Saudi Arabia has a lousy track record of women's rights that people ignore because of our past failings.Just because we are not perfect doesn't mean we can't point out the fact that Saudi Arabia's law is very close to what the Taliban's.It's not for my country's sake we do it but for the many women who are even allowed to drive in fear they might be arrested.

Well, yeah, do what you can. More you can potentially do yourself, more you can pressure Saudia Arabia to respect womens rights in return for letting them do it for you.

Get the capacity to be oil self-sufficient and you take away one of their two main cards, the other being that damn alliance.

At the very least make improving rights a condition for continued military connections!

edited 1st Jul '11 12:35:23 PM by GameChainsaw

Either secularism, civil rights and women's rights or all military aid gets cut immediately would work.

All we can do is disapprove, it would be wrong for us to interfere and physically force them to change things. I despise wahabist Islam, but I don't support putting the metaphorical thumb of America up the ass of every culture we disapprove of.

We can stop giving them any aid, though. We should stop subsidizing or protecting oppressors.

Throw them to the dogs, that easy.

edited 1st Jul '11 12:40:33 PM by SavageHeathen

I guess you have a point Barkey, but I despise watching groups of people getting oppressed and not being able to do anything about it.

I guess pressure would just cause views to harden though. You can't win civil rights through pressure, you need to win the minds of the people who are in the country. You need to open Saudi Arabia up and convince people, not force them to back off and close ranks.

Its worth bearing in mind this isn't just a governmental issue. If it was, then yeah, pressurise away. But most Saudis, as I have pointed out, unfortunately share those views; if you're male, anyway.

You're not going to get people to change that by blunt measures.

edited 1st Jul '11 12:41:58 PM by GameChainsaw

Yes, you can. Put them under an arms embargo. They're so dependent on American military hardware that they'd be fucked and powerless to resist any attempt at an overthrowal. As soon as they couldn't get replacements for their tanks and planes, it's open season, the Glory Days for any bunch of dudes willing to massacre the Saud dynasty and get in power.

The Sauds know that. If seriously threatened with it, they'd comply. That's what folks like the Sauds do when threatened: Cave in. They've got no other option.

edited 1st Jul '11 12:44:00 PM by SavageHeathen

Yeah Savage, if the Sauds were on the brink of a revolt that would work fine, but as they're not, I don't see how exposing them to invasion by Iran is going to help matters. Your issue is with the Saudi people as much as with its government. Though I suppose you could at least convince the Saudi government to loosen up its restrictive laws and move towards a more open society. That would allow a flow of information. And that would lead to civil rights movements and sounds made for equality and greater say in government. You open the information lines, and you let the people figure stuff out for themselves.

Why do people want to use up their own oil first? Is that really the solution you want? Then when that runs out, you'd be even more dependent! If you want to make them obsolete, try alternative solutions.

But you know there's ways to convince people to change, very few of the coercive ones work unless you're willing to spend considerable effort on it.

Better to find ways to convince them it is in their own interests.

I don't think its so much a case of actually tapping the untouched resources as making it plain that you can and will do so if the government at least doesn't loosen up. And well, if they ignore you anyway, follow up; at least next time you have them over a barrel they'll be more inclined to take you seriously.

The military thing is less permanent as you can always re-establish that. Equally, that makes it less of a weapon, as the Sauds know it can always be a temporary thing and they only have to hold out.

edited 1st Jul '11 1:04:09 PM by GameChainsaw

Every government is on the brink of a revolt whenever they lose the means to stop one.

Saudi Arabia is chock-full of impoverished gastarbeiters. Many Saudis are piss-poor, too. If the Saudi monarchy's life support is unplugged, they're gone in less than a year. Whether it's the Jihadis, secularists, or just pissed-off guest workers trying to seize their stuff, the Saudi regime is a goner if they don't get arms.

I'm all for blackmailing that bunch of fundies into civilization. Or letting them be destroyed, for that matter.

And if someone worse rises up to take the place of the Monarchy?

No, this is for the best. Let them work it out themselves, it's not our problem.

The Monarchy are pretty much a bunch of capitalists, the Islamists in Saudi are the real vicious bastards, and they would be the ones to seize control if the Monarchy crumbled right now. They can stay right where they are.

Someday, we'll start thinking in the longview, so we aren't creating more groups like Al Qaeda through our own manipulation of the world. Until then, well, we'll reap what we sow.

edited 1st Jul '11 1:07:21 PM by Barkey

^^Exactly. Which is why I'm for opening them up. Go after the government and get them to free up restrictions on their people, and then try to sow seeds for social reform. Social reform has always followed political reform. You can instigate political reform. You cannot instigate social reform.

edited 1st Jul '11 1:07:36 PM by GameChainsaw

There are options beyond letting the Islamists conquer the Saudis... How about them Sauds do as they're told? If the other option is being slaughtered or losing their power and their über-racket, they will.

Show them an USGOV able and willing to let them die without a second thought. They'll do whatever it takes to keep their sorry skins on.

Savage, I thought foreign governments not meddling in the affairs of other countries was a core tenant of yours? I'm all for spreading freedom, but doing it at gunpoint or gunpoint by proxy really isn't going to solve anything.

Knowing us we'll either fuck it up and the Jihadists will gain control of the country, or we'll try to set up a Karzai-esque puppet who will capitulate to a few of our demands, but the corruption will be worse than ever.

I'm all for governments not violating the liberty of people. And I'm for crushing authoritarianism by any means necessary.

Slapping authoritarian governments around is A-OK with me: I'm all for freedom at gunpoint, TBH.

You can't out-corrupt the Sauds, that's impossible.

edited 1st Jul '11 1:20:20 PM by SavageHeathen

Economics and military action aren't going to work. You have to completely overhaul a culture in order to give feminism a foothold. Foreign nations aren't 'just like us, but with a backwards government' - we're talking about socio-cultural and metaphysical assumptions about sexuality that would take decades to change. Any outside action would either involve ineffective and slow education or colonialist cultural transformation.

I think we're talking crossways here. I'm with you when it comes to dealing with the authoritarian nature of the Saudi regime. I just don't think that pressure can be applied to sort the prejudices of the Saudi people.

You may be right, but I don't see an islamist government, even if it is merely as bad as the Sauds, being any better, and as they hold power through fanaticism rather than authoritarianism alone, they're going to be even harder to influence.

edited 1st Jul '11 1:21:32 PM by GameChainsaw

You're not going to let the Islamists take power: And the Sauds are an immensely backwards Islamist regime anyway.

If the Sauds don't budge, you back the most socially progressive faction in the power struggle. Arm the Hell out of the guest workers and green light their loot the Sauds and take over aspirations. Or any other secularist faction in the country. Your call.

Any means to fight authoritarianism is legitimate by definition.

Them Saudis are soft, anyway. If the Saudis don't budge, cause a guest worker revolution, and watch the wahhabis burn.

edited 1st Jul '11 1:29:16 PM by SavageHeathen

So you would be prepared to intervene in an internal war to back, say, a Saudi regime that has been moderating its policies over, say, an Wahhabist regime that would be the death knell for womens and minority rigths, that is nonetheless popular with the majority? To protect the more progressive party? If not, what do you mean by "back the most socially progressive party"?

EDIT: I shouldn't have said "the majority", more like "a large proportion of the population."

edited 1st Jul '11 1:36:16 PM by GameChainsaw