…according to state television.
The new king is Abdullah’s half-brother Salman. Succession in SA apparently is to the old king’s senior near relation, not to his son.
That’s a recipe for permanent gerontocracy.
King Salman? Sounds pretty fishy …
Let’s not rushdie to judgment here…
I saudi what you did there.
You guys arabian me the wrong way with all your puns.
the new King is the father of the Arab World’s only astronaut.
When a new King is crowned, a new Crown Prince also is installed. It would not seem that the new King has complete control of his succession. Salman, it is said, is his father’s 22nd son, so I think it unlikely that there is a genetic succession scheme always in place.
Meritocracy? Anyone know for sure?
No, not quite. Since 2006 it has become a consensus decision by a small senior council of royal princes who vet and vote on who should become the designated successor as crown prince. It still loosely follows hereditary principles, but it basically an internal family election from and by a small pool of candidates.
ETA: Here’s a wiki on the topic.
Note that he’s quite old at 79, and not too healthy.
Prince Muqrin bin Abdulaziz is the next in the succession, and “only” 69.
So for those of us who are not up on Saudi politics, what exactly does the King do and what doesn’t he do in terms of ruling the country?
The King does pretty much whatever he wants. He makes laws, he appoints and dismisses ministers and judges, he decides on the budget. he appoints a legislature that can recommend laws to him. That all being said, that while in theory the King has absolute power, in practice, the kings of Saudi Arabia generally try for consensus in the royal family and ulema before they act. If the House of Saud or ulema as a whole are opposed to something, the King generally defers.
On paper, he’s an absolute Monarch. In reality, decisions are made via the fairly opaque internal politics of the (huge) ruling family and to a lesser extent, by a second family that dominates the countries religious council. Figuring out what the family factions are and whose pulling for what policies is basically a guessing game, similar to “Kreminology” during the Cold War.
Presumably, that’s part of the reason for passing the throne to elderly, not necessarily healthy princes. A young active monarch might live long enough to consolidate power at the expense of the rest of the family.
If you want to say they wish to avoid another Faisal, just say it.
A lot of stuff will be done in his name; still not allowing women to drive, accepting Saudi women into standing in elections, getting rid of or promoting influential clerics, supporting Palestine, asking the US to go against Iran, building lots of schools and universities for Saudi’s young (half of the population are under 25), supporting those against the Syrian leader, building a multi-billion dollar subway in Riyadh, and he was the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques in Mecca and Medina. So it’s a lot King, some ‘Papal’ as well, with a bit of Prime Minister thrown in.
So, will the new king try to thawb the relationship between his country and Iran?
Who’s Faisal and what did he do that was so wrong?
The Saudi king from 1964 to 1975, when he was murdered by one of his nephews. So liberal he was almost an anarchist, compared with some of his relatives.
This clause is key. The most liberal thing he did was abolish slavery.
A bit too liberal for the Americans as well, they were glad to see the back of him. As it was, it was not his (not particularly) liberal views that they disliked, but his policies and governance style, he preferred to rely on professional advisors as opposed to family and tended to appoint non Sauds to positions of power.
No. Slavery was abolished before he became King (1962 v 1964). He was a moderniser more than anything, he is pretty much responsible for creating the modern structure of the state, and for undertaking development projects, encouraging industry and creating higher educational institutes, including women’s education.
After him, they have had a pious recluse (Khalid), a party boy (Fahd) and a thorough establishment figure (Abdullah).
Perhaps I misremember. If the paper abolition preceded him, did he not have a role in actually carrying it out?
None of which is really “liberal,” except women’s education, which is what I am hearing Abdullah being praised for right now. Because women in Saudi Arabia have such opportunity these days.