Saudi Cabinet Shakeup Targets Key Ministries
Source: abcNEWS
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Dec 8, 2014, 10:52 AM ET
By ABDULLAH AL-SHIHRI and AYA BATRAWY Associated Press
Saudi King Abdullah announced on Monday a Cabinet shakeup, naming new ministers to key portfolios overseeing the kingdom's universities and mosques where ultraconservative clerics and their supporters hold sway.
The Saudi Press Agency carried the king's decrees, which included new heads for the ministries of higher education, Islamic affairs, health, culture and information, telecommunications, transportation, agriculture and social affairs.
Longtime Islamic Affairs Minister Saleh al-Sheikh, who was in the post since 1999, was replaced by Suleiman Aba al-Khail, former president of one of Saudi Arabia's largest public universities, the Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University in the capital Riyadh.
The new minister, Aba al-Khail, is from the traditionally conservative region of Qassim.
He enters the post, overseeing the kingdom's thousands of mosques and imams, at a time when the Saudi king is pushing clerics to speak out against extremist groups. Saudi Arabia follows a strict strain of Sunni Islam known as Wahhabism.
After years of supporting and, at other times, turning a blind eye to jihadists taking up arms in foreign conflicts, Saudi Arabia moved to criminalize fighting abroad this year. Clerics who do not condemn terrorism in Friday sermons could face penalties, and some have had their license to preach revoked.
Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/saudi-cabinet-shakeup-targets-key-ministries-27443924
= new reply since forum marked as read
The Politburo of the old Soviet Union was the head of the Soviet System. The men in the Politburo ran not only the Soviet Union but the Warsaw Pact. The problems in the 1980s was the generation that came to power under Stalin were dying out and being replaced by people born post Stalin.
Both Yeltsin and Gorbachev was born in 1931, thus was only 23 when Stalin Died in 1953:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachev
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Yeltsin
Putin was a year old when Stalin Died:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin
Thus all three of these Politicians had little if any interaction with Stalin. That was NOT true of Gorbachev predecessor, all had dealt with Stalin on a personal basis. They all talked to Stalin and survived Stalin.
Thus the 1980s was the decade of the post Stalin politician and politics and the infighting was intense. One story went that Gorbachev had arranged for one of his rivals to host a state dinner with glasses from Catherine the Great. At the end of the toast, someone threw a glass at the fire place (a Russian Tradition) and everyone sitting followed (A Russian Tradition). The problem was it was CATHERINE THE GREAT GLASS WARE not some 1980 copy. Worse, the story I read was the Politician's last name was Romanov, no relations to the Tzar's family but sharing the same name PLUS the on the face carelessness of handling the Glass War of Catherine the Great ended up being fatal to that politicians raise in the Politburo.
I do NOT know if the above story is true, but it is typical of a time period where you have a change in generations. Mostly this occurs about 40-60 years AFTER the either an event that "molded" a generation (Thus Civil War Veterans were all by one President of the US between 1860 and 1901, WWI Veterans were President from 1916 till 1961, and WWII Veterans were President from 1940 till 1993).
Side note: I include whoever was President during a war as a Veteran, thus Lincoln and Andrew Johnson were Civil War "Veterans", Wilson was a WWI Veteran, and FDR and Truman were WWII Veterans (Truman actually served in WWI, FDR had been Secretary of the Navy During WWI so in many ways a Veteran).
Even in the US it took 47 years to get a NON WWII Veteran to be President. The same with the Soviet Union, WWII was a defining war, but surviving Stalin was even more defining.
Now, Wars bring about a defining generation that holds onto power for almost two generations, but that is also true of the heirs of a founding Dynasty. In many ways Stalin can be viewed as the first of his "Dynasty". Now his successors were NOT his sons, but they were his "Sons" in the sense they had know Stalin, dealt with Stalin on a Constant basis, did what Stalin told them to do, were rewarded by Stalin and saw people Stalin had turned against killed by Stalin. Those killed were NOT always enemies of Stalin, but Stalin wanted them dead for Stalin thought they were enemies of Stalin.
One of the Characteristics of the Second Generation after the death of a founder of a Dynasty is that the "Heirs" see each other as survivors who MUST stick together as they had tried under the founder. Some infighting occurs, but the deaths are minimal (i.e. the heirs prefer to work together than kill each other). This is what happened under Khrushchev and Brezhnev. The heir did NOT kill each other (When Khrushchev was removed, he was not killed, just sent to live in a Soviet Collective in the Ukraine, where he came from). No infighting, no support of violence etc.
That is NOT true as the THIRD Generation moved into power. They want to show they can use power to advance what the Dynasty say they support. Thus the Soviet Union under Khrushchev and Brezhnev would support a Communist Government (such as Cuba), they would NOT send troops. They will give supplies and advisor's but not actual troops (Korea occurred under STALIN, thus the sending of Soviet Pilots was Stalin's idea not Khrushchev and Brezhnev's generation). The Soviet would maintain their empire (this sending in troops in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 and threatening troops in Poland in the 1980s, those were all part of the Soviet Existing Empire.
The Third Generations started to take charge in the 1970s when Soviet Advisors went to Africa (along with Cuban Troops). You saw increase of this in the 1980s as the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. The Second Generation would NEVER had done either when they were in complete command, but the third generation was pushing starting in the 1970s and 1980s.
The Third Generation wanted to show how pro Communists they were as long as the Second Generation was on the top rung of the ruling ladder. Gorbachev and Yeltsin (and Putin and most of today's Soviet Billionaires) were all good party men during that time period, supporting expansion of the Red Army and sending troops and advisors overseas.
Thus you had massive infighting and jockeying for position within the Politburo as the Stalin Generation slowly died out. This did NOT stop when Gorbachev became the head of the Soviet Union, in fact the infighting intensified after Gorbachev took over. In this massive infighting several groups that wanted to break away from the Soviet Union appeared and were used by those doing the Infighting. In fact there is evidence that the people who tried to overthrow Gorbachev had funded these groups, hoping to set up a situation where they could justify taking over the country to put them down. Yeltsin took this opportunity to quit the Communist party and become the President of Russia (a weak position, the real ruler was still Gorbachev who was head of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and by that time President of the Soviet Union). In the coup, the Troops refused to support the Coup (the problem with a Universal Service draftee army they do what the people want NOT want the leadership wants). With no troops willing to support the coup plotters it failed. Gorbachev had been on Vacation in the Crimea, so Yeltsin took charge of the opposition to the coup and with that success Gorbachev was finished and so was the Soviet Union.
Notice the problem with the Soviet System was it permitted massive infighting among various parts of the ruling elite. Much of this infighting was NOT visible, but people could see the results. Yeltsin ended up on top, but his incapacity to rule slowly became clear so by 2000 Putin was in charge of Russia. It was a much slower change then in 1989, but it was a change. It was also a "Normal" change not a change as result of infighting that resulted in something no one really wanted (Contrary to Western Views, except for maybe the Baltic states, most of the Soviet Union wanted to stay together, there saw each other as part of a united whole).
After the coup, the Communist party, the single unifying institution was gone, there was nothing to replace it with, thus independence of every former Soviet Republic. How those Republics should interact has been an ongoing source of tension within the Former Soviet Union states.
Now, I bring up the fall of the Soviet Union for it is the last instance where a dynasty fell. King Saud I of Saudi Arabia started building Saudi Arabia before Stalin took over the Soviet Union and died in 1952 a year before Stalin. King Saud was succeeded by his sons. One advantage sons have over sycophants (Which is what Stalin had around him) is they tend to younger and thus the Third Generation takes longer to get in charge. Thus what the Soviet Union went through in the 1970s, Saudi Arabia went through in the 1990s, and thus what the Soviet Union went through in the 1980s is what Saudi Arabia has been going through since about 2000.
Saudi Arabia is still being ruled by a 90 year old son of King Saud I. This is like Brezhnev surviving till 1996 not dieing in 1982 at age 76. They have been reports that King Abdullah has some serious health problems (he is 90) and not expected to live to much longer.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/05/saudi-transition-kings-sons-well-place.html
King Abudllah's present Crown Prince (and thus successor) is Prince Salman, who is one of seven full brothers known as the Sudairi Seven:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_bin_Abdulaziz_Al_Saud
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudairi_Seven
The Sudairi Seven are considered the single most powerful group of sons of King Saud I. King Fahd, King Abdullah's predecessor, was one of these seven sons. Two had been the Crown Prince before their died. One is the present Crown Prince, Three, Turki, born in 1931, Abdul Rahman, born 1931 and Ahmed born 1942 are still alive. All Seven had several children.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saud/tree/
Thus it is time for the Grandchildren of King Saud I to do what the Third Generation after Stalin did, fight among themselves in regard to who should rule what part of Saudi Arabia. This infighting may result in the breakup of Saudi Arabia or someone may come out on top (This happened several times during the Roman Empire, infighting during succession crises, but then stability as one of the successors of the precious ruler comes out on top).
In the case of the Soviet Union, the infighting lead to the break up of the Soviet Union, that is an extreme case but always possible. In the 1970s and 1980s the infighting in the Soviet Union was mostly over who was the better communist, breaking up or leaving the Soviet Union was NOT as issue till the late 1980s, which many be 2020 in the case of Saudi Arabia (When talk of a break up begins NOT the break up itself). I can see the Saudi Army supporting the sons of the Sadari Seven against the son of King Abdullah, who controls the National Guard of Saudi Arabia, which is almost as strong as the Army (The Army has more tanks then the Guard, but the Guard has more wheeled vehicles to move men quickly to a point of decision).
We may even get to see how much better or worse is the M1 Tank vs the German Leopard II. The Saudi Army has the M1, the Saudi National Guard has the Leopard II.
As in the old Soviet Union, you will NOT see any violence till after the Second Generation is mostly gone. i.e when King Abdullah and maybe his successor finally dies and finally a third generation member gets to be in charge.
Please note the present Deputy Crown Prince was born in 1945 and is the youngest son of King Saud I, Maguin, thus it is possible to delay the raise of the third generation another 20 years (at least in theory):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqrin_bin_Abdulaziz_Al_Saud
Succession to the House of Saud:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_to_the_Saudi_Arabian_throne
Thus I do NOT think this is good news, it is part of the infighting among family members, and I suspect ISIS is also part of that Infighting (Some of the family support ISIS, other oppose them and mostly on how ISIS helps or hurt their grab for power within the House of Saud not anything else).
Just like it was good practice to be a true blue Communist in the 1970s and early 1980s while the second generation where still in charge of the Soviet Union, in many ways it is best to support radical Sunni Islam in Arabia and the rest of the Middle East today. Once the second generation is gone, people doing the infighting can change their spots and even turn against ISIS for those Radicals would have done their job. The problem is by then the genie may be out of the lamp, like the movement to break up the Soviet Union, to powerful to put back into the bottle and you end up killing off what you wanted to rule (i.e. destroying Saudi Arabia instead of being in control of Saudi Arabia). Only time will tell but that such infighting is happening is NOT a good sign.
