Oil kings: The House of Saud’s uncertain future

By Mohamad Bazzi
January 12, 2015

Saudi royal guards stand on duty during the Janadriya culture festival at Der'iya in Riyadh

In his annual “state-of-the-kingdom” address on Jan. 6, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah hoped to reassure the world that his country is prepared to absorb the economic shock of plummeting oil prices and to deal with the worsening conflict in its two neighbors, Iraq and Yemen. The message might have been more effective had the 90 year-old king delivered it personally, but Abdullah has been hospitalized since Dec. 31 for pneumonia.

Instead, Crown Prince Salman delivered the speech on the king’s behalf. That image — of an aging heir with his own health troubles standing in for a nonagenarian king — did little to address concerns about whether Abdullah is still fit to lead. Larger questions over the line of succession in one of the world’s most important oil producers remain unanswered.

The 79-year-old Salman, a half brother of the king and his designated successor, has taken on a larger public role in recent months, standing in for Abdullah at a summit meeting of Persian Gulf leaders in Qatar last month. But Salman himself is in poor health, and reportedly suffers from dementia. If Abdullah dies or is incapacitated, and Salman ascends to the throne, he might not be king for long. It’s also unclear who Salman would designate as his crown prince — and that crucial decision could destabilize the royal family.

Prince Muqrin, 69, who has served as head of Saudi intelligence and in other senior positions, was installed last year by Abdullah into the newly created post of deputy crown prince, making him second-in-line to the throne. But any new king has the right to choose his own crown prince. If Muqrin is passed over by Salman, that could set off a succession battle within the House of Saud at a time of regional crisis and instability in the global oil markets.

Beyond Salman’s expected ascension to the throne, the Saud dynasty faces a larger challenge over succession within its system of hereditary rule. The kingdom was founded in 1932 by Abdulaziz al-Saud, and he left behind a system where the throne is passed from older son to younger son (the king had 35 surviving sons when he died in 1953). With the old generation of Abdulaziz’s sons dying off or passing into senescence, the kingdom has no clear plan to hand power to the “new” generation of royals — Abdulaziz’s grandsons, of which there are at least 30 who could be in line for the throne.

Muqrin is the youngest surviving son of Abdulaziz who is still in the running for the throne (he has several older siblings who have been passed over). If Muqrin becomes king, he would have to appoint a crown prince from the third generation of royals. Muqrin does not have strong enough support within the royal family to appoint one of his sons to the post. One theory is that Abdullah positioned Muqrin as second-in-line so that he would be beholden to Abdullah’s sons, one of whom could become king once the generational shift takes place.

Aside from the king’s illness and questions over succession, Saudi Arabia is faced with a series of regional and economic threats.

Most prominently, the kingdom must cope with plunging oil prices. On Jan. 7, Brent crude, the international benchmark, fell below $50 a barrel for the first time since May 2009 — a drop caused in part by Saudi’s refusal to cut high production levels. At the last OPEC meeting in late November, the Saudis led the charge to prevent the cartel from cutting production, which would have driven prices up. Instead, the kingdom is trying to gain more control over the global market, and to drive out U.S. shale oil, which requires higher prices to remain competitive.

So far, Saudi leaders have been able to withstand the economic shock by increasing oil production to make up for falling prices, or by accessing some of the kingdom’s $750 billion stashed in foreign reserves. But those are not long-term solutions.

The other challenge for Abdullah’s successor will be containing Iran, the kingdom’s regional rival. Saudi Arabia is engaged in proxy battles with Iran in several arenas: Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. The kingdom is using oil as a weapon to punish Iran, and Russia, for their support of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. Facing Western sanctions and economic isolation, the Iranian regime is dependent on oil remaining at $100 a barrel or more to meet its budget commitments.

The proxy war has played out most intensely in Syria and Iraq. After the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, neighboring Sunni regimes backed Sunni militants, while Iran supported the Shi’ite-led government and Shi’ite militias. When various Middle Eastern regimes realized that the United States would — in their view — lose its war in Iraq, they began maneuvering to protect their interests and to gain something out of the American withdrawal. Saudi Arabia, which saw Iraq as a bulwark against Iranian influence, tried to destabilize the Shi’ite-led government in Baghdad.

The Saud dynasty views itself as the rightful leader of the Muslim world, but Iran has challenged that leadership for several decades. Although Saudi Arabia has a Sunni majority, its rulers fear Iran’s potential influence over a sizable, and sometimes-restive, Shi’ite population concentrated in the kingdom’s oil-rich Eastern Province.

Any new leader is unlikely to change the larger contours of Saudi foreign policy — or the kingdom’s use of oil to enforce its interests and try to keep Iran at bay. But the new king and his inner circle will face decisions on succession that could reshape the ruling family and the monarchy’s future for generations to come.

PHOTO: Saudi royal guards stand on duty in front of portraits of King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz (R), Crown Prince Salman bin Abdulaziz (C) and second deputy Prime Minister Muqrin bin Abdulaziz during the traditional Saudi dance known as “Arda” at the Janadriya culture festival at Der’iya in Riyadh, February 18, 2014. REUTERS/Fayez Nureldine/Pool 

13 comments

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Pretty insightful article.

Posted by amd65 | Report as abusive

Changes in the global oil supply situation make the fate of Saudi Arabia less important to the West, at least over the medium term. It is unlikely that the U.S. and its allies will allow Saudi Arabia to be taken over by outside forces. Of greater potential concern, there may be a risk of internal turmoil leading to the end of the current Saudi regime if the subsidized lifestyle of Saudi citizens has to be curtailed for budgetary reasons. Also, Saudi Arabia has less than half the population of Iran, and the population in the oil producing areas tends to be predominantly Shiite. Some of the oil producing kingdoms in the Gulf with large Shiite populations have supplemented their armed forces with Western defense contractors based on concerns that locals would be unwilling to fire on troops from neighboring countries.

Posted by Bob9999 | Report as abusive

its quite alarming that the world economy is in the hands of people like this.

Posted by rikfre | Report as abusive

The Americans as the world’s biggest oil importers formerly propped up the Saudi regime for decades, but those days are over. Now they are fighting with their competitors over Asian market share, the result of which the world has recently experienced with desastrous consequences for several countries including Russia.

Posted by pbgd | Report as abusive

When the entirety of your success is simple due to happenstance (such as waking up one day with oil under your feet) you tend to not know how to grow a sustainable existence but rather you spend what you have on useless things. I call it the Texas syndrome. Texas is where stupid got lucky. Saudi Arabia is the same. They will not do anything good with the wealth they have because they never really had to earn it. Add in that they are mystical magical followers of a religion and thus are incapable of rational thought and you have an easy time estimating their future once the oil runs out. They have about 30 more years.

Posted by brotherkenny4 | Report as abusive

Can we assume since our foreign policy is one of imperialism for corporations and the counsel on foreign affairs make suggestions on our foreign policy to the government, that what many people believe, that the CFA works for the wealthy banks and the heads of the free masons, is true?

Posted by brotherkenny4 | Report as abusive

@brotherkenny4 There is one big difference between Texas and Saudi Arabia. Texas houses most of the oil refineries in North America. So most of the oil that we import from Canada and Mexico gets refined in Texas. Texas is on surer footing than Saudi Arabia is because Texas actually invested in the physical capital necessary to move up the value chain in the oil industry.

Posted by Sewblon | Report as abusive

All I want is one of his imprisoned daughters for a wife and I will lead the country out of trouble.

Posted by Macedonian | Report as abusive

Interesting article. Strange how Saudi Arabia, the US and Israel have the same foreign policy goals: decimate Russia, Iran, throw Lebanon into turmoil and a new civil war and topple Assad, which will leave Syria a failed state or Libya 2. Ironically, if that were in fact all to happen, the Saudi Kingdom, which never used its oil money to build a non-oil dependent private industry, would be the first to fall, the petrodollar second and an enraged Middle East might in fact attack Israel, the cause and core of all the problems in the Middle East.

The US is not wining against IS and maybe doesn’t want to win against IS to use it as proxy force in a wider Middle East war and as militants to destabilize Russia, Iran, Pakistan and China. But IS has already shown what reign it wants to impose and most ME countries will not want this regime and will fight against IS, Saudi Arabia and Israel while Russia and China will hit down any IS or other Muslim militancy in their countries. The old heads in the Saudi Kingdom appear not to be up to the time anymore.

Posted by 1964 | Report as abusive

Pretty shallow insight in the politics in KSA, probably because the author has never been exposed to this. My experience is that the House of Saud is flexible, and has managed to renewed itself with the current king. The most important envoy of the king is not even mentioned. Living and teaching in the US creates a distance.

Like the price of oil he quotes for Iran is utter rubbish. They sell to China and Russia, usually to a premium, and is also involved in free trading in the Middle East.

Aramco has upgraded the field using the huge profit generated, so now they can produce cheaper than anyone. They have also made huge investments, in particular in the emerging markets. This creates the conflict with Venezuela (Maduro is in Riyadh at the moment), where Vz has spent the profit, while Bin Saud has invested. Maduro needs the funds to defend the local economy and currency, and the Saudi can buy more power and mere investment. Iran has invested in Venezuela, but Saudi is reluctant.

Since Europeans and Americans are denied the right to buy Russian product following the embargo, the Saudi are buy refined product from Russia and sells this in Europe, with a huge profit, doing nothing but signing on documents. Since Iran is also embargoes, the Iranians cannot do the same.

Posted by Knut_H | Report as abusive

Questions:
* wahhabism-A Saudi theocracy, is at the root of the evangelical, or”radical” wing of Islam. What is the Royal Family going to do to update and reform this sect of Islam that is at it’s core, anti-enlightenment, anti-progressive and unfortunately, anti-American/Western?
* What is the Royal Family going to do with Yemmen, as well as the issue that most of the terrorists of 911 were Saudi?

This first question is the core issue of our day, only if they are forced will the Saudi’s even address it. Maybe an alliance with Iran, the Iranian people, will the Kingdon start, start to address fallout of wahhabism.

Our children will be dealing with wahhabism for centuries. So the Kingdom is our ally? Really?

Posted by ac789962 | Report as abusive

The Saudi “royal family” (created in the 1930s) should carefully consider whether they want to be a successful oil company or a medieval Sunni theocracy – because it is not possible to be both successfully.

OPEC is finished – and with it any regional alliances Saudi Arabia could call upon should its alliance with the US disappear, as looks increasingly likely.

If an Iran or Iraq – or both – were to attack – who would save them now?

Posted by DonD1977 | Report as abusive

@Sewblon
again you tell us that the money is better invested in the fossile fuels and fracking that in the mitigation of the climate change. You are proud of a Texas that many other people say it would have failed if it was not granted.

Posted by meleze | Report as abusive