Part 3: Saudi Arabia’s Ascendancy: Balancing Power, Partnerships, and Global Influence

Saudi Arabia is emerging as one of the most consequential actors in the Middle East, redefining its role through a carefully calibrated foreign policy that balances regional leadership aspirations with global economic and diplomatic engagements. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), the designated successor to the King, is steering the Kingdom toward greater geopolitical autonomy, leveraging its vast economic resources, strategic partnerships, and mediation efforts to expand its influence. However, Saudi Arabia faces challenges, particularly regarding its stance on Israel, its evolving relationships with the United States and China, and its role in shaping post-conflict regional dynamics. This analysis examines Saudi Arabia’s shifting influence in the Middle East as it fills the power vacuum left by the declining influence of Iran and Russia.

Saudi Arabia’s diplomatic strategy is defined by a mix of calculated pragmatism and bold initiatives. A prime example of this is its cautious approach to normalizing relations with Israel. While the Kingdom has signaled openness to normalization, it has repeatedly reaffirmed that any agreement must be contingent on the establishment of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. This stance aligns more with the Arab Peace Initiative than the Abraham Accords- that do not list the creation of a Palestinian state as a precondition. The Arab Peace Initiative, adopted unanimously by 23 Arab states in 2002 and confirmed by the Arab Summit earlier this year, reversed the traditional negative Arab position toward peace with Israel and offered a comprehensive peace plan for ending the Arab Israeli conflict. The continued strikes in Gaza have further complicated the process, making it politically untenable for Riyadh to pursue normalization without substantial Israeli concessions. Saudi media has aggressively criticized Netanyahu, reflecting broader frustrations with his policy and its impact on regional stability. Simultaneously, Saudi Arabia is spearheading an alternative Arab plan to counter American-Israeli proposals for Palestinian displacement. This initiative, which focuses on rebuilding Gaza with Gulf funding while sidelining Hamas from governance, underscores the Kingdom’s determination to shape the postwar order on its own terms, highlighting its ability to balance U.S. expectations with Arab consensus, reinforcing its leadership within the region.

Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the United States remains central to its foreign policy, yet the Kingdom has adopted a more independent approach, continuing to pursue a policy of “active neutrality” in global affairs, beyond the Middle East. It has condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine at the UN but has refrained from joining Western-led sanctions against the Kremlin, allowing it to maintain strategic flexibility and preserve economic and security ties with both the U.S. and Russia. In 2023, Saudi Arabia hosted a major international peace summit on Ukraine, demonstrating its ambitions as a global diplomatic power. Even though Russia dismissed the summit, Saudi Arabia’s involvement in prisoner exchanges and backchannel diplomacy underscored its growing influence beyond the Middle East. Similarly, despite being a key U.S. ally, Saudi officials have emphasized the importance of their relationship with China, describing it as complementary to their alliance with Washington. Hence, Saudi Arabia remains indispensable to both Western and Eastern powers.

Saudi Arabia remains one of the world’s largest arms importers, historically reliant on U.S. and European suppliers for advanced weaponry. However, in recent years, it has diversified its defense partnerships, expanding military cooperation with China, including—areported joint production of drones and ballistic missiles. Additionally, Saudi Arabia has conducted naval exercises with the Chinese navy, signaling its intent to hedge against shifting U.S. commitments in the region. Despite this diversification, the United States remains Saudi Arabia’s primary security guarantor. Ongoing negotiations for a formal U.S.-Saudi defense treaty reflect the recognition that neither China nor Russia can fully replace American military support. However, Saudi leaders are leveraging their growing relationships with Beijing and Moscow to extract greater security guarantees from the U.S., including technology transfers and assistance in developing a domestic defense industry. 

Saudi Arabia’s military posture is undergoing a transformation, shifting from direct interventionism—exemplified by its involvement in Yemen—to a more calculated security strategy focused on regional stability and diplomatic engagement. Having significantly reduced its military operations in Yemen, the Kingdom is pursuing a negotiated settlement with the Houthis, who reject the Saudi-backed government,  while simultaneously reinforcing its defense capabilities against potential threats. Moreover, Saudi Arabia’s reassessment of its relationship with Iran once again reflects its broader shift toward diplomacy over confrontation. The China-brokered détente in 2023 signaled a preference for regional stability over prolonged hostilities. While tensions persist—especially regarding Iran’s support for proxy groups—Saudi Arabia’s engagement with Iran highlights its commitment to preventing further destabilization in the Middle East, rekindling hopes for ending the Yemen conflict, where both countries have historically supported opposing factions. 

Under Vision 2030, Saudi Arabia has aggressively pursued economic diversification, reducing its dependence on oil while expanding investments in infrastructure, technology, and renewable energy. Non-oil sectors account for 52% of GDP, with a projected 6.2% increase by 2026, with Saudi Arabia aiming to position itself as a hub for green energy and advanced technology, aligning its economic ambitions with global trends. In pursuit of Vision 2030, the Kingdom has deepened cooperation with China, now its largest trading partner, in infrastructure, 5G technology, and renewable energy. The Sino-Arabian alignment plan integrates China’s Belt and Road Initiative with Vision 2030, facilitating joint investments in hydrogen energy, electric vehicles, and industrial projects. This shift signals Riyadh’s effort to diversify its partnerships and reduce exclusive reliance on Western economies. Simultaneously, Saudi Arabia wields strategic influence over global energy markets through OPEC+, which it co-founded, working closely with Russia to manage oil production and pricing. Despite U.S. pressure to increase production following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Kingdom instead coordinated production cuts that favored Moscow, underscoring its prioritization of economic self-interest over Western expectations. This stance is further reflected in its overtures toward joining BRICS—an increasingly potent counterbalance to U.S. influence—as well as its hosting of a meeting between Russia and Ukraine, a significant development after Zelensky’s meeting with Trump. This move underscores Saudi Arabia’s growing confidence in charting an independent economic and foreign policy.

At the regional level, Saudi Arabia has all the qualifications to be a powerhouse—34 million inhabitants, a stable political system, a booming economy, and one of the world’s largest oil reserves. Its past isolationism and extremist Wahhabi social order are largely relics of the past, replaced by a rapid modernization drive that began a few years ago, with tangible change unfolding daily. Leveraging its economic strength and strategic partnerships, Saudi Arabia is reshaping the regional order. By balancing ties with the U.S., China, and Russia, while spearheading regional economic transformations and redefining security strategy, Saudi Arabia is positioning itself at the center of an emerging multipolar order. This new order is defined by fluid alliances and pragmatic diplomacy, moving beyond the past dynamics of U.S. hegemony and Iran-Saudi rivalry, with Saudi Arabia standing at the forefront.As things stand, the war in Gaza remains a determining factor in shaping the Middle East, and Saudi Arabia’s role in normalizing relations between Israel and the Arab world will be pivotal. As regional power structures shift following the decline of both Russia and Iran, a power vacuum has emerged—one that Saudi Arabia is poised to fill. The Kingdom’s support for the two-state solution, tying diplomatic normalization with Israel to the creation of an independent Palestinian state, places it in a unique position of leadership. Saudi Arabia’s potential to broker a peace agreement that reflects broader Arab consensus and upholds Palestinian self-determination could set a new precedent for regional cooperation in the Middle East, countering the status quo.

Featured/Headline Image Caption and Citation: “Saudi Arabia said Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman conveyed the kingdom’s stance in ‘a clear and explicit manner’ without room for interpretation,” Image source from Free Malaysia Today | CC License, no changes made

Originally published in May 2021

The guardianship system in Saudi Arabia consisted of a set of legal norms that, until recently, restricted women’s liberties. Previously, a woman needed the consent of her male guardian (wali al amr) to engage in basic exercises of autonomy such as obtaining a passport, traveling, and registering the birth of her child. The guardian would usually be a woman’s father or husband; however, he could even be her son. In 2019, heeding the calls for modernization in the Kingdom, the Council of Ministers put an end to the system. Currently, all women over the age of 21 do not need male guardians and are viewed as fully autonomous under the law. [1] The policy changed due to a shift in the understanding of the rights of women in Islam. Saudi Arabia is currently undergoing a process of disentangling patriarchal culture from  true religion. While Islam is the absolute foundation of the country, culture is merely relative and subject to change. This is particularly true of oppressive cultural practices. 

Prevailing Western thought asserts that religion must be entirely divorced from the state in order for society to be just and free. However, a close examination of theocracy shows that religious law and justice are not mutually exclusive; in fact, in some societies, justice is defined by and can only be attained through the pathways of religious understanding. This article will analyze how religion functions in a theocracy, through the case of the recently repealed guardianship law in Saudi Arabia. Institutionalized religion can be analyzed on three levels: the validity of a religious society, the difference between religious knowledge and religion as such, and the relationship between religion and culture. 

Religious knowledge is the human interpretation of religious scripture by disciples. This understanding is tainted by the subjective perspectives of individuals, groups, cultures, or zeitgeists of a particular period. Therefore, these religious notions should not be regarded as absolute. Contrastingly, religion as such is the unalterable will of God. It transcends all contexts and remains consistent. While the theoretical distinction between these aspects of religion is clear, in practice the line between them is often ambiguous. 

In the case of the guardianship law, Saudi clerics claimed that the law was based on religion as such, rather than a normative interpretation of religion; however, this was not true. They cite a Qur’anic verse that they interpreted to mean that, “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because God has given the one more strength than the other, and because they support them from their means.” [2] This translation presents the notion that God has endowed men with greater faculties which they are to employ to guide women. However, in the original Arabic, the meaning of this verse is much more obscure. Professor Azizah Al-Hibri, a scholar of Islamic feminism, contends that the more accurate translation of the verse is that, “Men are the advisors and guides of women in circumstances where God has given preferred distinctions to them over others and in circumstances where they spend of their own money [to support them].” [3] The distinction between the translations is two-fold. First, in the former men are “protectors”; however, in the latter men are “advisors”. The protective role assigned to men by the guardianship law has been its principal source of female oppression. The advisory role is a responsibility assigned to men that is not meant to encroach upon female autonomy. Second, the latter interpretation stipulates that a man would only be assigned the role of an advisor in cases where the woman is dependent on him and in situations where “God has given preferred distinctions to” him. Professor Al-Hibri argues that the advisory role of a man to a woman would manifest in the role of a father advising his daughter, specifically when she chooses a husband. However, the daughter would not have to submit to the will of her father. [4] This more accurate interpretation elucidates how previous understandings were tainted by social patriarchy. In the application of religion in society, injustices are often a function of wider social issues and not the religion itself. While it is often challenging to disentangle social bias from religious knowledge, it must be done to ensure that religion as such is protected. This shielding of religion from oppressive culture allows for theocracies to be true bastions of faith. 

The principle function of a theocracy is to uphold religion; therefore, culture cannot be regarded as a force of equal standing. Religion and culture are often perceived by secular thought as synonymous and of equal importance (or lack thereof ). However, the former, in its true sense, must be held to a higher degree of importance than the latter in a religious society. Moreover, religion must be employed to evaluate the legitimacy of cultural practices. Susan Moller Okin, a prominent liberal philosopher, in her analysis of women’s rights as they are affected by culture, claims that, “…most cultures have as one of their principal aims the control of women by men. Consider for example, the founding myths of Greek and Roman antiquity, and of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam: they are rife with attempts to justify the control and subordination of women.” [5] Okin’s conclusion presents a stark analytical flaw: she equates culture to religion. This assessment sets a precedent that would be fundamentally oppressive to women in theocratic societies.

The guardianship law in Saudi Arabia was a function of culture, not religion. Saudi Arabian culture is patriarchal and in some cases does oppress women. However, the Islamic faith does not oppress women; in fact, the thrust of the religion is the equality of all before God. [6] Aside from the fact that Okin incorrectly characterized Islam, she would not make the distinction between Saudi culture and Islam. If the notion that culture and religion are one and of the same were to be applied to a theocratic society this would endow culture and cultural interpretations of religion with the same command as divine authority. In a theocracy, to say that culture is religion is to say that it is infallible. This would inhibit the vital process of disentangling culture from religion. Therefore, oppressive cultural practices would be perpetuated because religion would no longer be a superior framework used to evaluate the validity of culture. Okin would strip Saudi society of the mechanism (the process of disentangling culture from religion) that liberated Saudi women from oppressive culture. Okin intended for her rejection of religion and culture on equal bases to be a force for liberating women. However, her theory, when applied to a theocratic society, would only serve to further the subjugation of women. This reveals how external, secular thought cannot be applied to religious societies as they are often forces for oppression, not liberation. 

Legal reform in Saudi Arabia has resulted in tangible improvements in women’s employment opportunities. The World Bank, in their report “Women, Business, and the Law 2020,” stated that Saudi Arabia was the top reformer of the year. [7] Repealing the guardianship system established that a Saudi woman has the same rights to economic and literal mobility as a Saudi man. The latest labor market survey shows that,“women’s participation rose to 31.3 percent in the third quarter of 2020, up from 26 percent at the end of 2019.” [8] This substantial improvement occurred  despite the economic challenges posed by the pandemic. Saudi Arabia has now already surpassed its goal of 30 percent women’s labor force participation by 2030. The country is displaying that incremental, modernizing legal reforms are compatible with a religious society and lead to substantial improvements in social welfare. 

The fact that a society is religious does not preclude social progress or development. Saudi Arabia can look internally to its own theological basis to usher in reform. Religion is a steward of social change in that it provides a framework through which the status quo can be evaluated and judged. In this way, religion functions as a source of empowerment: only in a religious society can one demand the true extent of their religious rights. In Saudi Arabia religion has not been an oppressive force, culture has. It is through religion, more specifically through extracting religion as such from the abstractions of culture, that women have been liberated from domineering forces. These rights were not bestowed upon women by the government; rather, the rights that have always been outlined for them in Islam were recognized. Ending the guardianship law in Saudi Arabia did not mean that the country was becoming secular or Western; rather, Saudi Arabia became a more truly Islamic country. 

References

[1] Wagtendonk, Anya van. “Saudi Arabia Changed Its Guardianship Laws, but Activists Who Fought Them Remain Imprisoned.” Vox, Vox, 3 Aug. 2019, 

www.vox.com/world/2019/8/3/20752864/saudi-arabia-guardianship-laws-women-travel employment-mbs.

[2] Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Holy Quran. Idara Impex, 2012.

[3] Ali,  The Holy Quran.

[4] Al-Hibri, Azizah Y. An Introduction to Muslim Women’s Rights. 2000, karamah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/An-Introduction-to-Muslim-Women%E2%80 %99s-Rights.pdf. 

[5] Okin, Susan Moller., et al. Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? Princeton University Press, 2011.

[6] Al-Hibri, An Introduction to Muslim Women’s Rights.

[7] “Saudi Women Rising up in Business in Line with Vision 2030.” World Bank, www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2020/03/11/saudi-women-rising-up-in-business-in-l ine-with-vision-2030. 

[8]Khojji, Zaynab. “Saudi Arabia’s Rising Female Labor Force Defies Global Pandemic Trend.” Arab News, Arabnews, 7 Mar. 2021, www.arabnews.com/node/1821396/business-economy.

Featured/Headline Image Caption and Citation: Night view of City Riyadh from Hauptstadt Saudi Arabiens by Jack Soma on October 30, 2011 | Image sourced from Wikimedia Commons | CC License, no changes made

The pressing issue at hand in the Middle East is the growing tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran.  The conflict between these two nations has its roots in the Iranian Revolution of 1979 when the anti-west Ayatollah Khomeini replaced the pro-Western monarch Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. This transition marked a turning point for the Middle East, particularly in regards to alliances and security. Hostility has since engulfed the two nations.

The Saudi-Iran conflict reached new levels on September 14 of this year. Advanced drone technology was used to target the Abqaiq and Khurais oil facilities in eastern Saudi Arabia, causing a major scare in the global oil supply. Houthi rebels later claimed responsibility, but many U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, say all signs point toward Iran. In an interview on “Face the Nation,”-Pompeo stated the alleged Iranian involvement in the strike was an “act of war.”

The implications of Iran’s involvement could provoke major hostility in an already fragile region, and the escalating dispute between the U.S. and Iran places America in a potentially compromising position. The U.S. has already deployed troops to Saudi Arabia to assist the country in the defense against future attacks, the Pentagon confirmed this week.[i]

The major victim of this attack, however, is neither Saudi Arabia nor its allies, but the people of Yemen.

Yemen has seen little reprieve from violence since the outbreak of civil war in 2015 between the Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi-led government and the Houthi-rebel faction. The Saudi-led bombing campaign on Yemen to combat Houthi rebels and Iranian influence in the area has led to staggering numbers of casualties: an estimated 17,729 civilians have been killed or injured since March 2019. Just this past week, 16 people, including seven children, were killed in the Sawd District of Northwestern Yemen by a Saudi-led airstrike. This attack came in response to the Saudi oil field bombings just a few days earlier.

Perhaps most concerning, Yemen is home to the worst humanitarian crisis in the world according to the United Nations. The country currently suffers from a widespread food shortage with 13 million Yemeni civilians facing starvation in what is being referred to as “the worst famine in 100 years.”[ii] The Saudi-led intervention in Yemen resulted in a complete blockade of medicine and food from the country in 2015, leaving the country susceptible to starvation and disease outbreaks. In fact, the number of cholera incidents in Yemen has risen dramatically since 2015: 109,000 cases of suspected cholera have been reported from the beginning of 2019 to March 2019, and almost 2,000 new cases are added each day according to the World Health Organization. Experts are certain the cholera endemic coincided with the outbreak of war between Houthi rebels and a Saudi-led coalition in March 2015.[iii]

In addition to this, UNICEF confirms over 2 million children are out of school in Yemen, with an estimated 3.7 million more at risk. Since the outbreak of civil war, almost a fourth of children have dropped out of school.

What this all means for Yemen’s future remains unclear, though one thing is certain: the crisis in Yemen will continue to deteriorate as long as the Saudi-Iran proxy war calls Yemen home. Expect additional U.S. military personnel to deploy to the region in the weeks to come.

Endnotes

[i] Gibbons-neff, Thomas. “New U.S. Aid to Saudi Arabia Will Include 200 Troops.” The New York Times. The New York Times, September 26, 2019.

[ii] “Humanitarian Crisis in Yemen Remains the Worst in the World, Warns UN | UN News.” United Nations. United Nations. Accessed September 28, 2019. https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/02/1032811.

[iii] Gladstone, Rick. “Cholera, Lurking Symptom of Yemen’s War, Appears to Make Roaring Comeback.” The New York Times. The New York Times, March 28, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/27/world/middleeast/cholera-yemen.html.