What would happen if a Saudi newspaper published an article advocating democracy, freedom of speech, the rule of law and the resignation of incompetent officials? You might expect that the writer would be arrested, as has happened to several online activists in the kingdom recently. But not necessarily, if it's written in a clever way. 

Earlier this week, a subtly subversive article appeared in the Saudi Gazette, reprinted from the Arabic-language newspaper, al-Madina. Written by Salem Ahmed Sahab, it discusses the Legatum Foundation's latest worldwide Prosperity Index – and provides an interesting example of what Saudi writers can get away with.

The Legatum Prosperity Index claims to be "the only global measurement of prosperity based on both income and wellbeing". It tries to take into account "the joy of everyday life and the prospect of being able to build an even better life in the future" as well as the usual macroeconomic indicators.

Saudi Arabia, as everyone knows, is one of the world's wealthiest countries and yet, in the latest Prosperity Index, it ranks 52nd out of 142 countries – one place behind Trinidad & Tobago and one place ahead of Vietnam. The main reason for its comparatively low ranking is that "the joy of everyday life" in Saudi Arabia is – shall we say – somewhat lacking. In the "personal freedom" category of the survey, for example, it is 13th from the bottom.

None of that, however, is discussed in Sahab's article which doesn't even mention Saudi Arabia's low ranking. In fact, the article doesn't mention Saudi Arabia at all or criticise it – except by implication.

Instead, Sahab focuses on three Scandinavian countries – Norway, Denmark and Sweden – and asks why they are at the very top of the list. "Why are they happy?" says the headline, tempting Saudi readers to make them-and-us comparisons.

The answer, Sahab says, is definitely not the weather. During a Scandinavian winter "you don’t see the sun for several weeks" (unlike certain other countries he could name, but doesn't). Then comes the subversive part:

"In my opinion a nation’s happiness is, to a large extent, determined by other factors. Look for instance at the international indicator of government transparency — all of the countries that rank high in transparency are Scandinavian countries. 

"A person becomes happy when he has a sincere feeling that no authority or influential person will rob his country’s wealth through devious means which may look legal at the surface but are replete with exploitation, theft and lies.

"A person also becomes happy when he feels that he is a real participant in the process of decision-making, free to choose his representatives, hold his leaders accountable and monitor the performance of government departments. He will feel happy when he is certain that he can openly criticize any shortcoming without being questioned for his actions.

"The officials in the happiest countries either apologize or quit their positions in case of any mistakes.

"These people are happy because they feel that they are real partners in nation-building."

Those five paragraphs can (and will) be read as a wholesale critique of the Saudi system. But it's also a deniable critique. If asked, the writer can say he was merely explaining the success of Scandinavian countries in keeping their people happy. Anything else is in the mind of the reader. Isn't it?

Posted by Brian Whitaker, 24 January 2013.