Interview in: Neues Deutschland, 11/02/2005

Tobias Pflüger is a member of the left fraction in the Europarliament and recently has been staying in Riad.

ND: You have just returned from observing, as part of a delegation of the Europarliament, the local elections in Saudi Arabia. From what strata do the candidates come?

Pflüger: It seems to be in part a heterogeneous group. We have visited several so-called electoral tents by candidates. They are of different sizes, and there also apparently seem to be different amounts of capital behind them. In general, however, the candidates come from the middle and upper class. However, there also are a few other types among them.

What does such a candidate promise himself from such a post?

We have demanded several of them. The answers offered a broad spectrum, similar to the one in this country. Basically, the classical spectrum of people, ranging from those, who somehow want to have an important position, to those, who want to move something substantially. In one case, the issue was the right to marriage. There the concrete question was, how that could be influenced on the premises, by way of registration at the local authorities etc.

Can one even talk about elections, when women are excluded and very few voters have even registered?

Precisely these are the crucial problems. On Thursday, we have visited four of the places, where one can vote. They all looked very German. It then turned out that the Society for Technical Cooperation (German abbreviation GTZ) had helped with the organisation. The formal procedure was completely correct. However, there existed the already mentioned mega-shortcomings: Women are not allowed to vote, this excludes more than half of the people. The second shortcoming is that only around 25% to 30% of the men eligible to vote over 21 years old have registered at all. I would say nevertheless, however, that the elections are a first step, but that it is impossible to speak about normal democratic elections.

You had a conversation with Crown Prince Abdullah. What does he think in principle of a women’s right to vote.

The interesting thing was that he did not say No to start with. That in principle is already a success. Why does he not simply allow the women to vote? He signalised that it is not only his decision and that society at this point was still not ripe for it. Future would provide the answer. However, it remains a political scandal that women are excluded.

How is the general situation in the country? The large anti-terror conference in Riad has just been concluded. Is there a police man or a soldier at every corner?

There are two levels. As the official delegation, we have been invited by the parliament of Saudi Arabia and, by this fact, are also official guests. We are being brought to different meetings. As far as that is concerned, the presence of police men and of security forces is extremely high. At the same time, it was possible for us to move freely in the evenings. On these occasions, it turns out that the police is apparently concentrated at certain places. Apart from that, almost only men can be seen on the streets – if there are women, then clothed completely in black.

There is supposed to be an informal women’s movement, however?

Yes. We had informal meetings in buildings, and there got to know very, very self-asserted women, who know exactly what they want, who want to get involved politically or socially. They have said also that they want to exercise pressure. The more liberal among those, to whom we have spoken, have made clear that the pressure will continue. One has to see, how that will continue to develop.

And how does the terror evolve? Has the anti-terror conference left any hint?

My impression was that, from the point of view of PR, it was not sold so badly. However. the conference, as a matter of fact, has failed already at the definition of terrorism. The question being, what precisely is terrorism? The Western countries always talk of “international terrorism”, without distinguishing different kinds. Here, it was done in a similar way.

For example?

For example, taking the example of the Kosovo-Albanese UCK, I asked, how they would now define terrorism. Because the UCK fighters after all were at one time considered terrorists and at another as liberation fighters. The question remained unanswered? And what about state terrorism? As long as one does not have a definition, it is very, very difficult to come to an agreement.

What about Saudi Arabia? To an outside observer, does it present itself as a country in a state of emergency, or doesn’t it?

No. For men, there is absolutely no restriction of movement. The country is a car country, to that extent, one does not see so many people on the streets. Everybody, who has the chance, drives a car. Yet, it is not a country, where there is police present everywhere.

Questions: Martin Ling

Translated by Carla Krüger, 12/1/05