Political Implications in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain
The following discussion will consider the political implications of the sectarian divide between Sunni and Shia Muslims in the Arabian Gulf region. In particular it will examine the political implications as the rise of Islamist sentiment interacts with increasing demands for formal public participation in government in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain.
The distinction between Shia and Sunni Muslims goes back to the early days of Islam. After the death of the Prophet Muhammad, the question arose as to who should take his place as the leader of the young Muslim community. All Muslims agreed in principle that the right to make this decision was in some ultimate sense vested in the community of believers as a whole, the ummah. However, no mechanism existed for identifying or defining the will of this community, already spread out over a vast region.
In these circumstances, effective authority devolved onto the Prophet's lieutenants, supported by leading circles in Mecca and Medina. To borrow the language of contemporary politics, this group formed the "Establishment," and its leader became Caliph, political and military leader of the Muslim community. The majority of the Muslim community readily accepted and supported this leadership, However, a significant minority of Muslims viewed his accession as a usurpation or power-grab, not a genuine expression of the desires of the community. Their discontent was sharpened by claims that the leadership was not living up to the high standards of ethical conduct expected of those claiming leadership of the Islamic community.
Thus, to continue the borrowing of contemporary usage, an "insurgent candidate" arose: Ali, son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad. He combined a close family tie with a reputation for exemplary personal conduct, and his claim won support among a significant minority of ordinary Muslims, particu...