Once one of the Gulf’s more progressive states, Kuwait appears to have swung to unconstrained autocracy.
By James WattJames Watt is a former UK ambassador to Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt.
Away from the glare of media interest in the Israel-Hamas conflict, the outlook for Iran, and the historic changes in Syria and Lebanon, Kuwait these days rarely gets a mention in the world’s press. Yet political developments in Kuwait have been following a perplexing course. They have nothing to do with geo-politics, and all to do with how Kuwait will be governed. No foreign hand is alleged to be involved, at least not credibly. This is an internal affair, but one which nonetheless has consequences for how Kuwait finds its place in the world, and for its future.
Kuwait’s form of limited democracy had been termed a semi-constitutional monarchy, under the ruling Al Sabah dynasty. Parliamentary politics proved both empowering, giving a voice to diverse parts of the citizenry, and a continual headache for the ruling family as paralysing divisions led to frequent legislative deadlocks. The upside though, over the years, was a civic space that encouraged social progress, freedom of expression, innovation and the creative arts. And pride in being Kuwaiti.
A sense of crisis, though, began to prevail over time. Political debate became intemperate and entrenched, reflecting the pull of opposites between autocracy and popular demands.
Things had to improve. The economy was under-performing, despite high oil revenues, and was further impaired by the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. Compared to the rising fortunes of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, Kuwait was seen to be stagnating.
With the accession of the current Emir, Sheikh Mishal Al Ahmad Al Jaber Al Sabah, in December 2023, now aged 84, the response came with the ruling family taking a tighter grip. In February 2024 he dissolved the National Assembly, and three months later dissolved it again after elections, suspending selected constitutional articles for a period of four years.
From that radical step have flowed a series of interventions by the State in the rights of Kuwaitis, rights jealously guarded in its decades-long constitutional progress. Critics of the Emir, including former parliamentarians, have been arrested as part of a sweeping campaign of repression launched by the Interior Minister, Sheikh Fahad Al Yusuf. Freedom of speech has been threatened and curtailed.
These moves served only to inflame the criticism. This drew in turn a doubling-down of repressive measures, the regime’s weapon of choice being stripping opponents (or their families) of their Kuwaiti nationality, making use of clauses in the law designed to reverse citizenship awards that had been granted as the result of fraud, or to serve the interests of security or political stability.
Since August last year the number of revocations has soared, reaching over 47,000 (compared to an annual average of around 800). The most striking feature though is that over 30,000 of these cases are women. Passports and national identity cards are seized, trapping those affected either inside or outside Kuwait. Those trapped outside are unable to return to their children and families. Pension payments, social payments and in some cases salaries are stopped while bank accounts are frozen. Businesses owned by de-nationalised women have their files with the Public Authority for Manpower suspended. Access to both public and private hospitals is blocked, since both require the presentation of proof of citizenship. Under a new provision loss of citizenship means inability to seek a judicial remedy – against loss of citizenship.
The revocations are decided by a ministerial Special Committee, which publishes no criteria for its decisions, and gives no explanation for them. Journalists and other public figures have been warned against criticising the revocations. Even Kuwait’s most historically privileged citizens, those with settled status before 1920, have lost their once-guaranteed nationality protections under new security provisions. Under which, ‘Tier-1’ Kuwaitis now face the risk of revocation if deemed a national security threat.
Kuwait has many friends in the West, harking back to the solidarity shown when Saddam Hussein invaded and sought to extinguish the country in 1990. Those traumatic events, even before liberation the following year, resulted in a surge of patriotism among all Kuwaitis and a commitment to a better future. The following decades were positive for both freedoms and equity. The growing political antagonism within the country began to hold it back, however, and economic management of the country’s oil wealth suffered.
It should be for Kuwaitis themselves to resolve these challenges, as they have done, step by step, in the past. The new policy of deepening divisions is the exact opposite of what any leadership, autocratic or otherwise, should be doing. Doing it in a way which traduces both the principles of justice, and natural justice itself, is doubly damaging to the solidity of the State. The added twist of targeting, above all, the wives of political opponents may seem ingenious and low-risk to those who dreamt it up. But is profoundly offensive to any sense of decency. Kuwait deserves better. Its friends can be in no doubt.
