When my eyes first fell upon the three volumes authored by Prince Dr. Salman bin Saud bin Abdulaziz, titled “The History of King Saud… Document and Truth,” I initially imagined them to be an attempt to reclaim a period whose history had not been written in a manner that satisfies a son’s view of his father’s legacy—specifically, the era of King Saud’s rule over the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. But with further reading and deeper examination, I found a substantial work worthy of attention, one that invites reflection on the features of an entire era. The extensive documentary effort alone merits study, and the objective treatment of the period’s circumstances outweighs any attempt to steer the reader toward achievements alone.
In essence, it is a work deserving of reading from two perspectives:
First, it presents a dense, well‑documented historical period that is not readily accessible to a generation that did not witness King Saud’s era, let alone possess the ability to discern its features. This generation has the right to understand the outlines of a developmental project—one that moved forward under primitive and difficult conditions—and which deserves recognition.
Second, it addresses a period that remains ambiguous to many, to the extent that it sometimes seems detached from the social, economic, cultural, or political history of the Kingdom. Until now, that era has not—based on what I have seen—received a comprehensive documentary and analytical reading that examines the developmental project that began to emerge during that time. The work relies on documents at every turn, allowing the document itself to speak the truth. For this reason, it becomes an important reference and a concentrated scholarly effort that could serve as part of the curriculum for researchers and historians.
I believe that when Dr. Salman bin Saud chose to publish this work and assume responsibility for it, he was not merely seeking documents that would support the legitimacy of the publication. Rather, the pursuit of truth itself was his driving concern. I am confident that his academic and cultural background allows room for readers’ observations, and I recognize that his scholarly and reflective character invites commentary and engagement with a work of this magnitude on the history of King Saud—may God have mercy on him.
I do not believe that the task of a columnist is merely to summarize the works of researchers and authors. The task, rather, is to shed light on a project in one way or another. Therefore, I will not dwell extensively on the content of the three volumes—interested readers may explore them themselves. Instead, I will offer a brief outline of their material, along with several observations.
The first volume of King Saud’s history includes three main themes:
- His biography and period of rule, covering:
- King Saud before the Crown Prince era
- King Saud as Crown Prince
- King Saud ascending the throne
- King Saud and the crisis of governance in the Kingdom
- His efforts in the Islamic world, highlighting the activities of his reign in:
- Islamic outreach
- Expansion of the Two Holy Mosques and care for pilgrims
- Islamic solidarity
- His political framework, including:
- A critical study of political literature of the 1950s and 1960s
- An analysis of King Saud’s political thought
- His management of crises during the turbulent years and their regional and international implications
The second volume focuses on administrative reforms and economic development during King Saud’s reign, through two themes:
- Administrative reforms, including:
- Organization of government work
- Public institutions
- Oversight bodies
- Development movement and local administration
- Economic development, covering:
- The oil sector
- Industry
- Agriculture
- Monetary policy
- Trade
- Transportation and communications
The third volume provides a documented reading of four major themes:
- The educational project in King Saud’s era
- The media landscape
- Healthcare development
- Social transformation
(When I was a student at Riyadh University—after it had restored the name of its founder—I did not know that the College of Petroleum and Minerals, which later became a university, was established during King Saud’s reign, nor that the General Presidency for Girls’ Education was also founded then.)
I believe that the extensive, well‑documented material capturing the internal development project, administrative reform, and the building of state institutions during King Saud’s era—particularly in the second and third volumes—reveals the outlines of a developmental project that has faded from the memory of generations. Examining the details of these projects offers a more accurate picture of a period that witnessed growth and achievement. Approaching the truth requires acknowledging that the subsequent phase of nation‑building rested on foundations laid during that earlier era.
I will not comment further on the second and third volumes—the documentary material alone provides the reader with a clear impression that the foundations of the developmental project, with its structures and components, owe much to that period. The available material speaks for itself. Therefore, I turn to the first volume, which is the most intriguing and the most complex in its political dimensions—Arab and international—and the most influential in the events of that era and their consequences.
I believe that Prince Dr. Salman bin Saud recognized the importance of analytical depth in this volume, as it addresses one of the most consequential periods in the Arab region after World War II. Indeed, I believe that King Saud—and the crises that accompanied his reign at the Arab, regional, and international levels—were deeply shaped by these external dynamics. The governance crisis referenced by the author was itself a result of regional and international interactions. Understanding what happened internally during that period is impossible without sufficient awareness of the external forces at play. For this reason, I believe that further analytical attention to regional and international influences would enrich the political narrative of that era.
There is no doubt that King Saud—may God have mercy on him—was deeply Arab and nationalist in spirit. The 1956 war, his alliance with Nasser’s Egypt against the Tripartite Aggression, his use of oil as a weapon—cutting off supplies to Britain and France—and his mobilization of the Kingdom’s economic, political, and military capabilities in support of Egypt were all expressions of this Arab orientation. His opposition to the Baghdad Pact, his alignment with Nasser’s Egypt against a pact designed to restore British influence in the region under the guise of Cold War strategy, his rejection of the Eisenhower Doctrine, his cancellation of the Dhahran Air Base lease to the United States, his resistance to foreign military alliances, and his efforts to strengthen Arab unity—all these elements can be discerned in the documents presented in the first volume.
Yet I believe that understanding the history of that era requires understanding the mechanisms of great‑power conflict at the time. A colonial power—Great Britain—was still dominant in the region but exhausted after World War II. It lost its influence in Egypt after the Free Officers’ Revolution of July 23, 1952. The movement of Mohammad Mossadegh in Iran nearly drove another nail into the coffin of the British Empire. The Iraqi army’s revolution of July 14, 1958 dealt a severe blow. The series of coups in Syria beginning with Husni al‑Za’im in 1949 further eroded the old colonial order.
The United States was not absent from these events—it saw itself as the heir to the fading empire, entering the region to inherit what remained of British influence. The Game of Nations revealed much about this transition. Thus, managing crises during such a period was extraordinarily difficult and dangerous. After the failure of the Suez War in 1956, and the U.S. opposition to Britain’s attempt to retake Egypt, Britain never regained its footing. It continued to rearrange its cards in the region, crafting alliances, intrigues, and conspiracies to recover some of its influence.
In my view, the Cold War was not truly part of the Middle East’s internal dynamics—it was a pretext used to justify Western alliances such as the Baghdad Pact and the Eisenhower Doctrine. The Soviet Union had no real presence in the region, nor the capacity for meaningful influence. The Cold War was being fought on the edges of Eastern Europe. Except for Aden, the narrative of Soviet influence in the region was largely a myth—one that concealed a different struggle between a fading empire and a rising power.
Understanding this struggle helps us better understand the era that Prince Dr. Salman bin Saud devoted a special chapter to: “Managing the Years of Turbulence and Their Interactions During the Reign of King Saud.”