Anti Corruption Movement in Lebanon

Many nations across The Middle East actively participate in corruption practices on a governmental level. Lebanon is no exception to this phenomenon. It is unique however, in its ability to embed characteristics of monopoly of resources, embezzlement of funds and an absence of transparency across both the public and private sector. A phrase commonly used among Lebanese when discussing the political atmosphere in Lebanon is “Kullun Haramiyyeh” or “They’re all Thieves” (Issa). Over the past few years however, Lebanon has experienced a rise in civil activism to combat such malpractices by the government. Civil activists have ignited a movement demanding political transparency and higher standards of living for the Lebanese population. At the forefront of this movement has been the youth of Lebanon, who mobilized the population to rally for these demands by means of demonstration, petition, interaction with the media, and especially use of the internet to garner support. This movement has gained unprecedented momentum, engaging both civilians and media to spread awareness of the government’s corrupted habits. Enacting tangible change however, has proved to be a more cumbersome task. Some Lebanese voters pointed to Michel Aoun, The Prime Minister elected in 2016 after basing his platform on an anti-corruption agenda. Prospects began to dim however, after the election of Aoun where people of Lebanon have failed to see much transparency, and Aoun’s party attempted raise in taxes with questionable legitimacy (Issa).

Many members of society in Lebanon have voiced their grievances about the lack of transparency within the Lebanese political sphere. Youth groups, international actors, and even some elites such as Ali Khalil, Minister of finance, have reached to various media outlets to voice their concerns and rally for tangible change in Lebanon. By 2015, new lists were coming out almost every day of prominent Lebanese politicians and civil leaders who had been accused of some form of corruption, many of whom had previously been deemed “politically connected untouchables” (Belhaj). This symbolizes progress for the movement, gaining major support and momentum from the population at large. At this point, Lebanese politicians began competing to show how serious they were about fighting political corruption, even going so far as to disclose names of suspected felons to the media, in efforts to get elected or remain in power(Belhaj).

Ali Hassan Khalil, Minister of Finance (2015) has been a major face of Lebanon’s movement against political corruption because he effectively utilized his position under the public eye to bring attention to corruption practices across Lebanon. In 2015 he told the Lebanese media “we live in a regime that allows any individual to engage in corruption practices at all levels and enjoy political protection from within and outside the government.” (Belhaj). Such statements coming from important actors haven proven imperative to the success of such a movement in gaining public support. In this instance, the public has a face to look to for stability and direction.

Another group at the forefront of this movement was the MyCity political party of Beirut. The party was composed of young people, including filmmakers, architects, and professors who achieved “unprecedented political traction” combatting the corrupted politicians of Beirut during the 2016 elections (Cambanis). Their platform was based on a dialogue that outlined a commitment to fighting corruption, and bringing basic amenities such as proper waste facilities to the citizens of Beirut. While the party did not take public office, they made huge advancements providing- if only briefly, a sense of hope for many Lebanese who had previously believed that the gap between civilians and the political realm was too wide to close. While their campaign promises were not enacted into the governmental system of Beirut, they outlined a dream that was shared by the people of Lebanon for a transparent government that could provide basic programs and assistance to their people.

After being without a prime minister for about two years, circumstances seemed to slightly improve after Michel Aoun was elected in 2016. Aoun led his campaign on a platform of anti-corruption policies and with the goal of exposing corrupted officials (Issa). However, after the party sought to implement suspicious taxes, Aoun’s reputation began to falter. Citizens took to the streets yet again to combat what seemed to be more of the same institutionalized corruption. Effectively, Aoun’s party began to rethink the previously suggested tax reforms.

The movement to end political corruption in Lebanon has been an imperative step towards Lebanon’s legitimacy as a true democracy. The movement has been progressive, with widespread backing from Lebanese civil society. Tangible success however, has proven to be a more difficult task. The election of Michel Aoun seemed to be a step in the right direction for Lebanon’s political transparency after he ran on the platform of being against systemic corruption. However after being elected, his actions have not made large steps away from Lebanon’s chronic corruption problem.

Works Cited

Barnard, Anne, editor. The New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2015/08/26/world/middleeast/lebanons-garbage-crisis-underscores-governments-disarray.html.

 Foreign Policy. foreignpolicy.com/2016/11/01/lebanon-has-a-new-president-not-that-it-matters/.

 IBCGroup. www.lbcgroup.tv/news/d/news-bulletin-reports/261364/report-beirut-my-city-campaign-announces-candidate/en.

 Middle East Institute. www.mei.edu/content/article/lebanon-s-emerging-protest-movement.

#YouStink

#YouStink, your government, your municipality, your disregard for your citizens, and your corruption. The #YouStink campaign began after the end of the Lebanese government's termination of the contract with their contracted private garbage disposal company and the closure of the Al Naameh dump site on July 17th, 2015. The government had no plan after the contract as to how they planned on disposing all of the trash, piles of garbage started to form and the people saw the piles of trash all around and everywhere smelt like trash. "Lebanese have long suffered through water shortages, regular electricity blackouts, a leaking sewage system and poor health and education services (Slim)," the people finally began to rise up when they felt that the government was no longer treating their people like humans by making them to live among trash. 

They also felt that their was corruption in the distribution of shares of the Independent Municipality Funds (IMF) was not being allocated correctly, and that privatization impoverished the people and pushed towards the situation that they were in where many public services were being disregarded. "Between 1995 and 2015, Lebanon spent more than two billion USD on waste management (Tadamun)" the private companies, Sukleen and Sukomi, who were in charge of garbage disposal for those years had found a goldmine for themselves taking advantage of the frailty of the government and creating a monopoly on the garbage disposal, making disposal more expensive in Lebanon than in most countries. With all of this money that the companies received they did little to recycle the waste making the landfills to fill up quickly. The filling up of the Al Naameh landfill led to the mountains of trash to move onto the streets and for the stench to spread all over. 

#YouStink created a great slogan to spread through international media coverage and to resonate with everyone who had to deal with the trash situation. The protests began by focusing on "environmentally friendly solutions to waste management; restoring the municipalities’ role in waste management by allocating public funds to them rather than to private companies; and holding those responsible for the crisis accountable... [but later] The scope of the protesters’ demands widened with each demonstration as they shouted out slogans condemning the corrupt state and how the confessional leaders benefited from the system (Tadamun)." These aspects create an ideal social campaign because of its ability to spread, yet the police brutality and defamation of the campaign lead to it ultimately dissolving without much results.  This campaign was able to unify people like no other previous protest had done which is both a good thing and a bad thing good because they had found a non-sectarian and non-partisan way of uniting the public yet because of the overall inclusivity that this campaign involves it ends up calling for different groups to bring different agendas onto the situation each group wanting to bring different types of changes. The campaign leaders did try to stop any political affiliations among the social movement to avoid conflicts among protesters ideas, but their stance ultimately was let out creating some distance between groups of protesters although there was still some type of unity among all.  

Today the waste crisis in Lebanon continues. Despite the ending of the You Stink protests, there was still a few things that were successful in the protests. They were able to stop the bidding process for privatization of waste management and they were able to bring in the debate of decentralizing the municipalities and how the distribution of funds should be equal. Another thing that the You Stink movement brought was the launching of the Beirut, My City campaign to run in the municipal elections in 2016 they focused on many of the ideas brought upon by the You Stink movement such as affordable housing, green spaces, access to public space, stronger environmental regulations etc. This campaign was able to get 40% of votes but they were not able to get a position in the Municipality. 

This political campaign although not entirely successful was able to show the people of Lebanon that there could be some type of unity among their people and that although they may be a country full of varying groups they can come together to create change. This was something that had rarely happened in the history of Lebanon and it is something that can now be kept in history to remind the people that when there is something wrong in their society they can come together to try to change it. 

Bibliography

“The Garbage Crisis in Lebanon: From Protest to Movement to Municipal Elections.” Tadamun, 21 May 2017, www.tadamun.co/2016/05/19/garbage-crisis-lebanon-protest-movement-municipal-elections/?lang=en#.WtTUDtPwbOR.

Slim, Randa. “Can #YouStink Campaign Shake up Lebanon?” CNN, Cable News Network, 31 Aug. 2015, www.cnn.com/2015/08/31/opinions/slim-lebanon-trash-campaign/index.html.

In March of 2014, over two dozen women demonstrated in Baghdad, against an Iraqi approved draft law. This draft law from the cabinet allowed women to be married at the age of nine instead of 18. The law would also grant girls custody to fathers. Thus, the fathers are the only one who can deny or accept a marriage proposal, and the mother has no input. This law would also legalize marital rape. This entitles the husband to marital sex with or without the young wife's consent. Further, if the law was passed women would not be able to leave the residence without the permission of the husband. In case of divorce the law allows children over the age of two to automatically be in the custody of the father. This law would subject women to abuse in the household and of their basic human rights. The state had the upper hand when deciding what age young girls should be married and the protesters wanted to have some input. One of the ways the women of Baghdad mobilized was through a frozen flash mob in a shopping mall. This flash mob was an effective strategy to draw attention to the movement. During the flash mob men, women, and children participated. There were a variety of scenes that depicted the life of a girl forced marriage at age nine. One of the many scenes was of a young girl holding a doll looking afraid and being taken by a significantly older man. The other participants in the frozen flash mob were fathers holding their young daughters hands. Also, there were men trying to buy and convince young girls to come with them. The Flash mob denounced young forced marriages of Iraqi girls. The resourcefulness of the women in Iraq used their platforms to come together into one movement. The Organization of Women’s Freedom and a variety of other women’s rights groups in Iraq came together to protest in main square in Iraq. The conjoined women's rights groups debated with the drafter of the law, the Minister of Justice. The women's protest often used the media as a platform for debates and discussions like BBC Arabic. These Women Human rights groups mobilized the public opinion against the law. Due to these efforts the Prime Minister chose to halt the proposal and made the committee review the law further. The women’s organizations are still advocating to make sure the draft of the law is thrown away. This powerful movement frame showed the flaws in the society and the culture in Iraq. The solution is to stop this law altogether but the movement understands this will take some time. The rapid gain of mass following came with the attention from the initial Frozen flash mob. The possible reason behind doing such an act was for the public to see this issue in a creative way directly in front of them when they least expect it, a busy mall. This use of modern practices link political and historical ideals embedded in Iraqi culture. Regardless, of the Women’s organizations political organization they all came to illuminate the heterogeneity in Iraq.

Women to Drive Movement

Women to Drive

In 1957, Saudi Arabia’s capital and a very populous city Riyadh, passed a law that banned women from driving (Commins, 109). For decades, women had to either hire male drivers or have men in their family drive them anywhere. This has prevented women from being able to get jobs and has affected Saudi Arabia’s economy negatively as about half of their population is unable to participate in the work force. 

As international standards for women’s rights rose, women in Saudi Arabia demanded a change to the ban on driving and began the “Women To Drive Movement.” The first form of activism that was seen in support of this movement occurred in November of 1990, when a group of women drove around Riyadh for half an hour until they were stopped by police. They were punished for this crime harshly. Their families “were barred from foreign travel for a year”; “women who had government jobs were fired”; and the women “were denounced by name as immoral women out to destroy Saudi society” (Murphy). This was an important part of the movement because it showed how unjust the rule was and how harsh the government was in responding to it. This became the backbone for the movement. 

The movement steadily gained momentum, however, in 2011 when women took to social media and were exposed to other various political movements. Many women were inspired by other uprisings against autocratic rulers. They began to believe that they also had a voice and could make a change through protests. This shows the power that the internet and social media has on society and change. 

There are many examples of women who took to the internet to show their acts of protest against the law on driving. One woman in 2011 began driving regularly. When she was interviewed by the BBC and she stated: “Before in Saudi, you never heard about protests, [but] after what has happened in the Middle East, we started to accept a group of people going outside and saying what they want in a loud voice, and this has had an impact on me" (Buchanan). A call for change truly began when Manal Al-Sharif took the movement campaign to social media. She posted a video of her driving and called upon women and men to join her “Women2Drive” movement. Her video received thousands of views within a day. She was imprisoned for nine days as punishment (Vu). The harsh punishment may have been meant to deter Al-Sharif and other women from driving.  But in reality, the harsh punishment she received strengthened her campaign and increased its following as more women were encouraged to raise their voices against this unjust law. Following Al-Sharif’s media post, many more women became inspired and took to the streets, driving until they were arrested and posting it on various social media platforms to gain more and more support. 

After women had protested for almost 27 years, in September of 2017, King Salman finally issued a statement, which gave Saudi women the right to drive; however, it will not be implemented until June 24, 2018. The flock towards social media truly commenced the movement because it not only inspired Middle Eastern women and men, but it also inspired people in the United States to get involved. This further pressured the Saudi Arabian government to make a change to the law.
            This has inspired more change for women’s rights in Saudi Arabia and has even brought challenge to the guardianship rule, which stops women from making decisions without assistance of a male figure. This move to ease restrictions on women in Saudi Arabia will have great outcomes on their economy and women’s ability to work (Gauoette & Labott). Many women in Saudi Arabia are well-educated and ambitious and the ban on driving has prevented them from reaching their goals in society. Even though it may not seem like such a large step in women’s rights, it has helped inspire many women to feel empowered to have a sense of participation in Saudi Arabia.

Although it is a great positive step, there are still many lifestyle limits on women in Saudi Arabia. This includes their strict law known as Wahhabism, which requires women to have strict dress codes, they cannot associate with unrelated men, and they must always be accompanied by a male guardian (Gardner). These limitations that women face will hopefully be lifted soon in the future to allow women to have equal rights. Women in Saudi Arabia have pushed for change more and more as they hope to have equal access to resources and work. Change has sparked specifically from the “Women to Drive” movement and it has continued into other movements in an attempt to allow women to do as they wish without a male figure having to be involved. 

#Women2Drive

            Women’s right to the freedom of movement is heavily restricted in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia was the only country in the world where women were not allowed to drive until September 2017 (Human Rights Watch 2008). Leaving aside many other forms of gender inequality, the right to drive is a major obstacle placed upon Saudi women that limits their visibility, physical movement, and participation in the public sphere. Starting the “Women2Drive” movement was not their first act of civil disobedience. In 1990 about four dozen women in Riyadh were arrested for driving in protest of the ban and had their passports confiscated. In 2007 women petitioned King Abdullah for their right to drive. The Arab Spring of 2011 allowed for the women to put together a more organized and intensive campaign. The “Women2Drive” campaign is part of a broader movement, the “Right2Dignity,” which advocates for the end of all gender inequality in Saudi Arabia (Human Rights Watch 2013). Although they faced many obstacles facing a government that is generally intolerable of any opposition and the culture of male guardianship, the king lifted the ban and women will be allowed to apply for a driver’s license by June of 2018 (Hubbard 2017).

            The movement began at a particularly opportunistic time. When the first protests against the driving ban arose, there were no other movements occurring. This allowed them to gain as much attention in the public sphere as possible. The Arab Spring of 2011 inspired the women behind the campaign to revive the movement. One woman from Jeddah noted that “Before, in Saudi, you never heard of protests, [but] after what has happened in the Middle East, we started accepting a group of people going outside and saying what they want in a loud voice” (Buchanan 2011). Because protests were occurring more frequently, they were less afraid of the consequences. They were influenced by people across the region who were courageously speaking out against their governments. They took to social media to spread the “Women2Drive” campaign. Their slogan was “Teach me how to drive so that I can protect myself” (Human Rights Watch 2013).

            Saudi Arabia has a history of quelling any dissent. They frequently jail protestors and people who speak out against the regime. During the Arab Spring, Saudi Arabia gave money to Bahrain to aid in the government’s repression of protestors. The Saudi government took measures to silence the women of the movement. During the demonstration in 1990 where women in Riyadh drove around a parking lot to protest the driving ban, they were detained, their passports were confiscated, they were suspended from their government jobs, and intimidated to not speak to the media (Human Rights Watch 2008). Many of them could not obtain a job for a while due to public shaming by the government. Women that were caught driving were detained and if they were released they had to agree that they would remove themselves from the campaign. One of the most prominent women in the movement, Manal al-Sharif, was arrested while driving and during her detention, it was reported by Saudi media outlets that she had confessed to being funded by “outside sources” and conspired to overthrow the regime (Human Rights Watch 2013). Her detention was extremely important as she was one of the main faces of the movement. By arresting al-Sharif the government was sending a clear message that they will not tolerate this opposition.

            The government could control the narrative through the media in the country. It also heavily restricts access to social media. Internationally, there were pressures on the king to lift the driving ban and Saudi Arabia was called out by various countries and NGOs for their blatant violation of human rights. But within Saudi Arabia, people, particularly men, believed that lifting the ban and allowing women to drive would have disastrous negative consequences. One of Saudi Arabia’s top clerics, Sheikh Saleh al-Lohaidan, claimed, with absolutely no evidence, that driving damages women’s ovaries and will lead to them bearing children with clinical problems (Al-Akhbar 2013). Deputy crown prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud stated that “women driving is not a religious issue as much as it is an issue that relates to the community itself that either accepts it or refuses it” (Staufenberg 2016). Many men share the concern that allowing women to drive will ruin the “Saudi family.”

            The “Women2Drive” campaign created a strong online presence, with global coverage on mainstream media outlets, social media, and feminist networks. Saudi women posted videos of themselves driving, bringing their issue to the international stage (Marya 2011). In 2013, activists arranged another campaign that called for women to defy the driving ban on October 26. This produced even more videos and photos of women driving circulating through the internet (The Guardian 2013). The “Women2Drive” campaign highlighted the practical necessity of being allowed to drive and the danger of being forbidden to do so in emergency situations (Human Rights Watch 2013). They framed the issue as one of economics as well. Lifting the driving ban could help the economy. Low oil prices have limited the government jobs available, so the kingdom is trying to push more people, including women, into the public sector. But working Saudi women have to hire drivers which takes up a lot of their paycheck and decreases their incentive to work (Hubbard 2017).

            On 26 September 2017, King Salman lifted the ban and is allowing women to drive. The change is set to be implemented this June (Hubbard 2017). This shows the effectiveness of organized movements and the ability of the Women2Drive campaign to frame their issue as one that would not only benefit women but Saudi Arabia as a whole.

Women2Drive Movement in Saudi Arabia

In places such as the United States, it is almost unfathomable to imagine a world where women are not allowed to drive. In Saudi Arabia, this was their reality. Women and children grew accustomed to relying on others to get anywhere from school, to work to the grocery store. If families were able to afford it, women often had a driver to bring them around and afforded some mobility. The culture adapted to a women’s inability to leave and come as she pleased with fast food restaurants offering to bring food to women who were unable to leave the house because their driver or husband were not available (Bager). The lack of mobility and freedom that this caused women, led to the movement campaign we now know as “Women2Drive” and is now one of the driving forces behind new legislation allowing women to begin driving in June of 2018.

            While the whole movement centers around allowing women to legally drive, technically women driving has itself never been illegal. The act of women driving is made illegal by a set of defacto laws and a fatwa which led to a formal ban on women driving. Laws that prohibit women from driving include laws that prohibit women from obtaining a driver’s license or the guardianship laws that make it impossible for women to be independent from men, making things like driving by yourself nearly impossible (Shmuluvitz, par. 5). A fatwa was also issued in 1990 regarding the issue of women driving because the religious body feared the social and cultural repercussions women driving would present (Shmuluvitz, par. 2). The fatwa issued in 1990 following the minor uprising of women driving, led to the interior minister of the time, Nayef bin Abdul -Aziz Al Saud to issue a ban on women driving (Rothna, par. 6).

The fatwa was issued due to an uprising of approximately 47 women who went to an empty parking lot in the city of Riyadh to drive (“Saudi Arabia Agrees to Let Women Drive”, par. 4). The women involved were subsequently arrested for their actions, many of whom lost jobs or were shunned by others for what they had done. Rumors began to spread about what had occurred at the protest, claiming the women were in “bikinis” (“Once Shunned as ‘Drivers,’ Saudi Women Who Fought for Ban Now Celebrate”, par. 26). While it did begin a conversation on the capability of women driving, many also questioned why the protest took place. Yes, it was inconvenient for women to have to rely on everyone else to get around, but why change it? Women driving? That was inconceivable.

While women fighting for their right to drive isn’t a new phenomenon in Saudi Arabia, 4 women were crucial in the development of the “Women2Drive” movement.  Manal Al Sharif, Loujain Al Hathloul, Wajeha Al Huwaider and Maysaa Al Amoudi were all integral in the “Women2Drive” movement. Manal Al Sharif gained worldwide attention when she drove through Saudi Arabia posting the footage of herself doing so on YouTube. While she ended up getting arrested for her defiant act, what she did put spotlights on the issue of women not being able to drive and boosted support for the movement (Begum). Although she was arrested and held in jail, her act brought about the wider issue and gave other women a leg to stand on when it came down to the broader issue of women in the driver’s seat. Maysaa Al Amoudi and Loujain Al Hathloul, like Al Sharif were also arrested for attempting to cross into Saudi Arabia driving. Saudi officials arrested Al Hathloul because she was driving the vehicle and subsequently arrested Al Amoudi for being in the car with a woman driving. Wajeha Al Huwaider made noise for the movement by being an advocate and although scrutinized, created a petition for people to sign, asking for the ban currently placed on driving to be lifted (Al Ash- Shaykh).

While it takes more than being arrested and having people sign a petition for a successful movement to take place, what these women did helped to drive the movement to success. They risked everything they had to bring awareness to an issue that was being widely ignored for decades. Factors such as modernization and globalization helped the culture to shape and adjust to the idea of women being able to drive (“Once Shunned as ‘Drivers,’ Saudi Women Who Fought for Ban Now Celebrate”, par. 6). This is also a factor in how the movement was able to successfully get the ban lifted and the fatwa against women driving removed and allowed for legislation that stated they could drive. While people are still staunchly against allowing women to drive in the area, the fact that women will be able to is a great win for the women who sacrificed so much to see this dream become reality.

While guardianship laws are still in place in Saudi Arabia, Prince Khalid Bin Salmon stated that women would be able to drive without men, so they could move about freely going to work or to school (Begum, par.15). Women can finally experience freedom and with this some women have considered joining the work force due to their newfound mobility. While it is difficult to predict the outcome of the “Women2Drive” movement on the society, this is a good step to showing that while not every social movement can be successful, some can and this one was.

How Saudi Women Won the Right to Drive

Saudi Arabia in June of 2018 will allow its women to apply for a driver’s license and drive cars, even motorcycles. This change is well received in the kingdom as well as outside, however, this victory has been credited to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman with little attention paid to grassroots activists who started campaigning for their right to drive more than two decades ago (Begum). It started in the 1900s. The United States and Saudi Arabia joined forces against Iraq after it invaded Kuwait. The US worried that Saddam Hussein might come after Saudi Arabia’s oil so they deployed many American troops to protect the country. What happened immediately after was a culture shock. Female American troops were shocked at the restrictions placed on Saudi women while Saudi women noticed that American women were able to drive around the military base and even work alongside men (Shannon). Saudi Arabia had a customary ban on women driving but that didn’t seem to be the case for the rest of the world. Women immediately started campaigning around this with “47 Saudi women [organizing] a convoy to drive through the streets of Riyadh in protest of the ban” (Begum). This was the first of a series of protest meant to resist the ban as well as call for an end to it.

Social movement campaigns are used in different parts of the world to overthrow oppressive regimes and change the culture of a society. These movements were overlooked in the Middle East until the 2011 Arab Spring brought them to the forefront. The Arab Spring highlighted civil society in the region as well as showed the willingness of people to fight for what they believe in. What was even more shocking was that activists in the region mobilized using tactics associated with successful movement campaigns: using international actors to pressure the state, uniting followers as a means of mobilization, and countering hegemonic discourse by offering an alternative that resonates with the population (Hardig). In reaction to the 1900s protests the “Counsel of Senior Scholars Saudi Arabia’s highest religious body, issued an edict—or fatwa— prohibiting driving because, it said, it could lead women to mix with unrelated men and ultimately bring about ‘social chaos’ (Begum). This made the ban on women driving, previously a social rule, an official policy. The aim was to discourage Saudi women from demonstrating for their rights, but it did quite the opposite.

Activists used social media as a medium to publicly defy the ban. In 2008 Wajeha al-Huwaider uploaded a video of herself driving, in 2011 the “Women2Drive campaign” was officially launched to unite followers, and around the same time, Manal al-Sharif—who later became the face of the movement— spent 10 days in detention for posting a video of herself driving (Begum). All of these events garnered international attention and support. This helped achieve one of the goals of the movement. Using international actors to pressure the state, activist forced the state to pay attention to them. Saudi’s trading partners were paying attention to the issue so the state had no choice but to do the same. Otherwise, they would compromise their relationship with other countries. In addition to applying pressure on the state, the movement was successful in countering the hegemonic discourse. When women protested the ban in 2013, men drove with them to show their support and in 2013, “the head of the religious police stated that there were no religious text forbidding women from driving” (Begum). This increased the support for the movement and dismantled the legitimacy of the ban. It now seemed more like a joke, than an official policy.

The ban was lifted in 2017 prompting women to take to Twitter to express their joy and hope for the future of Saudi Arabia. The movement used international actors to pressure the state, united followers under a common cause, and countered the hegemonic discourse in order to gather and mobilize followers. More importantly, this was all done nonviolently. From the first fight to the current victory, activists demonstrated peacefully for their right without directly provoking the authorities. It was a long and hard fight but many activists see it a stepping stone to combatting another brutal law, the guardianship law. Under Saudi law, women are required to get the permission of a male guardian in order to do a wide range of things such as getting a passport, job, or traveling outside the country. The success of the women to drive movement has shown the potential of organization and mobilization in Saudi Arabia. Under the right circumstances and with the right tactics, many social movements are successful. If activists in Saudi Arabia play their cards right, I have no doubt that in a few years we'll hear that the guardianship law has been overturned.

Work Cited

www.hrw.org/news/2017/09/29/brave-female-activists-who-fought-lift-saudi-arabias-driving-ban.

doi:10.1080/09557571.2012.678296.