Fiercely criticized in France, Nicolas Sarkozy’s speech at the “Majlis Al-Shoura,” the Saudi Arabian Consultative Council, is probably the tree that hides the forest. Or, to metaphorically exaggerate, the bush that conceals the steppes! Reducing the expression of the President’s religious thought to the single phrase mentioned, “God does not enslave man but liberates him,” to the point of accusing him of Christian sectarianism constitutes not only a misreading but also an unfair interpretation of his speech. And this is because of at least three reasons.
The first is due to the very place where this intervention occurred. A purely advisory assembly, a kind of nursery for young intellectual or religious figures who may one day join the complex intricacies of a notably worn Saudi power, the “Majlis al-Shoura” actually represents a “phase of political observation of future leaders,” according to the amused expression of one of its members. The Consultative Council nevertheless remains a forum where subjects of interest to the Kingdom can — cautiously — be debated without necessarily committing the state’s official stance. The setting facilitates discussion, yet it is defined by its environment. In a country that indeed draws its fundamental laws from Sharia and considers the Quran as the ultimate revelation that concludes the two previous ones – not without hierarchical consequences that favor the Mohammedan corpus – religious reflection is not always serene. Invoking, as Nicolas Sarkozy did in these “holy places of Islam” and without falling into syncretism, other monotheisms, and even broader beliefs including more rational philosophies, without ever prejudging their status or attempting to assess their substratum, does not resemble intransigent inquisitorial strictness. Moreover, this approach has another merit: it encourages Wahhabi authorities to continue a more interpretative reading of the Quran, a shift initiated by King Abdullah since ascending the throne despite the difficulties of overcoming persistent dogmatic resistance.
Contrary to the criticisms addressed to him, the presidential discourse, the second reason, decisively moves away from a purely theological vein, which as the occupant of the Élysée reminds us, is unnecessary, and leans towards a form of spirituality — if the term were not so overused today. The universalism claimed, or even hammered, by the President is its main articulation. The term “universal,” which Nicolas Sarkozy bravely sought to highlight in a passage of King Abdullah’s speech to the Hajj pilgrims, speaks volumes: far from sectarianism, free from dogma, and not subject to commands, it presents what is most “illuminating” about man in his quest for the absolute. The President’s line inadvertently takes on the guise of a personal “jihad” – in the sense of an effort made upon oneself. This is evident from the presidential slip when Nicolas Sarkozy stumbled over the phrase “as head of a state based on the principle of separation of Church and State,” where he initially omits “preference for a belief” in favor of the latter… before correcting himself. He probably felt more in tune with his “credo” when he spoke as Canon of the Basilica of St. John Lateran. The adjustment in the Riyadh speech thus shows a head of state eager to transcend his own religious choice in the name of a role and the weight of its symbol.
One could not find, the third reason, a better illustration of the spirit of “secularism” than his discourse, juxtaposing all religions, even beliefs, without any one of them prevailing over another. There is no “primus inter pares” among religions in the secular Republic, as the President has convincingly recalled, except for the principle of secularism itself, inalienable guarantor of this equity for all others. And who today demands no preeminence for itself. For those who still might doubt, so to speak, the ecumenism of the first Frenchman, it is perhaps against his personal belief that the quality of the recent welcome given by the Élysée to a delegation from the Grand Orient of France, the main French Masonic obedience shunned by the so-called regular masonry for the freedom it grants its members to believe — or not believe — should be noted. This does not prevent senior members of this association from revisiting rites that are surprisingly Christ-like in their symbolism.
Would a sectarian head of state agree to commit to speaking, in the coming months and at their invitation, before members of such an assembly? For an alleged dogmatist, one could hardly find a more conciliatory figure.
