A blog about life in the hottest and holiest region in the world.

Why Obama's Saudi Bow was Not a Kow-Tow

 President Obama definitely bowed down when he shook the hand of Saudi Arabian King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz al-Saud at the G-20 in London last week. Despite the continuing outrage of conservatives and Arab-bashers, what Obama did was entirely appropriate, too.  Here's my guide to Arabian royal protocol and American common sense.

 In the videotape zapping around the Internet, Obama looks slightly awkward, as if he wasn't quite sure whether to bow, shake hands or do both. It turned out to be a deep bow- cum-handshake, it was certainly more than the nod-handshake he gave Queen Elizabeth II, but it was not quite a formal diplomatic bow from the waist. Maybe that's why the White House is, unofficially, denying the Obama bow.

 A simple handshake would have sufficed. Obama certainly did not need to bow at all, as far as Saudi royal protocol is concerned. I have attended Abdullah's majlis in Riyadh a few times and witnessed his own personal distaste for obsequious shows of respect. In the context of a tribal society, Abdullah is a sheikh, indeed the sheikh of sheikhs, and as such his subjects would typically greet him at his Saudi-style town meetings with a kiss on the shoulder and a kiss on the hand.

On those occasions, however, I watched as Abdullah repeatedly whipped back his hand as some tried to kiss it, a custom that other monarchs in the Arab world have encouraged. I wasn't surprised when two months after ascending the throne in 2005, Abdullah decreed an official end to the kissing of shoulders and hands. The protocol henceforth, according to the Saudi royal court, would be a handshake. That goes for foreigners, including heads of state like Obama.

Yet, any American president should display a form of respect to any other head of state that he (or in the future, perhaps she) agrees to meet. Rather than kowtowing to Saudi custom, or showing fealty to a Muslim king, Obama's gesture in London seemed to be simply his gracious, spontaneous way of greeting Abdullah. That's fitting for a variety of reasons, beyond any rules of diplomatic protocol.

The Saudi leads a society that is steeped in custom, even if he himself is trying to loosen tradition a bit. As a much younger man, even if he is president of the world's most powerful country, Obama is entirely proper in showing pointed respect for an elder counterpart. Moreover, Abdullah holds a variety of positions that deserve and require recognition-king; custodian of the holy mosques of Mecca and Medina; elder statesman of the Arab world; son of the founder of his country.

Then there's the context of Obama's gesture, too, namely the long--and mutually beneficial-- Saudi-American alliance. The London encounter is the latest in an unbroken string of meetings between U.S. and Saudi heads of state dating back to the meeting between President Roosevelt and Ibn Saud, Abdullah's father, aboard the USS Quincy.

In 1945, FDR gave his Saudi counterpart more than a handshake. He presented Ibn Saud with a C-47 Dakota airplane--and one of his wheelchairs. The two aging leaders had gotten into a friendly discussion about their respective infirmities. Later, Ibn Saud would say, “This chair is my most precious possession. It is the gift of my great and good friend, President Roosevelt, on whom Allah has had mercy."

It's not really the bow that upsets many of Obama's critics. It's the US-Saudi political and economic partnership that reaches back decades. Some think the Saudis should be more subservient to the U.S., ought to make peace with Israel, have abetted Islamic extremism, are responsible for high oil prices, or all of the above. They didn't like it when even a president they supported, George Bush, held hands, Saudi-style, with Abdullah during a greeting in Crawford, Texas. But if U.S. presidents of both parties have deemed it to be in American interests to have friendly relations with Saudi Arabia, it's common sense to accord the Kingdom's elderly monarch a simple gesture of respect. For Obama, who unapologetically seeks to build bridges between Islam and the West, perhaps it's second nature, too.

 --By Scott MacLeod/Cairo

  • Print
  • Comment
Comments (44)
Post a Comment »
  • 1

    At least Time is more honest about the incident.

    But, if it is appropriate to bow in such a respectful manner to Abdullah, why not a similar bow from Obama and curtsy from Michelle before Queen Elizabeth, another long time ally who we hold dear as well?

    Maybe it is that disparity that bothers many more so than other reasons stated.

  • 2

    The Queen is the head of state but not the head of government in Britain. The Saudi "king" is both. He stands on equal footing with the President in a de jure sense, and like Scott mentioned Abdullah is an elder statesman and a noted moderate who is key in any administration plan for peace in the region. Plus the Saudis have the oil, so it pays to play nice.

  • 3

    "It's not really the bow that upsets many of Obama's critics. It's the US-Saudi political and economic partnership that reaches back decades."
    Damn right! The US 'partnership' with a backward absolute monarchy is nothing to be proud or happy about. The Saudi regime upholds mutilation and beheading as legal forms of punishment; it keeps women and foreign workers in semi-slavery positions; it does not even allow women to drive a car or to travel without a male relative 'in charge of defending their honor'. This regime belongs in the Middle Ages, not the Middle East.
    All this is not Obama's fault; he did not build that 'partnership', he inherited it. But maybe this is the source of Obama's obvious embaressment in meeting and greeting Abdullah.
    Ultimately, however, history will judge Obama on his own actions and decisions. Having inherited a bad situation is not a permanent excuse.

  • 4

    MacLeod defines, in paragraph one, the two sides of this controversy: "outraged conservatives and Arab-bashers" vs. supposedly thoughtful men, such as the author himself, knowledgeable in Arabian royal protocol and in full possession of their "American common sense".

    I hope readers will see through this not-so-subtle attempt to get them onboonbto agree with the author before they have even begun to read his (in my opinion, not very convincing) arguments.

    And American common sense leads one to note, as lewwaters, above, the disparity between the bow to King Abdullah and the bow to Queen Elisabeth.

    The context of a "long and mutually-beneficial Saudi-American alliance" doesn't cut it, in light of the equally long and mutually-beneficial British-American alliance.

    A show of respect for an elder counterpoint doesn't cut it, in light of the nearly identical ages of the Saudi king and the British queen.

    The White House is officially denying the bow. When White House Press Secretary Gibbs answers "No" to the question, "Did he bow or didn't he?", that is an official denial that the President bowed. Americans have a lot more common sense than the author gives us credit for, if he thinks this we will buy his flimsy excuse that Gibbs only meant to make a distinction between the "deep" (as in, 90 degree) from-the-waist bow-cum-handshake performed by the President, and a so-called "formal diplomatic bow", whatever that might be.

  • 5

    MacLeod defines, in paragraph one, the two sides of this controversy: "outraged conservatives and Arab-bashers" vs. supposedly thoughtful men, such as the author himself, knowledgeable in Arabian royal protocol and in full possession of their "American common sense".

    I hope readers will see through this not-so-subtle attempt to get them onboonbto agree with the author before they have even begun to read his (in my opinion, not very convincing) arguments.

    And American common sense leads one to note, as lewwaters, above, the disparity between the bow to King Abdullah and the bow to Queen Elisabeth.

    The context of a "long and mutually-beneficial Saudi-American alliance" doesn't cut it, in light of the equally long and mutually-beneficial British-American alliance.

    A show of respect for an elder counterpoint doesn't cut it, in light of the nearly identical ages of the Saudi king and the British queen.

    The White House is officially denying the bow. When White House Press Secretary Gibbs answers "No" to the question, "Did he bow or didn't he?", that is an official denial that the President bowed. Americans have a lot more common sense than the author gives us credit for, if he thinks this we will buy his flimsy excuse that Gibbs only meant to make a distinction between the "deep" (as in, 90 degree) from-the-waist bow-cum-handshake performed by the President, and a so-called "formal diplomatic bow", whatever that might be.

  • 6

    If this guy isn't on the white house payroll he is being cheated out of his money. Isn't it interesting how a change of administrations can prompt such increased effort to make excuses for any and all of the president's mistakes? I wonder what the reaction of Time would have been if the same thing had happened 6 months ago with the guy who was President then.

  • 7

    I am so terribly tired of the left biased media. Why is it so difficult to at least make an effort to be impartial? In my view, the biggest part of this story is the 'unofficial' denial (ridiculous...if the press secretary denies it, it's official). Why isn't the media focussing on the fact that the white house is lying about the act? It's time for this administration to start to displaying some ethics and integrity.

  • 8

    [...] Time Magazine is trying to say his bow was perfectly OK.  Nice try boys but lame, very lame. [...]

  • 9

    Nice try, Scott. Why can't the White House admit the President made a mistake and probably shouldn't have bowed, but it is really a trival matter? It seems you know better the protocol with the Saudi king, and you have to wonder who on Obama's staff failed to tell him how to greet the King.

  • 10

    Scott MacLeod has very articulately, explained why it is perfectly all right for President Obama to show respect to King Abdullah by bowing his head as well as upper part of his body. It is normal for younger people to show respect with this gesture. But it has nothing to do with Islam. From China to Turkey, many societies have this custom. It is a pity that such a beautiful tradition of respect for elders have been discarded in the West.
    In my opinion, President Obama is showing the way to good manners and graceful attitudes.
    By the way, when when bows to royalty, a person normally bends his one knee a little bit. This is not what Obama did.
    So dear American friends, come down to earth and see that the world has changed.
    KInd regards

    Bashy Quraishy
    Chair - ENAR Advisory Council-Brussels
    Chair - Jewish Muslim Platform-Brussels
    Mobile. 0045 40154771.
    Tel&Fax. 0045 38881977
    http://www.bashy.dk

  • 11

    "By the way, when when bows to royalty, a person normally bends his one knee a little bit. This is not what Obama did."

    May I suggest you rewatch the video and pay closer attention to his right leg and knee?

    And again, if it is "good manners and graceful attitudes," why did Queen Elizabeth only merit a head nod? Is she not also entitled to "good manners and graceful attitudes" fronm visiting heads of state?

  • 12

    Scott's argument is inconsistent with his own observations.

    "On those occasions, however, I watched as Abdullah repeatedly whipped back his hand as some tried to kiss it, a custom that other monarchs in the Arab world have encouraged."

    It behooves the diplomat to socially engage others in a form that generates a positive response. Thus, a firm and cordial greeting would have been both more appropriate with our customs and in keeping with the preferences of the King. This is basic diplomacy and especially important to an administration seeking to use "smart power". It is the responsibility of the state department to provide Obama with such information especially if the King dislikes ingratiation and demonstrative forms of affection. By any standard, the President's act was a faux pas.

  • 13

    A true American president does not curtsy for the Queen of England or bow to the King of Saudi arabia. Our president should stand up for the tenets of democracy not stoop for the obscene institution known as royalty. Michelle Obama's fondling of the Queen of England was a cowardly stab at the Western world and her husband's bow revealed his loyalties lie not with the United States but with the Arab world that is more rooted in the Middle Ages than the Middle East.

  • 14

    The question is not the bow? The question is why he lied about it? Even Spokesperson Gibb fudged on the bow saying he used 2 hands to shake hands..reporter pointed out the video show one hand....If it was a gaffe just say sorry end of matter....but the denial after the fact is getting more attention then the actual bow?? If this were a legal matter I think the bow on the video would be more then enough proof Obama bowed??

  • 15

    While I believe that the designation of a specific form of etiquette towards state heads is antiquated, I think accepting them as customs within another culture is crucial for America's image.
    .
    As for the bow meaning anything other than a greeting, the media's portrayal of these events has shown a true prejudice against Arab alliances with America. We quickly forget that a very well-qualified Chas Freeman came under assault by Zionists for having been "too close to the Arabs" and he was quickly snuffed. As if all Arabs are the Taliban.
    .
    I think, more alarmingly, we should pay attention to the country that has recently killed 1300+ civilians within its border that we so heavily arm and support blindly. First, then-PM Olmert quips about having the real say in the White House in a charming gaffe. Then, Netanyahu starts dictating orders to Obama. What's next?

  • 16

    You are doing your best to explain this away but it doesn't wash. If it is not serious why do you try so hard to explain it?

  • 17

    It's a non-issue. We should be so fortunate to have nothing more important to debate. We should be proud our president represented our interests abroad so respectfully. At least he wasn't dodging shoes.

  • 18

    Bow like a wimp to every one bit fat little Arab despot is a non-issue? You have your view friend and you are entitled to it. I have my view to which I am entitled. And he was the only other major state Head bowing like a wet fish? Where's your pride?

  • 19

    The idiots that are complaining about the "bow" are the same ones who revere the lies and stupidity of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rove-Gonzalez. They are victims of the Oxycontin and Viagra inspired flatulance of Rush Limbaugh and all of the other scumbags that have caused the financial and political problems of our country.

    They mistake their ability to verbalize and claims of "toughness" for flatulance and a 4-hour erection.

  • 20

    Gee guys, just don't kill each other; there's a whole New World Order waiting out there watching every move you make; some [you bet] probably hoping you will kill enough of each other so they can move in to collect the spoils.

  • 21

    [...] difficult to misinterpret bowing as a typical European norm. Time has an interesting piece on it: Why Obama’s Saudi Bow was Not a Kow-Tow :: The Middle East Blog - TIME.com Black 5 speed Coupe: Edelbrock Performer Intake - MAC Cold Air - Kirban AFPR - [...]

  • 22

    There is a wide gap between a showing of respect and subservience. Scott seems to either have missed that basic concept or is willfully flinging paddies from the golden shovel to rationalize the latter observence.
    .
    .
    The fact is, this bow is hardly like the ones practiced in Asia. In Japan, age is only one factor in how deep a bow is taken. Power and certainly position is fully taken into account, and as the President of the United States of America, Barak Obama deserves at minimum, an equal show of respect if not outright obeisance.
    .
    .
    The idea that one head of state is considered below another due to age is outright foolishness. One hardly has seen political rankings based on the age of leadership. But even beyond the reality of age, is the title of Abdullah, that of king, as was Queen Elizabeth, regardless of the fact that he is the actual ruler of Saudi Arabia while she only holds a formal title compared to the workings of the UK's democratic parlimentary government. Indeed, one is hard pressed to remember issues of ranking when US Presidents met the imperial leaders of Japan post WWII.
    .
    .
    But more than just the issue of titular respect towards a monarch is the issue or reciprocity. Beyond the arguments of whether the Saudi Kingdom follows the US lead in Middle East diplomacy, or its practices of oil economics is the idea of mutual respect. This has been a long standing bone of contention for those who remember back to 1990, when US troops were forbidden to show public displays of Christmas decorations and a Saudi demand that no female US soldiers drive off base, or wear 'inappropriate clothing' in public... even as the US military was protecting Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein's military threats.
    .
    .
    Indeed, it is this same Saudi sense of entitlement and obtuseness that was seen following 9.11, when many Saudi's, including members of the bin-Laden family were flown out of the country. This was followed by a $10 million slap in the face by Prince Alaweed bin Talal who decided to complain about US diplomacy even as the Twin Towers smoldered and Prince Ahmed bin Salman offers up one of his horses as restitution.
    .
    .

  • 23

    Well said jacobblues, and well researched. This is journalism and it was “Time” someone said it. Congrats!

  • 24

    Right... Jacob, please provide proof of anything you just said. ANYTHING would be good. You can start with this list:
    (1) The restitution Prince Ahmed bin Salman owed;
    (2) Prince Ahmed bin Salman's offering of a horse on 9/11;
    (3) the so-called "$10 million slap in the face"; and,
    (4) what Prince Alaweed bin Talal was complaining about specifically and the context.
    .
    At least you have fans though! :)

Add Your Comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.
The Middle East Blog Daily E-mail

Get e-mail updates from TIME's The Middle East Blog in your inbox and never miss a day.

Quotes of the Day »

Get & Share
CORINNA LANKFORD, one of the 10 American Baptists who are detained in Haiti on child-trafficking charges