SAUDI Arabia's ambassador has warned of "potentially serious repercussions" of a breakdown in relations with the UK and complained of a lack of "mutual respect".
Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz singled out the cancellation of a deal to train prison staff in the Gulf state as he railed against an "alarming change in the way Saudi Arabia is discussed in Britain".
In an unusual public intervention, he wrote an article for the Daily Telegraph in which he warned the wealthy kingdom would not be "lectured to" and urged respect for its strict system of Sharia law.
He said: "One recent example of this mutual respect being breached was when Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the Opposition, claimed that he had convinced Prime Minister David Cameron to cancel a prison consultancy contract with Saudi Arabia worth £5.9 million."
"This coincided with speculation linking the contract's cancellation to a number of domestic events in the Kingdom.
"If the extensive trade links between the two countries are going to be subordinate to certain political ideologies, then this vital commercial exchange is going to be at risk.
"We want this relationship to continue but we will not be lectured to by anyone. Hasty decisions prompted by short-term gains often do more harm than good in the longer term."
Mr Corbyn lobbied against the contract at the same time as urging the Government to intervene over a number of Saudi human rights abuses including the planned execution of a protester, who was just 17 at the time of his alleged offence.
He said the Government had been "shamed into" ditching the deal - which had initially been the only contract to survive Justice Secretary Michael Gove's axeing of a controversial commercial body.
Downing Street claimed it had been a financial decision unrelated to cases including the threatened flogging of a 74-year-old ex-pat British grandfather who breached strict alcohol laws.
Karl Andree has served his time in jail but is still locked up as Saudi officials wait to carry out the lashings, according to his family, despite Mr Cameron pledging a personal intervention.
"Our justice system is based on Sharia law and implemented by our independent judiciary," the ambassador wrote.
"Just as we respect the local traditions, customs, laws and religion of Britain, we expect Britain to grant us this same respect."
The Prime Minister has repeatedly defended the UK's close relations with the Saudis - pointing to the role its intelligence played in foiling a plot to bomb a freight aircraft in UK airspace.
That - the ambassador suggested - saved thousands of lives not the hundreds claimed by the PM.
He wrote: "The importance of Saudi Arabia to the UK and the Middle East's security, as well as its vital role in the larger Arab world as the epicentre of Islam, seems to be of little concern to those who have fomented this change.
"Yet it should be worrying to all those who do not want to see potentially serious repercussions that could damage the mutually beneficial strategic partnership that our countries have so long enjoyed."
He concluded: "To further our shared strategic interests in the years ahead as we confront a variety of threats, it is crucial that Saudi Arabia be treated with the respect it has unwaveringly afforded the United Kingdom."
The ambassador's article drew criticism.
Kate Higham, of human rights organisation Reprieve, said: "The Saudi Government's misconceived view seems to be that not only must Britain keep its mouth shut about their horrific abuses - we should also be actively supporting them."
She said the Saudi authorities "still don't seem to have got the message", adding: "They need to realise that until they put a stop to the horrific abuses in the kingdom, no country with any respect for human rights will want to go near their 'justice' system."
mfl
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel