Sheik Hamad ibn Kalifa al Thani

WASHINGTON — In 1995, Sheik Hamad ibn Khalifa al Thani became the first of the younger generation of princes in the Persian Gulf sheikdoms to assume power. He did it, to the consternation of leaders in key neighboring states, by overthrowing his father. And that was only the beginning.

He has since challenged convention, policy and even political taboos in the cloistered and ultraconservative emirates by gradually opening up Qatar, the tiny peninsula near Saudi Arabia that was one of the world’s most closed societies, and implicitly daring others to follow suit. The first elections are around the corner.

“The new world order gave Qatar two choices: either to move forward with the changes brought by this order or be paralyzed by these new challenges,” Hamad told an audience at Georgetown University during his first U.S. visit this month. “If we steadfastly resist these changes, the pressure will build and great instability will result. As your President John Kennedy once said, ‘Those who make peaceful revolutions impossible will make violent revolutions inevitable.’ ”

Not all reforms have been universally welcomed, especially since some threaten the opulent lifestyle synonymous with petrodollar wealth. As he distributes the political franchise, Hamad plans to cut back public economic perks such as a free university education, housing and virtually automatic and highly paid government jobs. “Not everything I do is popular,” he conceded with a laugh during a conversation after talks at the White House, State Department and Pentagon--and before flying to Disney World with his 7-year-old son.

Hamad has moved just as boldly in the region, dealing openly with all sides, even old enemies. Qatar has negotiated the sale of gas to Israel and its envoys host their Israeli counterparts, while Iraqi and Iranian diplomats are warmly received in Doha, the ultramodern capital. U.S. warplanes have also been temporarily based in the sheikdom, while U.S. military equipment is positioned there in the event of future threats to the region. No state in the oil-rich peninsula--indeed, in the world--has been as accommodating to all four countries. The modest reforms and diplomatic openings have led to Hamad’s billing as the first emir for the 21st century.

Having resources helps. The population of Qataris totals a mere 550,000--there are more foreign residents than native citizens--yet Qatar boasts the third-largest natural-gas reserves in the world, after Iran and Russia.

But Hamad’s most striking characteristic may be his style. In contrast to his illusive and stiff counterparts, as well as his own training at Britain’s Sandhurst Military Academy, Qatar’s emir is refreshingly informal and candid. He engages in repartee and laughs easily and often. He volunteered that his son was really just an excuse for the Disney World trip and said he wanted to make the visit without bodyguards or VIP passes “to get the American experience,” an idea that later backfired somewhat when it was discovered he had no advance reservations. And when pressed on women’s rights in a region that is one of the world’s last male bastions, he took a reporter by the hand to chat with his wife. “Find out for yourself,” he said. “She has quite a mind of her own.”

*

Question: You’ve been described as an emir for the 21st century. Why?

Answer: We are trying our best to develop our country and catch up with the democratic world. We opened the Doha Stock Exchange a month ago and soon we will open a development bank to promote domestic industry outside of the energy sector. Our intention is to build heavy industry which has a lot of high-tech. We are also trying to have Western [style] universities. We would like to see Qataris pushing themselves forward to take responsibility for such development.

The modernization of our economy has brought new thinking to other parts of our society. Just as we cannot run our economy as we did in the past, so we cannot expect our social and political systems to remain static and unchanged. We are laying the groundwork for the 21st century by planting the seeds for individual freedoms and participatory democracy. I have issued a decree abolishing our ministry of information and censorship and introducing freedom of the press. I admit I am not comfortable with everything I now read in our newspapers and see on television. Freedom of the press causes us a lot of problems. But criticism can be a good thing. We have to suffer at the beginning, but in the end I think we will be a healthier country with a free press.

Q: What political reforms are you planning or trying to introduce in Qatar?

A: We will start with municipal elections to choose administrators at the local level where government touches the daily lives of people. This is, for Americans, not that important, but for my country, for people to govern themselves and for ladies to participate in such elections, this is a new thing in my country. About women joining the election, there is a big debate in my country and it’s going to be a headache. This is something I know. All the Gulf area is like this and so we have to face it.

But there is no doubt municipal elections will lead to democracy and then elections for parliament. Our democracy may not in the end exactly resemble yours. But a democratic system is now a part of Qatar’s future, and we are proud of this achievement.

Q: Do you ever fear that by opening your country to democracy you may be undoing the monarchy? That you’ll become the Gorbachev of the Gulf, introducing freedoms only to have them marginalize you?

A: I think the monarchy will continue. But it will not be as the monarchy of the past, that the ruler will control and give orders and the rest obey. I think it will include more participatory democracy and government will have a consultative approach to passing laws and legislation and making decisions. Already my role as emir is not to make all the decisions that affect the daily lives of our citizens.

But we have no intention of waving some magic wand and changing our entire culture and society overnight. I don’t want to go that fast and then find we can’t control the situation. We want to be a healthy democracy where we have the first election and free press and then we go further. To hurry change would only invite the social instability we seek to avoid, so we have chosen a middle course for change. Compared to radical changes in other nations since the end of the Cold War, our changes might appear small but they are well planned. We must be careful to change at a pace that meets the needs and desires of our people as well as our traditional culture steeped in thousands of years of Arab and Islamic history.

Q: Do you anticipate there will eventually be democratic change throughout the Gulf? And is there anything in Islam or Arab tradition that makes it difficult for democracy to penetrate these societies?

A: A Qatari view is that yes there will be democracy in the next century. Islam supports democracy. There is sentence in the Koran that requires a government to conduct itself through consultation with the mass population.

Q: Throughout this decade, U.S. policy in the region has focused on the two powers, Iran and Iraq, in a “dual containment” policy--designed to isolate both for being threats to the area’s stability. Your government is a close ally of the U.S., but also has contacts with Iran and Iraq. How do you feel about America’s position?

A: I’ve been candid in my views with the United States. We in Qatar are convinced your government’s approach toward both Iran and Iraq has become counterproductive to both your interests and ours. We think engagement not isolation is a better approach to deal with both Tehran and Baghdad. And we’re concerned that dual containment is only embittering the peoples of Iran and Iraq toward the U.S. We’re also concerned that it will only further destabilize our region.

Q: So, first, what do you think the United States should do about Iran?

A: America has long condemned Iran for disrupting the [Arab-Israeli] peace process, for supporting terrorism or what people in our area call the mujahadeen and for developing weapons of mass destruction. But after [Mohammad] Khatami was elected president last month, which no one expected, he declared that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict belongs to the Palestinians, Israelis and neighboring countries. There are other statements that indicate he wants peace with his neighbors generally. We believe this is a good time for America to realize that Iranians, particularly the young generation of Iranians, are now thinking more about what to do with their own country than about the other countries.

The United States should make a sort of dialogue with Iran. I don’t mean that the Americans should accept whatever the Iranians want, but at least talk to discover if the Iranians are changing or not--instead of the Iranians thinking that the Americans want any excuse to bomb them or destroy them.

We are one of the neighboring countries to Iran and we have American troops. If anything happens [between the United States and Iran], it will not happen to you in Washington. We will be one of the suffering countries. So we have to find a solution for our security and peace in the area and talking is a first step.

Imagine how people in the Gulf feel when the United States wants Arab countries to talk with Israel about peace. So why are Americans not talking with the Iranians? This is a big question in the Gulf. Plus Western countries like France and Germany have relations with Iran.

Q: Does the election of President Khatami promises real changes in Iran, that this is not just a repeat of the hopes eight years ago when President Rafsanjani was first elected, then very little happened?

A: We have to wait. But if you had asked me two months ago who would be president I would have said [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri, speaker of Iran’s Parliament. I am a neighbor of Iran and I was surprised with the election. We have to respect their election. It doesn’t mean we agree with the Iranian version of democracy. But compare Iran with some other Mideast countries, where a president finishes his first term or his second term and suddenly he decides that his own people want him to stay. So he continues in power and breaks the rules. But in Iran, presidents do come and go, and this is good. They are starting to practice democracy. And the ladies vote there.

Q: And what do you propose the United States should do about Iraq?

A: Iraq made a big mistake by invading Kuwait. Our troops fought the Iraqis and threw them out. We were against Iraq. But the war is finished.

What we want from Iraq is compliance with U.N. resolutions. But we are concerned about what happens with the children in Iraq because of the poverty, the medicine shortages. Imagine if you were a mother with three or four children and you couldn’t take them to school because of the present situation. This will effect a whole generation of children. If the Iraqis don’t comply with the resolutions, we should find a solution to help the normal Iraqi people. We should give more humanitarian aid to the Iraqi people. The best way should be discussed--whether it comes from our pockets or from the sale of more Iraqi oil.

The Iraqis are the same tribe as in Qatar, Saudi, Kuwait--the same family and the same mentality. So they made a big mistake and I think they’ve been well punished.

Q: What should the world do once Hussein complies with the U.N. requirement on eliminating all Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction as a prerequisite to lifting sanctions? Secretary of State Madeleine Albright has indicated that Washington will not have any relations with Iraq until Hussein is out of power. How do the Gulf countries, which he has so often threatened, feel about dealing with him again?

A: As long as he complies and as long as there are continuous inspections for weapons of mass destruction, then he should be dealt with. Many dictators in the Middle East, they fought wars, they were under siege and then they were recognized.

We should allow the people of Iraq to decide whether Saddam Hussein stays or not. It will be a mistake if you in America decide who should rule Iraq or who doesn’t rule Iraq. This is an interior problem.

Most [Gulf] states already send messages to him to congratulate him on a routine basis on national day. I congratulate him at the end of [the Muslim religious month of] Ramadan, which I began doing almost three years ago.

Q: In the Arab world generally, you have been one of the pioneers in dealing with Israel. How difficult has this policy been for you? And what impact has the current impasse in the peace process had on your efforts to deal with both sides?

A: We took a risk by agreeing to host the Middle East-North Africa Economic Summit, which is going to be held in Qatar on Nov. 16, because Israel will be there. We took a lot of pressure from some of the Arab countries. They have argued that we shouldn’t provide opportunities for the Israelis and Arabs to meet until Israel honors the commitments it made at the Madrid Conference, the Casablanca economic summit and in the Oslo accord. We are also frustrated by Israel’s refusal to live up to its promises.

But we intend to meet together with our neighbors and discuss the economic future of our region--an issue of critical importance. And we will remain consistent in our support of the peace process. Setbacks cannot become an excuse to give up in despair and abandon the search for peace. That only sentences our children to a future filled with conflict and hatred. Our policy honestly causes us a problem but this is a line which we cannot change. We must make sure our own people respect our own views. Sometimes it could be wrong. They know this. But these are our own interpretations and initiatives.