• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "C. Raja Mohan"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie India",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Gulf",
    "Türkiye",
    "Qatar",
    "Saudi Arabia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Political Reform"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie India

Raja Mandala: The Great Sunni Divide

The outrageous murder of the Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi in the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul has brought into sharp relief the deepening conflict between Riyadh and Ankara.

Link Copied
By C. Raja Mohan
Published on Oct 23, 2018

Source: Indian Express

The outrageous murder of the Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi in the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul has brought into sharp relief the deepening conflict between Riyadh and Ankara. For Saudi Arabia, the challenge of coping with an increasingly assertive Turkey has become as demanding as the existential threat it sees from Shia Iran. Driving the great Sunni divide are radically different perspectives of the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman and the Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan on the role of Islam in the future of the Middle East.

Consider, for example, their disagreement over the idea of “moderate Islam”. Last year, Crown Prince Salman unveiled a bold agenda of “returning the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to moderate Islam”. He argued that the four decades following the Islamic Revolution in Iran during 1978-79 produced an abnormal state of affairs in Saudi Arabia.

As Tehran sought to extend its revolution to the Arab world, the House of Saud ceded more ground to the Wahhabi conservatives at home and extended support to jihadi groups beyond its borders in competition with Iran. As Salman put it, “After the Iranian revolution in 1979, people wanted to copy this model in different countries, one of them is Saudi Arabia. We didn’t know how to deal with it. And the problem spread all over the world. Now is the time to get rid of it.”

While much of the world welcomed Saudi reforms, not everyone was impressed. That Iran — the arch rival of the Saudis — would dismiss Salman’s claims was taken for granted. The most surprising attack on Salman came from Turkey’s Erdogan. Addressing an international conference a couple of weeks after Salman went public with his agenda, Erdogan told the crown prince does not own Islam: “The term ‘moderate Islam’ is being lathered up again.

The patent on ‘moderate Islam’ belongs to the West. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam; Islam is one. The aim of the concept is to weaken Islam. The person voicing this concept thinks it (Islam) belongs to him. No it does not belong to you”. In attacking the crown prince, Erdogan was also rejecting the unofficial but long-standing Saudi claim as the guardian of Islam.

That Salman and Erdogan are on different political trajectories is not in doubt. If Prince Salman is trying to liberalise the deeply religious Saudi society, Erdogan is turning a secular society into an Islamic one. If Salman has a huge challenge in consolidating his power at home and implementing bold reforms, Erdogan, older and cannier, has been in power for nearly a decade-and-a-half. He has crushed political opposition and neutered the secular elite. Erdogan also marginalised the armed forces that saw themselves as the legatees of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s 1923 revolution, which put modern Turkey on a secular foundation and abolished the Caliphate.

The argument between Salman and Erdogan is not just about Islam. It is also about the geopolitics of the Middle East. For decades, Turkey stayed out of the region’s politics. As a secular state, a member of the NATO and a candidate for the membership of the European Union, Turkey was seeking deeper integration into the West. As he sought to bring political Islam back into Turkey’s life, Erdogan turned inevitably to the Middle East.

The Saudis and its Sunni allies had no love for Turkey or the imperial rule of the Ottoman Empire. While they resented Erdogan’s “neo-Ottoman” ambitions, the Saudis hoped that a resurgent Sunni Turkey could help strengthen the coalition against Shia Iran. But the Arab Spring and the developments since then have put Ankara and Riyadh at odds with each other.

Erdogan is deeply empathetic to the kind of political Islam championed by the Muslim Brotherhood. The Saudis see the Brotherhood as a great threat to the established order in the Middle East and has branded it as a terrorist organisation and gone after its units in the kingdom. If Turkey backed the Brotherhood government that was elected to power in Cairo in 2012, Saudi Arabia endorsed the Egyptian army’s coup against it in 2013 and a sweeping crackdown on its members. Turkey has offered shelter to the Brotherhood activists fleeing from Egypt and the Gulf.

In Syria, the Saudi and Turkish interests seemed to align against the regime of Bashar al Assad. But the Sunni militias they back have often clashed with each other. The Turkish alliance with Qatar, at a time when Saudis were trying to isolate Doha for its support to the Brotherhood, is another dimension of the current conflict between Ankara and Riyadh.

Erdogan has no love for Shia Iran, but he has found a way of simultaneously competing and coordinating with Iran. Riyadh, in contrast, sees itself locked in a mortal combat with Tehran, a sharpening conflict with Turkey and the radical forces of political Islam. Speaking to a group of Egyptian editors last March, Prince Salman described them as the “triangle of evil”.

The Khashoggi killing has certainly weakened the Crown Prince and significantly improved Erdogan’s leverage, at the least for the moment. The US, meanwhile, is trying to limit the conflict between two of its closest allies — Saudi Arabia and Turkey — and redirect the energies of the region against Iran. There is no evidence so far that the US might succeed. If Turkey and the Western critics of Prince Salman mount the pressure beyond a point, there is no telling how the House of Saud might lash out.

This article was originally published in the Indian Express.

About the Author

C. Raja Mohan

Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India

A leading analyst of India’s foreign policy, Mohan is also an expert on South Asian security, great-power relations in Asia, and arms control.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Deepening the India-France Maritime Partnership

      C. Raja Mohan, Darshana M. Baruah

  • Commentary
    Shanghai Cooperation Organization at Crossroads: Views From Moscow, Beijing and New Delhi
      • Alexander Gabuev
      • +1

      Alexander Gabuev, Paul Haenle, C. Raja Mohan, …

C. Raja Mohan
Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India
Foreign PolicyPolitical ReformMiddle EastGulfTürkiyeQatarSaudi Arabia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Gas station attendant gesturing while a woman gets her motorcycle refilled
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Fuel Subsidies Are an Easy Fix for the Iran War’s Energy Price Shock—and the Wrong One

    Instead, governments should adopt climate-friendly measures to address the impact of rising prices.

      • Henok Asmelash

      Henok Asmelash

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europeans Are Quiet Quitting the United States

    European leaders have now not only lost faith in Donald Trump’s U.S. presidency, but also in America’s hegemony as a whole. But short-term challenges make an immediate divorce unwise.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Azerbaijan Looks to Tap Ukraine’s Military Expertise With Raft of New Deals

    Baku’s backing for Ukraine is less about confronting Russia than about quietly broadening the mix of partners it relies on.

      Zaur Shiriyev

  • A Ukrainian flag is seen attached to a burned car at the site of a heavily damaged residential building following Russian air strike in the city of Ternopil, on November 19, 2025, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
    Paper
    In Fraught Geopolitical Times, Accountability for Russian Aggression Remains Crucial Despite U.S. Policy Reversals

    As the war in Ukraine enters its fifth year, it is worth examining where accountability efforts currently stand, how U.S. policy on Russian aggression has shifted, and what the Ukrainian experience reveals about the challenges of holding international aggressors to account.

      • Federica D'Alessandra

      Federica D’Alessandra

  • people looking at damage
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Two Wars Later, Iran’s Nuclear Question Is Still on the Table

    Tehran may conclude that its ability to disrupt the global economy via the Strait of Hormuz provides enough deterrence to begin quietly rebuilding its nuclear program.

      • Jane Darby Menton
      • Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar

      Jane Darby Menton, Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.