We have not heard anything regarding the smoothness of the Kuwaiti crisis. Nobody has said that the Americans came and removed one leader replacing him with another. Nobody had claimed that internal powers had forced a change in leadership. Furthermore, we did not hear any claims that the National Guard or army was involved in this shift of power. We did not hear any claims usually associated with such crises simply because the dispute and solution alike was available for everyone to witness in fine detail. Moreover, it was apparent that the results were accepted, especially considering that not one member of the National Assembly had objected to such a shift in leadership, despite all the differences between members. They had voted unanimously in one of the rarest incidents of the council’s history.
Kuwaiti openness throughout the crisis has added a sense of credibility to the result as Kuwaiti citizens followed the case thoroughly. If anything had expelled rumors that usually accompany major political events, it is the openness of the Kuwaiti crisis from beginning to end.
Kuwait had come across the suggestion of shifting leadership, the reasons behind such a shift, the details of the dispute and how the case was referred to the authorities either through the constitution or the legislators represented in the National Assembly. Everybody is aware that the attempt of shifting political authority has its legal references and is not an easy process. The disputing parties accepted handing over the case to the cabinet. In parliament, which was convened in a closed session, citizens were informed that arbitration was based on the law and official medical reports.
All rumors were nipped in the bud as transparency had historically documented the event so that people would refer to it and not take heed of any rumors. The dangers behind such hearsay are that they can strengthen lies that may become a reference for constant unrest, ultimately defaming the ruling system and harming its symbols. Such lies are born in the darkness where there is no honesty or transparency contrary to what we have seen in recent events in Kuwait.
At first, with the privacy of the ruling family in mind, people would ask about the risks involved in revealing family secrets to the public. To this, we answer that it is due to the sensitivity of the case and the potential dangers that the public should be aware so as not to weaken Kuwaiti leadership and history.
Sheikh Sabah Al-Sabah had not led a coup to overthrow Sheikh Saad and Sheikh Saad had not looked for support from anyone else when he was ousted. The action that took place was decided constitutionally. Thus, Kuwait had appeared before the world contradicting the rumors.
It is not a family dispute that concerns Kuwaiti citizens but rather the fate of the entire country. If Kuwaitis had not allowed the media to cover the dispute, nobody in the world would have known that the opposing parties were dealing with the matter according to the law, respecting its institutions and respecting one another even at the height of the conflict.