Why is Kuwait Sunni majority? How to get a Shia majority Kuwait?

Could someone with better knowledge of such details of the religious history of the Middle East tell me?: 1. Why is Kuwait Sunni majority, while Southern Iraq is Shia majority?
2. How could Kuwait be Shia majority?
 
Last edited:
1. Kuwait is tiny.

2. Sunnis have been ruling over the Shia in the region for centuries.

3. Shia do make up a large minority of the population. Like 30% - 40%.

If you want Kuwait to have a majority Shia population just give it a part of Southern Iraq or Northeast Saudi Arabia. Both would give Kuwait a majority and while a Sunni regime may rule the country, they will be vulnerable to being toppled by revolutionaries like Syria and Iraq.
 
1. Kuwait is tiny.

2. Sunnis have been ruling over the Shia in the region for centuries.

3. Shia do make up a large minority of the population. Like 30% - 40%.

If you want Kuwait to have a majority Shia population just give it a part of Southern Iraq or Northeast Saudi Arabia. Both would give Kuwait a majority and while a Sunni regime may rule the country, they will be vulnerable to being toppled by revolutionaries like Syria and Iraq.

I'm well aware that Shia are a large minority of the Kuwaiti population, between 30% and 40%, but I'm wondering why they aren't a majority considering that neighbouring Southern Iraq is Shia majority. Also, it should be noted that. unlike most Gulf countries, most Kuwaiti Shia are ethnically Persians, (descended from Persian traders that settled there), not Arabs.
 
I'm well aware that Shia are a large minority of the Kuwaiti population, between 30% and 40%, but I'm wondering why they aren't a majority considering that neighbouring Southern Iraq is Shia majority. Also, it should be noted that. unlike most Gulf countries, most Kuwaiti Shia are ethnically Persians, (descended from Persian traders that settled there), not Arabs.

It's called the Persian Gulf for a reason. Not surprising that Persians live there. Remember the Kuwait like many of the Gulf Monarchies, has some of the most draconian citizenship policies in the world. Many countries along the Gulf have more migrant workers living in them than they have citizens. This situation has been kept stable by oil revenue and foreign backing. If Kuwait had a Shia government, it would also probably be pretty stable, cause it would get Iranian backing.

If you took the Ottoman claims on Eastern Arabia from Kuwait to the South, and gave that area independence, the resulting country would have a Shia majority. That didn't happen in OTL. The Saudis were one reason. The second was the British policies toward the region, which I am not an expert on.
 
It's called the Persian Gulf for a reason. Not surprising that Persians live there. Remember the Kuwait like many of the Gulf Monarchies, has some of the most draconian citizenship policies in the world. Many countries along the Gulf have more migrant workers living in them than they have citizens. This situation has been kept stable by oil revenue and foreign backing. If Kuwait had a Shia government, it would also probably be pretty stable, cause it would get Iranian backing.

If you took the Ottoman claims on Eastern Arabia from Kuwait to the South, and gave that area independence, the resulting country would have a Shia majority. That didn't happen in OTL. The Saudis were one reason. The second was the British policies toward the region, which I am not an expert on.

I should explain myself better. What I meant is that in most Gulf countries, most Shias are ethnically Arabs. However, this isn't the case in Kuwait, most Kuwaiti Shias are ethnically Persians, however, they're not migrants workers, they're descended from Persian traders that settled there since the 18th century, read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/'Ajam_of_Kuwait.
So, what I'm wondering is: Why didn't the Arabs of Kuwait convert to Shia Islam, while the Arabs of Southern Iraq and parts of Eastern Saudi Arabia did?
 
In short, in actuality there is no real geographic distinction between Kuwait and Iraq, this much is clear. However, there exists a distinction in the sense of proximities and population factors. During the Abbasid caliphate and later periods, Shi’a and Shurha/Khawarij communities existed most strongly along the Euphrates River and nearby. Bedouin groups often varied in their religious affiliation but many of whom were Shi’a or Shurha and travelled far distances to and fro.

Kuwait on the other hand, is more along the periphery outside of this Shi’a radiation of Twelverism on the Euphrates. So there is a northern Shi’a radiation on the Euphrates and Tigris River valley in the northern sectors and among the types of communities existing therein. This is must strong on the Euphrates near Karbala, Kufa and Najaf. Meanwhile, the other Shi’a radiation is in the al-Haasa region to the south of Kuwait, in modern eastern Saudi Arabia and in the far southern reaches of the Nejd. This sector of Shi’a radiation, began with the group known as the Shumaytiyya in the 8th century. This group in turn, was related loosely to all the major Shi’a groups of the time. From these Shumaytiyya arose the Qarmatians and other Is’maili Shi’a who would be common in the Haasa and the Nejd. These communities subsequently would blend into a radiation of Twelver Shi’a Islam within the Haasa after the failure of the Qarmatians and the decline of the Fatimid caliphate. The Ismaili communities in the Nejd would disappear in that very early al-Saud monarchy within the Nejd, which positioned itself along Sunni lines.

Thus, as a very simple answer, Kuwait as an area, is somewhat between and distinct from these radiation zones and was sparsely populated. In the Middle Ages, it was known that Shurha and Shi’a tribes had influence there, however defeats of these movements, the Zanj rebellion and the decimation of the Qarmatians, would have disbanded any sort of gatherings there. Any non Sunni religious radiation that would have occurred, would have been most likely eradicated by the Saljuq empire. While other centres of Shi’a radiation were too dense, settled and or isolated to be disbanded.
 
In short, in actuality there is no real geographic distinction between Kuwait and Iraq, this much is clear. However, there exists a distinction in the sense of proximities and population factors. During the Abbasid caliphate and later periods, Shi’a and Shurha/Khawarij communities existed most strongly along the Euphrates River and nearby. Bedouin groups often varied in their religious affiliation but many of whom were Shi’a or Shurha and travelled far distances to and fro.

Kuwait on the other hand, is more along the periphery outside of this Shi’a radiation of Twelverism on the Euphrates. So there is a northern Shi’a radiation on the Euphrates and Tigris River valley in the northern sectors and among the types of communities existing therein. This is must strong on the Euphrates near Karbala, Kufa and Najaf. Meanwhile, the other Shi’a radiation is in the al-Haasa region to the south of Kuwait, in modern eastern Saudi Arabia and in the far southern reaches of the Nejd. This sector of Shi’a radiation, began with the group known as the Shumaytiyya in the 8th century. This group in turn, was related loosely to all the major Shi’a groups of the time. From these Shumaytiyya arose the Qarmatians and other Is’maili Shi’a who would be common in the Haasa and the Nejd. These communities subsequently would blend into a radiation of Twelver Shi’a Islam within the Haasa after the failure of the Qarmatians and the decline of the Fatimid caliphate. The Ismaili communities in the Nejd would disappear in that very early al-Saud monarchy within the Nejd, which positioned itself along Sunni lines.

Thus, as a very simple answer, Kuwait as an area, is somewhat between and distinct from these radiation zones and was sparsely populated. In the Middle Ages, it was known that Shurha and Shi’a tribes had influence there, however defeats of these movements, the Zanj rebellion and the decimation of the Qarmatians, would have disbanded any sort of gatherings there. Any non Sunni religious radiation that would have occurred, would have been most likely eradicated by the Saljuq empire. While other centres of Shi’a radiation were too dense, settled and or isolated to be disbanded.

Thanks for this very good answer.
 
In short, in actuality there is no real geographic distinction between Kuwait and Iraq, this much is clear. However, there exists a distinction in the sense of proximities and population factors. During the Abbasid caliphate and later periods, Shi’a and Shurha/Khawarij communities existed most strongly along the Euphrates River and nearby. Bedouin groups often varied in their religious affiliation but many of whom were Shi’a or Shurha and travelled far distances to and fro.

Kuwait on the other hand, is more along the periphery outside of this Shi’a radiation of Twelverism on the Euphrates. So there is a northern Shi’a radiation on the Euphrates and Tigris River valley in the northern sectors and among the types of communities existing therein. This is must strong on the Euphrates near Karbala, Kufa and Najaf. Meanwhile, the other Shi’a radiation is in the al-Haasa region to the south of Kuwait, in modern eastern Saudi Arabia and in the far southern reaches of the Nejd. This sector of Shi’a radiation, began with the group known as the Shumaytiyya in the 8th century. This group in turn, was related loosely to all the major Shi’a groups of the time. From these Shumaytiyya arose the Qarmatians and other Is’maili Shi’a who would be common in the Haasa and the Nejd. These communities subsequently would blend into a radiation of Twelver Shi’a Islam within the Haasa after the failure of the Qarmatians and the decline of the Fatimid caliphate. The Ismaili communities in the Nejd would disappear in that very early al-Saud monarchy within the Nejd, which positioned itself along Sunni lines.

Thus, as a very simple answer, Kuwait as an area, is somewhat between and distinct from these radiation zones and was sparsely populated. In the Middle Ages, it was known that Shurha and Shi’a tribes had influence there, however defeats of these movements, the Zanj rebellion and the decimation of the Qarmatians, would have disbanded any sort of gatherings there. Any non Sunni religious radiation that would have occurred, would have been most likely eradicated by the Saljuq empire. While other centres of Shi’a radiation were too dense, settled and or isolated to be disbanded.

BTW, as your answer mentions, Shia Islam has always had a presence in Southern Iraq but when, exactly, did Southern Iraq become Shia majority? I've seen claims that while Shia Islam has always had a presence in Southern Iraq, it only became Shia majority in the 19th century and that many Arab tribes converted in the 17th and 18th centuries because they felt discriminated by the Ottoman Sunni authorities. However, others say that Southern Iraq has always been Shia majority, long before Iran.
Which version is correct?
 
BTW, as your answer mentions, Shia Islam has always had a presence in Southern Iraq but when, exactly, did Southern Iraq become Shia majority? I've seen claims that while Shia Islam has always had a presence in Southern Iraq, it only became Shia majority in the 19th century and that many Arab tribes converted in the 17th and 18th centuries because they felt discriminated by the Ottoman Sunni authorities. However, others say that Southern Iraq has always been Shia majority, long before Iran.
Which version is correct?

The version that says parts of southern Iraq were always majority Shi’a. The lower Euphrates is in some ways, the origin of Twelver Shi’ism in every place that it exists today and it radiated from there and still to this day, the most prestigious Shi’a scholars are within Iraq.

The region became Shi’a partly during the Umayyad period. It expanded in popularity too during the Abbasid and Buyyid periods. Expanding once more, during the Ilkhanate (the Mongols in fact when capturing Baghdad, fired arrows into the city, promising Shi’a and Christians safe conduct) and gaining more traction in the Safavid period.
 
Top