Washington Post columnist David Ignatius described Saudi Arabia on Jan. 5 as a “frightened monarchy” and warned that “countries that feel vulnerable sometimes do impulsive and counterproductive things.”

The execution on Jan. 2 of Shiite cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, along with 46 others accused of extremism and terrorism, provoked a predictable wave of outrage and demonstrations among Shiite populations across the Middle East, and worsened already terrible relations between Riyadh and Tehran. Saudi Arabia could not have expected anything less. The kingdom broke ties with Iran after demonstrators ransacked the annex to the Saudi Embassy in Tehran, although, as an Iranian diplomat told Ali Hashem this week, “in practice, we had no real diplomatic relations in recent years.”

Of the 47 executed on Jan. 2, 43 were linked to al-Qaeda. The US State Department released a statement that said it was “particularly concerned that the execution of prominent [Shiite] cleric and political activist Nimr al-Nimr risks exacerbating sectarian tensions at a time when they urgently need to be reduced.” The killing of Nimr and three other Shiite citizens for inciting violence in the Saudi Eastern Province suggested that the kingdom was also “using the death penalty in the name of counter-terror to settle scores and crush dissidents,” said Philip Luther of Amnesty International, which characterized Nimr’s trial as “political and grossly unfair.”

Mohammed al-Nimr, the brother of the executed cleric, told Jean Aziz, “Sheikh Nimr’s defense lawyer, Sadeq al-Jibran, skillfully represented my brother. But, I contend that the trial was political, and its outcome was predetermined.” Mohammed al-Nimr offered his explanation for the execution, and said, "When news leaked about the death sentence, we thought that because al-Qaeda and Islamic State members were to be executed, Sheikh Nimr’s name was included to placate some members of the Sunni community and create a sort of sectarian balance. But, we later determined that the opposite was true. The whole intent was to get rid of Sheikh Nimr, with the names of terrorists added to cover that up. This was proven by the fact that 42 of the 47 people who were executed had been on death row for 10 to 13 years, while Sheikh Nimr had been convicted only a little over a year ago.”