The Architecture of Mohammed bin Salman: Beyond the Headlines

When I read the international discussion of NEOM and THE LINE, I often find the image of the megaproject overwhelming the question of the changing city around it. Delays and costs deserve scrutiny. They do not, by themselves, describe the whole of Saudi Arabia’s urban transformation.

As a practising architect, I see the role led by Prince Mohammed bin Salman, during King Salman’s reign, as a transformation that deserves to be recorded and attributed accurately. That requires distinguishing a new launch from the development or completion of an earlier undertaking.

Reordering priorities

My reading of the period is that it reordered development priorities around the needs of cities and citizens and the direction of Vision 2030. I do not describe this as one instruction stopping every construction project in the Kingdom. Each project’s history requires its own evidence.

For example, Kingdom Holding announced on 2 October 2024 an agreement worth SAR 7.2 billion to resume construction of Jeddah Tower. The announcement establishes the agreement; it does not by itself establish the causes of the earlier delay or a particular corruption allegation. Events concerning the Grand Mosque expansion and the crane accident likewise require their own records before a causal account can be made.

Identity becomes an institutional question

On 16 March 2025, the Crown Prince launched the Saudi Architecture Characters Map, encompassing 19 architectural styles. The architectural heritage precedes the initiative. The launch of this institutional framework belongs to the present period and should be credited accordingly.

What interests me is the movement from identity as decoration to identity as a subject of urban and project guidance. Its architectural value must then be examined in application: climate, street, massing, materials and daily use.

Starting and completing are different achievements

Prince Abdullah Al-Faisal Stadium illustrates the importance of chronology. The facility and the beginning of its redevelopment predate the current phase; it returned to hosting matches on 1 October 2021, during King Salman’s reign. Recognising the earlier beginning does not erase the achievement of completion and renewed use.

The public realm deserves the same attention. Walking, pavements, shade and access to services matter alongside spectacular buildings. A persuasive comparison between 2015 and 2025 would use dated photographs of the same places and identify what was actually delivered. General impressions cannot perform that work.

NEOM as work and accumulated knowledge

I also read NEOM as a large experiment in building capabilities and livelihoods alongside its physical projects. One specific example comes from NEOM’s 25 July 2024 account of its 2023 social-responsibility programmes: 583 people from NEOM and Tabuk secured employment through its initiatives, and 26 projects were awarded to Tabuk companies. These are programme measures, not totals for NEOM’s workforce or supported households.

This interpretation does not exempt projects from evaluating cost and delivery. It asks that the assessment also consider knowledge, experience and opportunity produced through the work, with each outcome judged on its own evidence.

I see Mohammed bin Salman’s architectural imprint as more than a collection of buildings: an attempt to redirect ambition, identity and the scale of possible work. The argument becomes strongest when we can move from a headline to a project, and from that project to an effect that can be described and examined.