Skyscrapers have long transcended their utilitarian function, now serving as emblems of national pride, political power and economic strength, their heights reaching towards the sky symbolizing state supremacy and human achievement. In the 20th century, New York’s skyline became synonymous with American progress, and since then, nations around the world have stepped in America’s footsteps. From the 451-meters high Petronas Tower in Malaysia (1999), to the 501-meters high Taipei 101 (2007) in Taiwan, the race for ever-higher buildings has only intensified to showcase a nation’s international stature. Currently, the tallest skyscraper in the world is the 828-meters Burj Khalifa in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Yet, Saudi Arabia’s ‘Jeddah Tower’ is said to push the boundaries even further with Saudi government officials stating it will be more than 1,000 meters tall. However, despite their awe-inspiring scale, researchers have pointed out that skyscrapers have little practical value for a nation's development and often mask deeper social and economic struggles. The question then arises: why are governments willing to invest large sums of money in these skyscrapers when their practical utility is deeply questionable?
North Korea’s Ryugyong Hotel
Nowhere is the intersection between political ambitions and architectural intentions more evident than in North Korea. In the 1980s, North Korea started one of its most ambitious architecture projects ever - the construction of the Ryugyong Hotel. With a height of 330 meters, it was supposed to be the tallest building in the world at the time. Destined to have more than a hundred floors with several thousand hotel rooms, the building was supposed to showcase North Korea’s global stature. Representing a giant pyramid, it was aimed to draw comparisons to Egypt’s ancient pyramids, which symbolize power, strength and stability. Therefore, it was a deliberate attempt to demonstrate the nation’s eternal stability and power on the international stage.
However, the true political motive behind the hotel’s construction lays in its rivalry with South Korea, which in 1988, was transforming to a prosperous democratic society while hosting the Summer Olympics Games. In response, North Korea sought to demonstrate that its political model - with the Kim family at the heart - was a more effective alternative. The Ryugyong hotel was supposed to be the centerpiece of the 1989 World Festival of Youth and Students, an event that was to showcase North Korea’s global power. Nonetheless, due to the financial implications that came with the engineering of the enormous hotel, the building of stadiums, and the fall of a significant donor during the Cold War - the Soviet Union - North Korea was heading for an economic crisis. The funds for completion were diverted to other pressing needs, and by the early 1990s, the construction of the hotel came to a halt.
Since then, the hotel remains unfinished. Despite several attempts to resume construction, it seems the project has officially been abandoned. Economists estimate that the costs of finishing the building will surmount to 5 percent of North Korea’s entire GDP, a staggering sum for a nation where 60 percent of the population is approximated to live below the poverty line. This architectural symbol of power has failed to fulfill its promise, and instead became a symbol of squandered potential. Often labeled ‘the Hotel of Doom’ in modern media, the hotel is yet to host a single guest and serves as a lasting statement to the disconnect of North Korea’s ostentatious ambitions and the tough realities facing its population.
UAE’s Burj Khalifa
In stark contrast to the Ryugyong hotel, the 828-meters Burj Khalifa in Dubai was finalized in 2010 and stands as a tangible monument of national pride. Over the past decades, Dubai has transformed its geographical incapacities to a fantastical way of living, reconfiguring a vast desert landscape into a hyper-modern urban hub of business, tourism and retail shopping. This re-imaging of Dubai has been effective, the city is now one of the most visited in the world, attracting 16,7 million tourists annually. Nonetheless, these impressive feats serve as a mere mask to hide the UAE’s social and political struggles.
Behind all the UAE’s opulence and modern practices, lies a dark reality of human rights violations, appaling migrant workers conditions and wealth inequality. As Human Rights Watch reported, migrant construction workers in the UAE are often subject to extremely low wages, debt-traps and the withholding of passports. The Burj Khalifa became a focal point of this discussion, with news reports of many migrant worker committing suicide due to the appaling work conditions. However, the UAE government has done little to address these issues, choosing instead to ensure the maintenance of the UAE’s polished image.
On top of the appalling working conditions, there is severe income inequality in the UAE. According to the World Inequality Database, the top 1 percent of the UAE possesses 22,8 percent of total income, while foreign nationals - who make up 88 percent of the population - live in relative poverty for minimal pay and are reaping none of the benefits of the country’s welfare. Although the country has made some progress through a bill passed in 2017 guaranteeing certain labor rights, systemic financial inequality and lax workers’ rights ensure that foreign nationals still carry the burden of poverty. While the Burj Khalifa stands as a symbol of the UAE’s ascension on the world stage, it also serves as a stark reminder of the systemic inequalities in a seemingly thriving nation.
Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah Tower and the Future of ‘Towers of Failure’
Due to the success of the Burj Khalifa in establishing the global competence of the UAE, Saudi Arabia is competing for an even higher building. Planned to soar more than 1,000 meters into the sky, the ‘Jeddah Tower’ will surpass the Burj Khalifa in height in 2028, cementing Saudi Arabia’s claim to architectural dominance and reflecting Saudi Arabia’s commitment to Vision 2030 and assert its status on the world stage.
However, while they are impressive feats of human ingenuity, it is important to reconcile the intentions behind the construction of these buildings, often masking political, social and economic undercurrents. Like its UAE counterpart, Saudi Arabia’s monumental undertaking raises questions about its priorities in national spending. While they are pouring billions into the construction of the Jeddah Tower, those resources could be spent more efficiently tackling domestic challenges, including social welfare, and education. While these towering structures may scrape the sky, they often cast shadows over the realities they seek to conceal. They highlight the uneasy balance between visionary architecture and the potential social cost they conceal, which raises a pivotal question: at what costs will nations keep building these towering symbols of greatness?
