Bahrain escalation

Over the past couple of months there seems to have been a see-sawing power struggle going on at the top in Bahrain.

The hard liners were obviously in control at the beginning of the current protests, when security forces attacked the protestors, killing several and injuring many more.

Then the moderates, led by the crown prince, seemed to take control, riot police were withdrawn and dialogue was discussed.

Tragically the dialogue didn't happen, I suspect in large part because the first attack had hardened opinion and increased the protestors' demands. How different it would have been had dialogue started with the protestors at the beginning instead of the violence against them.

No dialogue led to a stand off. For weeks. That simply couldn't continue and it seems certain it led to the hard liners taking back control.  Then it was inevitable that it would end up where it has today.

The inevitability of a spiral of increasing violence following the first use of violence. As sure as night follows day.

Today reports are building of a major assault on the protestors by troops with armour and helicopters. Currently the reports are saying at least three and possibly five dead and hundreds injured.

A huge leap in the escalation was the introduction of foreign troops, 1,000 from Saudi Arabia. The UAE says it has not sent troops but has sent 500 police. Whatever they are they'll be seen by the protestors as invading forces, even though the Bahraini government invited them in. Who knows what pressure they were under from the Saudis in that decision, incidentally.

Not only the protestors will see them as invaders, that's the view from the bogeyman of the region Iran and probably most Shias.

They have gone in under the GCC alliance clause which says, as do most similar alliances, that an attack on one member state is considered as an attack on all.

It's an interesting question whether the original intention was for that clause to interpret an internal uprising as an attack on the state. The writers had Iran and Iraq in mind I would suggest.

But it's a rhetorical question because of the facts on the ground. They're there.

As  result of the hard line approach I can't see anything other than more violence, more crackdowns, more deaths and injuries, more bitterness, a thicker wedge driven between Shia and Sunni. And the distinct possibility that it will spread geographically.

And if only they'd talked to each other it could have been avoided. What a disaster.

Pots & kettles

Just about all of the news outlets I use are suggesting the 'international community' needs to step in to stop more bloodshed in Libya. By 'international community' they mean, and usually name, the USA, the EU and NATO.

The West in other words.

But what about the Arab League and the African Union?

Libya is a member of both organisations so surely they should have been taking the lead in this crisis.

Nothing from them for weeks but now, according to AP, the Arab League have at last spoken out about the situation.

The foreign ministers meeting in Cairo have: ...condemned Gaddafi's crackdown on the Libyan people and said they would consider imposing a no-fly zone over the country if the turmoil continues...The Arab ministers said they will coordinate their discussions about a no-fly zone with the African Union and consult 'about the best ways to protect and ensure the safety and security of Libyan citizens'.

So the two organisations which should have been active from the beginning are gently dipping their toes to test the water.

It must be difficult for the Arab League though, given that some of the member governments condemning Gaddafi's actions are guilty of doing exactly the same.

As for the African Union, they've been conspicuous by their silence. A few gentle comments about governments needing to listen to and negotiate with their people is as critical as they've been.

But then it's difficult for them too isn't it. More than a few of the member countries have governments not dissimilar to the colonel's of course, and it's long been assumed that the colonel bankrolled the AU and paid smaller countries' fees.

The old cliche 'the pot calling the kettle black' comes to mind.




The AP report is  here.

Libya end game

Seemingly, to me, the Libyan revolution came out of nowhere. I really expected other places such as Yemen to dominate the headlines about people power.

It looks as though I wasn't alone in that thinking, the 'international community' very obviously didn't think the mad colonel was in any danger because they had no contingency plans in place.

Only after the country imploded and they realised their citizens in Libya were in grave danger did they start to work out evacuation plans.

Those plans have gone wrong very often too, for example with the British PM having to apologise for the stuff-up, and reportedly carpeting his ministers.

At this late stage the Aussies are being told to head to the airport where arrangements have been made with allies to evacuate them. I can't even begin to imagine the chaos and confusion there is and will continue to be.

Out of the blue Libya started to dominate the news. The speed of the changes and the success of the revolutionaries is astonishing.

What hasn't surprised me is the crazed raving of the colonel. Dressed just like Michael Jackson on tour he's been ranting almost incoherently - but behind the pantomime has been the very real threat of the massacre of demonstrators.

At long long last the 'international community' has started to speak out against the regime and it looks as though sanctions, even perhaps some sort of military action, are imminent.

Having supplied the weapons he's been using against the demonstrators it now seems that the west won't replace the spent arms. Assets squirreled away by the ruling family are being frozen. Diplomats and members of his government are defecting.

The regime is increasingly isolated and has all-but gone.

I'm afraid there's going to be terrible bloodshed though before they're finally driven out.

The colonel's son Saif al-Islam has been on tv telling the world they have Plan A, Plan B and Plan C. They are identical, to live and die in Libya.

Like a cornered wounded animal they will fight to the death and take as many of their opponents with them as they can.

I sincerely hope the 'international community' summons up the political will to step in and prevent that happening.

Going, going...

I said on a blog somewhere that the Bahrain demonstrators were demanding change in government, they were not against the monarchy. (I think it must have been in a comment I left on another blog).

I also said in yesterday's post, about the violence against the protestors: ...in practical terms it's simply counter productive. The more you brutalise people the more they will rebel against you. By doing it you create more pressure for change. It's a mistake all authoritan regimes make and they never learn from past examples....Even (the promised enquiry) may not be enough to stem the predictable reaction by the people to the violence.

It certainly did produce the predictable reaction. More demonstrations, increased fury at the authorities and an expansion of the demands to include calls for the king to go.

Once again a government has made a disastrous decision. And it continues because there was more shooting on demonstrators by the army on Friday.  Fifty injured, seven critically, according to reports.

It's an upward spiral, there's inevitably going to be much more violence and stronger demands in reaction to it.

"Our demands were peaceful and simple at first. We wanted the prime minister to step down,' Mohamed Ali, a 40-year-old civil servant, said as he choked back tears. "Now the demands are harsher and have reached the pinnacle of the pyramid. We want the whole government to fall."

In the short term a government may be able to control its people with raw power, but that isn't sustainable.

There's only one way this is going to end and that's with change. Only the government can control whether that change happens peacefully by negotiation or violently.

It will happen, one way or another. It's gone too far for it not to.


The quote is from here.

Bahrain a domino?

While the scaremongers have in the past often warned of the domino theory it hasn't actually happened. But it does look as though it's happening this time.

And where it's happening has taken world leaders by surprise. Especially in the west, where successive governments have propped up, financially and otherwise, the regimes which have now gone or are under threat.

First we had Tunisia, then Egypt and there's increasing unrest in Jordan, Algeria, Morocco, Iran, Yemen, Bahrain...

In the west they're usually lumped together and believed to be the same. But while they have in common the fact that they don't have democratic political systems, they're actually quite different from each other. Absolute monarchies, life presidents, secular, Islamic republic...

They also have very different economies, very different wealth, very different societies.

Currently they do have in common the fact that large numbers of the people want change. And they want change because they want a better deal, a better life.

In the poorer countries the unrest is mostly about standards of living and jobs. In the wealthier such as Bahrain it's mostly about politics. Much as in Northern Ireland it's politics dominated by religion - Catholics vs Protestants, Shia vs Sunni. Although interestingly there are reports of Sunnis joining the Shias in the demonstrations demanding changes.

I'm hearing a lot of surprise that modern westernised Bahrain, with at least half the population being expatriate, is included in the current wave of unrest. But in fact there's long been unrest there, it's been a fact of life for many years.

I remember on my second visit back in the late seventies seeing huge piles of sandals and flip-flops in the streets. In answer to my question I was told that there had been large demonstrations the night before and the demonstrators can run faster from the security forces if they kick off their sandals. From the amount of footwear I could see it must have been a good-size demo.

Coming back to my hotel after dinner I saw Public Defence units on most street corners and intersections and plenty of street patrol vehicles.

But while protests in Bahrain are far from a new phenomenon they do seem to have intensified since the success of unrest elsewhere in the region. In that sense I guess they are part of the domino theory.

The response of the authorities has intensified too with, sadly, people being killed. Reports are saying seven so far, including tragically a two year old girl. Well over two hundred are said to be injured.

Apart from any moral rejection of that, in practical terms it's simply counter productive. The more you brutalise people the more they will rebel against you. By doing it you create more pressure for change. It's a mistake all authoritan regimes make and they never learn from past examples.

Protestors say that riot police stormed their encampment while they were sleeping, firing tear gas and birdshot and beating them with clubs.


The government has said there will be an investigation into the deaths. I'm sure I'm not the only person sceptical about how effective and transparent the investigation will be.

Nothing short of bringing to justice those responsible on the ground and those who gave the order will suffice.

Even that may not be enough to stem the predictable reaction by the people to the violence.