…from beneath the crooked bough, witness 230 years of brutal tyranny by the al Khalifas come to an end

Pre-emptive Crackdown in Bahrain against planned Tamarrod protests
2 August, 2013 – bahrain Watch

The Bahrain government is currently engaged in a new crackdown on activists and wider civil liberties. In the past few days alone, dangerous new legislation has been introduced, there have been many arrests including prominent activists, and the government has “sanctioned a witch hunt” through the creation of a “hotline” for citizens to report websites and social media accounts deemed to be against “public interests and targeting national unity and civic peace”. Security has been ratcheted up with reports of increased police presence in many different areas. Three deaths have occurred over the past week in “suspicious” circumstances, according to the opposition. All involved traffic accidents. Hussain Kadhem was in police custody at the time of his death. Two youths were fugitives when they were killed. Their family believe they were being chased by police. Meanwhile another protester is intensive care after being run down.

The government’s crackdown comes in advance of August 14th, when opposition groups are preparing a day of mass protest under the banner ‘Bahrain Tamarrod’ (Rebellion). The date is also symbolic. It marks the day when Bahrain gained independence from Britain in 1971 and has long been an occasion for opposition protest as the Bahrain government refuses to celebrate it. Bahrain Tamarrod was first announced on July 4th. The idea quickly gained support from the full spectrum of opposition groups and societies. On July 15th, Government Spokesperson Sameera Rajab warned against “involvement” with the movement. Despite this, popular support for Bahrain Tamarrod grew, whilst pro-government supporters and politicians began to escalate their calls for a crackdown.

On Sunday, July 28th, the National Assembly met to discuss new “anti-terrorism” legislation, having been recalled by King Hamad a few days prior. The politicians made a series of recommendations which were quickly supported by a range of government officials, including the Prime Minister, Crown Prince and even the Human Rights Minister. The recommendations were condemned by the opposition and by multiple local and international NGOs, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Human Rights First.

The government has wasted no time in implementing them. On July 29th, King Hamad wrote to the Prime Minister, reportedly calling for “essential speedy implementation of these recommendations”. The Prime Minister subsequently directed “all ministries and concerned departments” start working on their implementation. He then chaired an extraordinary session of the Cabinet, who claimed that the recommendations would “inaugurate a new era of security, stability and safety in Bahrain.” In contrast, the BBC’s Bill Law wrote: “The recommendations if implemented in full would effectively return the country to a state of martial law.” …more

Banana Republic Without Bananas
An Impending Bloodbath in Egypt: Will It Break the Coup?
by ESAM AL-AMIN – 1 August, 2013 – CounterPunch

There is no parallel in modern history to the recent events in Egypt, which have so quickly and effortlessly stripped people of their will. Within a year, the nation that went to the polls in free and fair elections to elect the lower and upper houses of parliament, choose the first civilian president in a multi-candidate race, and approve a new constitution, remarkably witnessed the reversal and invalidation of its nascent democratic institutions. After the triumph of the great Egyptian uprising in February 2011, such a tragic outcome was not the anticipated feat of its promising trajectory.

But the setback to the march of freedom and democracy in a region that has been plagued with despotism, repression, foreign domination, and corruption, could not have taken place without the active scheming and subversive action by myriad players led by the fulool counter-revolutionaries, or Mubarak loyalists and corrupt oligarchs, as well as the “deep state,” which is a decades-old web of corruption and special interests entrenched within the state’s institutions. Former justice minister Ahmad Makki detailed in recent interviews the depth of the entrenched elements of Mubarak loyalists including the judiciary, which actively undermined Morsi’s introduction of real reforms. Other actors who were dismayed by the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and the Islamists in general, also played a critical role in dislodging them from power and creating a constitutional crisis. These players have not only included most secular, liberal and leftist parties and elites, but have also involved foreign powers such as Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which saw the Egyptian revolution as a threat to their interests. Moreover, youth groups and ordinary citizens were frustrated with the slow progress in fulfilling the declared promises of the revolution, namely “decent living, freedom, social justice, and human dignity.”

A Military Coup with Civilian Co-conspirators

As I argued before, the July 3 military coup was not in response to calls for a second wave of the revolution as falsely presented by the anti-Morsi forces. It was a determined and well-orchestrated plot to oust the democratically elected president after a single year in power. One of the co-conspirators, Mona Makram Ebeid, plainly exposed some of the details in her speech before the Middle East Institute (MEI) on July 11. Ebeid is a veteran of Egyptian politics, jumping between the regime de jure and the opposition. She was not only appointed to the legislature by Mubarak as well as Morsi, but she also served as an advisor to the Military Council during the transitional period. As a Coptic Christian woman who espoused a secular outlook, she embodied the elements of an ideal minority representative. She was also appointed to the Constitutional Constituent Assembly –  the body charged with writing the constitution – before the mass resignation of its secular members last November. According to her statement before the MEI, she was invited on the morning of June 30 to a meeting at the mansion of former Mubarak loyalist and housing minister Hasaballah Al-Kafrawi. Seated next to him was retired Gen. Fuad Allam, a former deputy chief of Egypt’s internal security service and a hardline MB foe. Having led the unit that monitored and investigated the religious groups for over two decades, Gen. Allam was one of the most notorious torture experts in the world. Among the attendees were also two-dozen secular journalists, academics, and opposition leaders. During the meeting, Minister Kafrawi stated that he had been in touch with the army, the Coptic Pope and Sheikh al-Azhar. He added that army chief Gen. Abdelfattah Sisi had privately requested a “written popular demand” in order to intervene on behalf of the opposition.  By 3:00 PM, a statement by over 50 anti-Morsi public figures was delivered to the army demanding its intervention. Since the organizers had previously announced that the demonstration at Tahrir Square would launch at 5:00 PM, the statement issued that morning was in fact requested by the army and provided by the secular opposition before any meaningful anti-Morsi demonstration had ever come onto the streets.

If the military is in charge, can anyone still say it’s not a coup?

Gen. Sisi ousted President Morsi on July 3 as his co-conspirators, including opposition leader Muhammad ElBaradei, were looking on. The anti-Morsi forces believed they had outmaneuvered the hapless president, the MB, and their Islamist allies.  Furthermore, they were convinced that within days their Islamist opponents would accept their fate and recognize the new status quo. If not, the new military-led regime was ready to beat them into submission using its Mubarak-era hardline tactics.

But contrary to these expectations, the MB, their Islamist allies, and hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens who believed their votes had been discarded, took to the streets in large demonstrations. Tens of thousands camped out in major squares in Cairo, Giza, and around the nation. In their desperate attempt to scare off the demonstrators, the police and the army had committed within few days several massacres that included the July 5 carnage near the Presidential Guards social club that left over 50 people dead and hundreds wounded.

In his attempt to disguise the military rule behind a civilian façade, upon declaring the coup on July 3 Gen. Sisi appointed the head of the Supreme Court as the interim president. A few days later he chose ElBaradei as Vice President and economist Hazem Al-Beblawi, as Prime Minister. As the anti-coup demonstrations persisted for almost four weeks, Gen. Sisi delivered a speech on July 24 asking the public to demonstrate in the streets to give him “a mandate and an order” to crackdown against “violence and terrorism.”  It was a brazen request to use brutal tactics to subdue the anti-coup protesters, who incidentally had called for massive demonstrations across Egypt to take place on the same day in their call to reinstate Morsi, activate the constitution, and restore the parliament.   ...more

Journalist arrested, another believed to be held in Bahrain
1 August, 2013 – Committee to Protect Jornalists

New York, August 1, 2013–A Bahraini blogger has been detained and a photographer is missing amid signs that Bahraini authorities are trying to crack down on critical voices ahead of protests planned for August 14, according to news reports.

“Bahraini authorities have a record of suppressing critical news and commentary, which has had the effect of obscuring the extent of the country’s unrest from the rest of the world,” said CPJ Middle East and North Africa Coordinator Sherif Mansour.

Masked security agents arrested blogger Mohamed Hassan at his home in Sitra early on Wednesday, news reports said. The agents confiscated Hassan’s computer and cell phone, the reports said. The Bahrain Center for Human Rights told CPJ that authorities have denied having Hassan in custody at the Dry Dock Detention Center in the town of Hidd, where the family believes he is being held. Authorities have not disclosed the charges against him.

Authorities have harassed and detained Hassan several times since early 2012. Hassan, who often covered human rights and politics in Bahrain for his blog, Safybh, was previously summoned for interrogation in June 2012 in connection with his writing and involvement in the Bahraini opposition, according to the Bahraini Center for Human Rights. He stopped writing his blog on April 29, 2013. He has also worked as a fixer for news organizations.

Another journalist, Hussein Hubail, a freelance photographer who is also Hassan’s friend, has been reported missing, according to news reports. The accounts said the journalist had not been heard from since he sent a message on Wednesday that said he believed police were going to arrest him while at the airport. …more

Amnesty Int’l: Bahrain:New anti-terrorism powers would pose further risk to human rights

BAHRAIN: NEW ANTI-TERRORISM POWERS WOULD POSE FURTHER RISK TO HUMAN RIGHTS
13 July, 2013 – Bahrain Center for Human Rights

Amnesty International warns against the imminent adoption of proposed amendments by the Bahraini authorities to the anti-terrorism legislation as it will lead to further violations of Bahrain’s international human rights obligations.

In response to recent increase in violence and in anticipation of planned large demonstrations by the opposition, on 28 July Bahrain’s parliament held an extraordinary session and then submitted 22 recommendations to Shaikh Hamad Bin ‘Issa Al Khalifa, the King of Bahrain. The recommendations toughen punishments laid out in the 2006 anti-terrorism law. On 29 July the King welcomed the recommendations and ordered his Prime Minister to ensure that they are implemented urgently by the government. Bahrain’s constitution (Article 38) gives the King the power to issue decrees that have the force of law when parliament is in recess. In these circumstances the government prepares the draft amendments and the King ratifies them.

The recommendations include the banning of all sit-ins, public gatherings and demonstrations in the capital Manama indefinitely, giving the security forces additional sweeping powers to “protect society from all terrorist acts and incitement to such acts”; increasing punishment for anyone propagating false information about Bahrain in social media networks; taking legal action against certain political associations which incite and support violent and terrorist acts; taking all possible measures to impose peace and security, even if it means imposing a state of national safety (state of emergency); and the imposition of harsher sentences on anyone involved in acts of “terrorism” and violence and anyone inciting others to use violence; the revocation of Bahraini nationality from anyone committing terrorist acts or incitement to such activities,

Given the manner in which authorities have abused existing legislation to suppress dissent, Amnesty International fears that these recommended amendments will further erode the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly.

The 2006 anti-terrorism legislation, known as “Protecting Society from Terrorist Acts,” defines terrorism in an overly broad and ambiguous manner. Amnesty International has expressed concern about provisions in the law that place arbitrary restrictions on freedom of expression and gives the Public Prosecution excessive discretion. The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism expressed fears in 2006 that the restrictions on freedom of association and assembly in the law would allow the criminalization of peaceful demonstrations by civil society. The UN Committee against Torture expressed in 2005 concerns about the broad and vague definition of terrorism and terrorist organizations and the erosion of judicial safeguards in the then draft law.

Since February 2011 when large anti-government protests started the human rights situation in Bahrain has deteriorated sharply. Scores of opposition activists were arrested and tried before military courts. Many were tortured. Some, including 13 prominent figures, are serving lengthy sentences of up to life. Dozens of people died, including from torture, but mainly as a result of unnecessary and excessive use of force during protests. Human rights activists have been jailed for their work.

In recent weeks violence has increased. There have been incidents where young men threw Molotov cocktails at policemen and police cars. On 17 July a car bomb exploded near al-Riffa’, south of Manama. No one was hurt and the bombing was condemned by opposition parties. The security forces have responded with mass arrests, excessive use of force, including through the use of shot-guns and tear gas, and reportedly torture and other ill-treatment of detained suspects. In the early hours of 29 July at least 27 people, mostly youth, were arrested in the village of Dar Kulaib where clashes between security forces and protestors had taken place.

Despite these measures sporadic protests have continued. Bahraini opposition groups are planning to organise large protests on 14 August. Planning for this has started on social media networks. The event is called “Tamarrod” (rebellion). …more

Emile Nakhleh, a former Senior U.S. Intelligence Service Officer, is a Research Professor at the University of New Mexico and author of “A Necessary Engagement: Reinventing America’s Relations with the Muslim World and Bahrain: Political Development in a Modernizing Society”.

OP-ED: Bahrain Declares War on the Opposition
By Emile Nakhleh – 1 August, 2013 – IPS

WASHINGTON, Aug 1 2013 (IPS) – The special session of the Bahraini National Assembly held on Sunday Jul. 28 was a spectacle of venom, a display of vulgarity, and an unabashed nod to increased dictatorship.

Calling the Shia “dogs”, as one parliamentarian said during the session, which King Hamad convened, the Al-Khalifa have thrown away any hope for national reconciliation and dialogue.

The 22 recommendations approved during the session aimed at giving the regime pseudo-legal tools to quash dissent and violate human and civil rights with impunity. All in the name of fighting “terrorism”.
Related IPS Articles

Q&A: No Justice for Tortured Bahraini Journalist
OP-ED: Why Bahrain’s Al-Khalifa Family Is Losing the Right to Rule
U.S., EU Urged to Press Harder for Reform in Bahrain

Watching a video of some of the speeches during the session, one is saddened by how low official political discourse has become. Students of Bahrain yearn for the days when parliamentary debaters were civil and when Shia and Sunni parliamentarians engaged in thoughtful, rational, and tolerant debates despite their political or ideological differences.

In the early 1970s when the Constituent Assembly debated the draft constitution, Bahrainis followed the speeches by their elected and appointed representatives with much respect and hope for the future of a modern, tolerant, and civil society.

Such parliamentarians as Rasul al-Jishi, Jasim Murad, Ali Saleh, Abd al-Aziz Shamlan, Ali Sayyar, Isa Qasim, Qasim Fakhro, and others made their countrymen proud with the quality of debate that characterised Bahrain’s first ever elected parliament.

Even such ministers as Muhammad bin Mubarak al-Khalifa, Ali Fakhro, and Yusif Shirawi participated in those parliamentary debates and worked jointly with elected members to chart a more hopeful future for all the people of Bahrain.

As I sat through those parliamentary sessions in 1973 and followed the lengthy discussions on a myriad of constitutional amendments, I envisioned a democratically prosperous Bahrain for years to come. The National Assembly, however, was dissolved two years later, and the constitution was suspended. Al-Khalifa ruled by decree ever since.

The parliamentary special session last Sunday showed a divisive, intolerant, and fractured country that is rapidly descending into chaos. It’s as if civility, rationality, and moderation have become relics from the past.

King Hamad and the Crown Prince welcomed the recommendations, and the powerful prime minister urged his ministers to implement them immediately; in fact, he has threatened to fire any minister who slows their implementation.

According to media reports, the recommendations were prepared before the meeting and were disseminated to the media a few minutes after the session ended. They were not even debated meaningfully or rationally during the session.

The regime’s fear that Bahrainis would have their own “tamarud” (rebellion) civil disobedience movement to confront the regime on Aug. 14, Bahrain’s actual independence day, drove the timing of the session. The Bahraini opposition hopes to emulate the Egyptian “tamarud”, which indirectly led to Morsi’s removal.

Like other autocratic regimes, whether under Abdel Fattah al-Sisi in Egypt or Bashar al-Assad in Syria, Al-Khalifa justified the draconian recommendations against all forms of opposition and peaceful dissent in the name of fighting “terrorism” and incitement of “all forms of violence” (Recommendation #3). The regime will likely use these recommendations to ban all peaceful demonstrations and protests.

The regime is prepared, according to Recommendation #2, to revoke the citizenship of Bahraini citizens “who carry out terrorist crimes and those who instigate terrorism”. The regime defines a terrorist as any Bahraini who is suspected of being a dissident or actively advocating genuine reforms. In fact, Recommendation #6 bans “sit-ins, rallies and gatherings in the capital Manama”.

The regime does not seem perturbed by the fact that citizenship revocation violates international legal norms and the Bahraini constitution. In fact, this might be a sinister way for the Sunni al-Khalifa to alter the demographics of the country by depriving the Shia dissidents of citizenship.

Viewing the entire protest movement through the security prism, as the recommendations imply, the regime seems bent on escalating its crackdown against peaceful protest and freedoms of speech and assembly, according to the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights.

Under Recommendation #7, the country could soon be ruled under martial law or “National Safety”, as the regime euphemistically calls it.

The recommendations have put the country on a sectarian collision course, have dealt a major blow to peaceful dissent and civil rights, and have raised serious questions in Washington about Al-Khalifa’s commitment to genuine reform.

In a direct rebuke to U.S. Ambassador Thomas Krajeski, Recommendation #11 requests “that all ambassadors to Bahrain to not interfere in the kingdom’s domestic affairs.”

Some die-hard Sunni parliamentarians, with the support of the Royal Court, have urged the regime to expel Ambassador Krajeski from Bahrain, claiming he has been meeting with pro-democracy Shia dissidents. Others have threatened his personal safety.

Still others, with tacit regime support, are hoping the ambassador would be transferred out of Bahrain, much like what happened to political officer Ludovic Hood in May 2011.

At the time, according to the “Religion and Politics in Bahrain” blog, pro-regime Sunni activists demanded Hood’s removal because they claimed he offered “Krispy Kreme doughnuts to demonstrators who had gathered outside the American Embassy” to protest perceived U.S. support for Al-Khalifa.

Now pro-regime Sunni activists are feverishly campaigning against the U.S. ambassador’s public support for human rights and genuine reform in Bahrain. The recommendation curtailing diplomatic activities in the country is squarely aimed at Ambassador Krajeski.

According to Bahrain Mirror, some have advocated banning him from appearing on state media and in pro-regime newspapers, even if the subject he is discussing is gourmet cooking, one of the ambassador’s hobbies!

The anti-Shia and anti-reform underlying theme of the recommendations is a naked display of tribal family autocracy, which Al-Khalifa are determined to preserve at any cost, including tearing the society apart. Adopting these recommendations reflects the regime’s nervousness about the ever-increasing precarious nature of their rule and the unstoppable demands for justice, dignity, and equality.

According to a recently leaked audio recording, Crown Prince Salman was quoted as saying, “The current situation is unsustainable, and the policy we are pursuing cannot continue. People are getting tired, and conditions could worsen any moment. Bigger dangers are threatening our society, and the future is becoming more precarious.”

Washington and other Western capitals should work diligently to disabuse the king and the prime minister of the notion that “securitisation” is the answer to Bahrain’s domestic ills. Engaging with the public on the future of Bahrain, including the Shia majority and the pro-democracy youth movement, is the only way to bring the country back from the brink.

Washington should make it clear to Al-Khalifa that media attacks and threats against Ambassador Krajeski should stop. Whipping the flames of hatred against the U.S. embassy to preserve the regime’s dictatorial rule is a dangerous game, which Al-Khalifa cannot afford to engage in.

As a first and immediate step, King Hamad should muzzle the hotheads in his Royal Court and in the prime minister’s office. In the meantime, the U.S. should initiate serious discussions on how and when to move the Fifth Fleet out of Bahrain to a neighbouring country or over the horizon. …source

Bahrain’s Twitter Army Cracks Down on Dissent
By David Kenner – 1 August, 2013 – Foreign Policy

In Bahrain, all it takes is clicking on the wrong link to end up in jail. A new report prepared by Bahrain Watch, an activist organization critical of the ruling monarchy, details how the Bahraini government creates fake Twitter accounts to reveal the identity of anonymous anti-regime tweeps — and then prosecutes them on the basis of “secret evidence.”

Here’s how it works. Dozens of shell accounts — many designed to impersonate top figures within the Bahraini opposition — have tweeted links to anonymous Twitter users who comment on Bahrain. The links include spyware that reveals the user’s IP address, which the government can use to identify the name and street address of the person behind the account. From there, it’s simple police work: The government can raid the house and build a case against those living there, usually on charges of “insulting the king.” In total, Bahrain Watch found that more than 120 accounts were targeted by the government in this way.

With the government having crushed large street demonstrations in the capital, the online debate has become the new front line of the revolt. In May, five men were sentenced to a year in prison for violating Article 214 of Bahrain’s penal code, which prohibits “offending the emir [king] of the country, the national flag or emblem.” During the trial of one of those men, Ammar Makki Mohammed al-Aali, an official for the Bahraini police’s Cyber Crime Unit said that his IP address was obtained through “a private way I cannot reveal.”

But the government’s tactics are not only repressive — they’re inexact. A Twitter user other than the one being targeted may click on a publicly available link, or the targeted user may click on the link — but do so while using a connection not registered in their name, directing the government to someone else’s IP address. Take the case of Mahdi al-Basri, a lawyer who was sentenced to a year in prison in May for operating the anti-regime account @karrana14. However, one of the account’s operators said Basri was not involved — the account operator had merely clicked on a “suspicious link” while using Basri’s Internet account.

The monarchy in Manama makes a show of being different from the other “Arab Spring” regimes — but by using tools that are both authoritarian and catch civilians up in a broad dragnet, its tactics look pretty familiar. …more

Bahraini activist arrested after govt calls for tough measures against protesters
31 July, 2013 – RT

A prominent Bahraini rights activist and blogger was arrested just days after the government warned of implementing tougher measures against anti-government protesters in the Gulf Kingdom.

A 26 year old blogger Mohamed Hassan was arrested early Wednesday, according to Yousef al-Muhafedha, acting president of the Bahrain Human Rights Center.

“Arrest of blogger Mohammad Hassan is yet another criminal act by Bahrain’s dynastic dictatorship. Impossible to reform dictatorship,” said London-based Bahraini political activist, journalist and member of the Bahrain Freedom Movement, Saeed Shehabi on his Twitter account.

This comes after Bahrain’s King Hamad Bin Eisa Al Khalifa ordered the government on Monday to implement tough measures recommended by the parliament, against what the authorities are calling an increase in “terrorism” linked to protests, according to the state BNA news agency.

The measures include banning demonstrations in the capital Manama and stripping citizenship for those convicted of violence. The Sunni-led parliament also urged authorities to prosecute political groups that “incite and support acts of violence and terrorism”, as well as those that use social networks to “spread false information”, as cited by the Gulf news website.

The Shiite-led opposition described these measures as a “declaration of war on the people, as well as open threats and insults to beliefs”. However, opposition groups urged for protests “to remain peaceful.”

Meanwhile the security forces have warned of a strong response to rallies scheduled by the opposition groups for August 14.

These measures come against the background of two years of protests led by the kingdom’s majority Shiites against the minority Sunni-led government. The demonstrators have repeatedly called for a transfer to a democratic system of government, complaining of discrimination in jobs and government. In turn their loyalty is questioned by the ruling Al Khalifa family.

In April, the government introduced stricter penalties making it illegal to insult King Hamad or national symbols, charges that carry up to five-year jail sentences.

Rallies intensified during the Formula 1 race on April 21 in the Gulf Kingdom. Protestors said the event overshadowed the many alleged human rights abuses in Bahrain. Multiple reports of physical and psychological torture emerged during the grand prix, according to the Human Rights Watch.

Hassan worked as an assistant to various foreign journalists visiting Bahrain to cover the anti-regime rallies during the F1 event. In March he appeared on the Dan Rather Report, a weekly news television show hosted by former CBS news anchor, which covered the Bahraini protests.

According to the Bahrain Human Rights Center, when he was asked if it was safe for him to speak to the press he replied “I don’t care anymore. My friends have been in prison, some of them are still in prison, and some of them are in hiding and some of them are dead.”

Though the Bahraini government said it has taken steps to address the police brutality, a November 2011 report of an investigative commission stated that the authorities have been using excessive force, including torture, to extract confessions. Human rights activists say many abuses continue. …source

Bahrain: Crackdown Worsens as the Authorities Incite Sectarian Violence Following an Alleged Terror Blast in Pro-Government Area
22 July, 2013 – Bahrain Center for Human Rights

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR) is gravely concerned over the worsening crackdown and massive human rights violations committed by the Bahraini authorities following an alleged terror blast targeting a mosque at a pro-government area. There is particular concern in regards to how the authorities are using the incident to incite and promote sectarian hatred and violence.

On July 20th 2013, the Ministry of Interior (MOI) wrote on its Twitter account that a car had exploded outside a mosque in Riffa area which caused no injuries, and that the authorities were conducting an investigation.

Though the Bahrain Center for Human Rights is actively following the updates and encourages the government to perform a transparent, impartial investigation into the incident, the BCHR is alarmed over the nature of the ‘required procedures’ the Ministry of Interior has resorted to as during the past five days. The BCHR has documented a large number of human rights violations which include arbitrary arrests, excessive use of force, midnight house raids, attacking mosques and places of worship, and collective punishment.

Arbitrary Arrests, Excessive Use of Force, & House Raids

The BCHR has documented 60 cases of illegal arrests, 140 shotgun injuries, and over 150 house raids in just the last five days.

The majority of arrests occurred after policemen, accompanied by masked civilians, raided individuals houses without an arrest warrant and without providing any justifications for their presence. The other arrests occurred during peaceful protests or at police checkpoints. …more

Kerry calls for compromise as Mideast peace talks begin
30 July, 2013 – The Daily Star

OCCUPIED JERUSALEM/WASHINGTON: Israeli and Palestinian negotiators arrived in Washington Monday to begin the first direct talks in three years, though optimism was in short supply after two decades of failed attempts to reach a deal.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called for Palestinians and Israelis to make “reasonable compromises” for peace as he prepared to preside over the negotiations.

“It is no secret this is a difficult process. If it were easy, it would have happened a long time ago,” Kerry said with his newly named envoy for Israeli-Palestinian peace, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk, at his side.

“It is no secret, therefore, that many difficult choices lie ahead for the negotiators and for the leaders as we seek reasonable compromises on tough, complicated, emotional and symbolic issues,” Kerry told reporters.

In a sign of the challenges, the parties differed in public about the agenda for the talks, with an Israeli official saying all issues would be discussed simultaneously and a Palestinian official saying they would start with borders and security.

Private talks were expected to start late Monday with an iftar dinner hosted by Kerry with Israeli chief negotiator Tzipi Livni and her Palestinian counterpart Saeb Erakat. …more

A Breathtaking Hypocrisy – Why the US Has No Right to Lecture Latin America
by DANIEL WICKHAM – 30 July, 2013 – Counter Punch

Venezuela has announced that it is ending efforts to improve ties with the United States after the Obama administration’s nominee for the role of ambassador to the United Nations labelled the country “repressive.” Samantha Power, who is widely known for her strong stance on human rights, vowed to contest “the crackdown on civil society being carried out in countries like Cuba, Iran, Russia and Venezuela.”

For obvious reasons, Power is selective in who she choses to criticise. The likes of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates, all of whom have presided over major crackdowns on dissent in recent years, warrant no mention, which is not surprising given the US government’s staunch support for the regimes in question. Regarding Saudi Arabia, Washington’s attitude towards democracy is best expressed by William M. Daley, Obama’s chief of staff during the Arab uprisings, who said that “the possibility of anything (like the revolution in Egypt) happening in Saudi Arabia was one that couldn’t become a reality.” Daley explained that “for the global economy, this couldn’t happen”, referring of course to the importance of Saudi oil, which was described by the Council on Foreign Relations in 2003 as the primary reason for US support for the monarchy. An unsurprising claim, in light of the US State Department’s description in 1945 of the Gulf’s oil reserves as “a stupendous source of strategic power and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.”

Returning to Latin America, the hypocrisy is again breathtaking. Condemning Venezuela as “repressive”, Power neglects to mention that the “most dramatic setback”, according to Americas Watch, for human rights in Venezuela came in 2002 when a coup d’etat, allegedly supported tacitly by the United States, removed Chavez from office and “dissolved the country’s democratic institutions.” It is also worth noting that the US supported enthusiastically the Caldera and Perez administrations which preceded Chavez’s Bolivarian Revolution, both of which were vastly more repressive than the current ‘revolutionary’ government.

Also strikingly absent from Power’s remarks was any mention of Colombia, the United States’ closest ally in the region, which according to Americas Watch, “presents the worst human rights and humanitarian crisis in the Western Hemisphere.” This year’s annual report claims that “over the past decade, the Colombian army committed an alarming number of extrajudicial killings of civilians”, carried out in “a systematic fashion”, during which time the army was the highest recipient of US military aid in Latin America. Most of the killings occurred under the presidency of Alvaro Uribe, whom President Bush described in 2006 as “a personal friend” and “a strong believer in democracy and human rights.” Under Obama, Colombia has continued to receive more military aid than any other country in the hemisphere, with Mexico, whose well-documented record of “extrajudicial killings, disappearances” and “widespread torture” is not much better, coming second. …more

The Saudi monarchy’s harsh crackdown on dissent
David Mizner – 29 July, 2013 – msnbc

Late last month in Saudi Arabia, tens of thousands of people marched in a funeral for two activists killed by the police. “Death to Al Saud,” they chanted in what was perhaps the largest demonstration in a protest movement that began in January 2011, when a 65-year-old man self-immolated. While most protests have taken place in the Shiite areas of Eastern Province, Sunnis have also sporadically taken to the streets, and there’s been a surge of dissent online.

The protests—and the resulting government crackdown—have gone largely unnoticed in the United States. While it’s understandable that the turmoil elsewhere in the region has taken precedence, events in Saudi Arabia should be getting more attention given the country’s global significance and the decades of U.S. support for its autocratic ally.

Saudi Arabia is a human rights horror show, especially for women, religious minorities, and migrant workers, who make up a majority of the workforce. Under a guardianship system, men treat women as minors. Girls as young as nine are forced to marry. In 2009, a female victim of gang rape was accused of “adultery,” beaten, and imprisoned. An absolute monarchy and theocracy that has no written penal code, the government prohibits the public exercise of any faith other than Islam, has beheaded people for “sorcery,” and routinely imprisons people without charge or trial and tortures them.

Yet in 2012, according to Human Rights Watch, not once did a U.S. official publicly condemn Saudi Arabia for human rights abuses. American priorities are clear. On June 25th, two days after Saudi police killed Shiite activist Morsi Ali Ibrahim al-Rabah, Secretary of State John Kerry appeared in Jeddah with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal and said that “protecting the stability” of the monarchy and other governments in the region is “the most important” issue.

The stability of the Saudi government enables the United States to pursue its core objectives in the region: accessing oil, checking the influence of Iran, and waging its war against al-Qaida and “associated forces.” American oil companies and arms manufacturers have a huge stake in the U.S-Saudi alliance. The United States is sending Saudi Arabia $60 billion worth of weapons to upgrade its air force—the single largest arms deal in U.S. history.

The countries were trying to seal that deal in 2011 when King Abdullah expressed displeasure over what he regarded as U.S. support for the region’s democratic uprisings. To mollify him, President Obama dispatched both Defense Secretary Robert Gates and, a few days later, National Security Adviser Tom Donilon to Riyadh. U.S. support for the Saudi monarchy is so unceasing it can make U.S. support for other allies, even Israel, seem conditional.

So it’s with the tacit support of the U.S. that the regime is intensifying its crackdown on dissent. The two recent slayings disrupted months of relative calm and brought to at least 20 the number of people shot by the police since the protests began.

Shiite activists aren’t the only victims of government persecution. In March, the government arrested a group of Wahabi women protesting the imprisonment of their husbands, prompting an unusual, unified outcry from Shiite and Sunni fundamentalists, as well as liberals. The regime is also going after the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association, one of the country’s few human rights groups. In March, a court sentenced co-founders Abdullah al-Hamid and Mohammed al-Qahtani to 11 and 10 years in prison, respectively. Another member, Mohammed al-Bajadi, is in prison. In a Youtube video posted in June, his mother said she hadn’t heard from him in nine months.

Under questioning from reporters, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland expressed “concern” about the al-Hamid and al-Qahtani sentences. The U.S. Commission on International Freedom also put out a statement. But there has been little else beyond that even as the Saudi government pushes its crackdown on people for speaking out online.

This week, a court sentenced the founder of the Free Saudi Liberal website to seven years in prison and 600 lashes. Twitter, which has more users per capita in Saudi Arabia than in any other country, is a popular platform for dissent. As part of a coordinated rhetorical attack on social media, the head of the religious police said that anyone who uses these sites has “lost this world and his afterlife.”

The anti-government activism, though striking for Saudi Arabia, at this point poses no threat to the regime, which has proven itself adept at neutralizing opposition. U.S. government and corporations are betting that the House of Saud will endure. …more

The billionaire prince who says Saudi Arabia is in far bigger trouble than the other royals admit
By Steve LeVine – 29 July, 2013 – Quartz

Saudi Arabia, home to the world’s largest reserves of cheap-to-drill oil, describes itself as a painstaking economic planner. It plots to keep current oil prices stable even while diversifying for harder economic days ahead. These practices have, among other things, resulted in the accumulation of $700 billion in official foreign reserves.

This self-depiction has always aroused suspicion since outsiders typically see little more than what the Saudis wish them to. But now a 14-page screed by one of the nation’s most prominent billionaire princes suggests internal dissent on whether the kingdom is planning painstakingly enough. Alwaleed bin Talal, a jet-setting nephew of King Abdullah who owns stakes in Apple, Citigroup and Twitter, says that Saudi Arabia faces a dire threat.

The main trouble, Alwaleed tweeted on July 27, is a flood of new petroleum reserves on to the global market, particularly shale oil from the US. These fresh supplies are eroding demand for Saudi petroleum and, since the country relies on oil exports for 92% of the state budget, will trigger a crisis unless the government acts post-haste.

“It is necessary to diversify sources of revenue, establish a clear vision for that and start implementing it immediately,” Alwaleed wrote in one of three letters that he posted with the tweet.

The letters, addressed to a variety of Saudi dignitaries including the king, are all dated in April and May. One can only speculate as to why Alwaleed made the highly unusual public release, but it may be that he felt his message was not heard. If so, it may be because his assertions diverge so much from the official Saudi message. On May 10, for example, Saudi oil minister Ali Naimi (one of the recipients of the letters), told a Washington audience that shale oil is “great news” for the US, and no threat to his own country.

There could not be a more stark contrast in news: the Saudis officially claim that they are building a gigantic array of solar panels that by 2020 will produce 24 gigawatts of power, and all but eliminate the need to burn oil for electricity. (Saudi currently burns 550,000 barrels a day of oil for its own needs, worth billions of dollars a year in potential export earnings.)

But Prince Alwaleed says that is not nearly enough. “Everybody knows that the policy of the western countries, led by the United States, is to decrease dependence on oil,” he wrote in green ink at the bottom of one letter. Because of that policy, he said,

The global dependence on OPEC’s petroleum and specifically the production of Saudi Arabia is in continuous and clear decline.

If the past is a teacher, Saudi leaders will either ignore or publicly dismiss Alwaleed’s assertions. But Twitter is popular with businesspeople in the Gulf as a forum that bypasses the straitjacketed mainstream press. Turning to it looks like an attempt by Alwaleed to bring direct pressure from public opinion to bear on the Saudi elite. …more

West war crimes in Syria exposed
By Finian Cunningham – 30 July, 2013 – PressTV

But what is truly remarkable is how the Western governments and their propaganda machine, known euphemistically as the mainstream news media, are ignoring these latest massacres (in Syria). That is because their vile game is up. They can no longer dissimulate on the reality of who is carrying out these massacres and how it is all part of a criminal genocidal campaign directed from Washington, London and Paris. That is why they are feigning to ignore such atrocities. To look into them honestly would uncover the ugly face of Western imperialism…”

There was a time during the 30-month covert dirty war on Syria when the Western governments and mainstream media would make a clamor over reported massacres.

Now, despicably, these governments and media just ignore such atrocities.

Why? Because it is increasingly clear that the groups committing these crimes against thousands of Syrian civilians are the foreign-backed mercenaries, whom the Western media and their governments have tried to lionize as “rebels” fighting for “democratic freedom”.

That charade is rapidly disintegrating, exposing not just criminal Western governments sponsoring the violence against civilians, but an entire media industry that is also guilty of war crimes through its willful complicity.

This is not mere hyperbole. To disseminate false information and lies about conflict – under the guise of independent news – is to be complicit in covering up war crimes. You can hardly get more serious misconduct than to tell lies about crimes against humanity.

These toxic lies and propaganda are now being exposed as the Western-backed plot to subvert the sovereign state of Syria unravels; this unraveling is accentuated by the West’s death squads becoming even more unhinged as they stare at looming defeat at the hands of the Syrian army.

The latest massacre occurred in the town of Khan al-Assal in the northern province of Aleppo. Some 150 people, mostly civilians, were reportedly slaughtered in cold blood. Many of the victims were shot in the head execution-style. The groups claiming responsibility are the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front and Ansar al Khalifa.

Reliable sources say that the killers tried to cover up their barbaric crimes by mutilating the corpses and burning the remains. Only days before this orgy of murder, the same groups are believed to have massacred at least seven civilians in the town of Maqbara in the province of Hasakah.

Elsewhere, as the Syrian national army makes searing advances against the militants, it is apparent from the identities of the dead that the majority of these fighters are foreigners, from Saudi Arabia, Libya, Jordan, Turkey, as well as from the US and Europe, including Britain, France and Germany.

Just last week, it was reported that Saudi Arabia bought $50 million-worth of heavy arms from Israel to supply this foreign network in its endeavor to terrorize the people of Syria into submission.

Already, the US, Britain and France have stumped up over $200 million which they claim is provided to “the Syrian opposition” in the form of “non-lethal aid”.

This is just cynical semantics to cover up the fact that the Western governments and their regional Turk, Arab and Israeli proxies are sponsoring genocide in Syria.

Over the weekend as the mass murders in Khan al-Assal and Maqbara emerged there was a telling silence in the Western media. A cursory glance at outlets such as New York Times, Washington Post, Voice of America, the Guardian, BBC, France 24, Deutsche Welle, Reuters, among others, showed no or negligible reports on the atrocities. …more

War against Iran, Iraq AND Syria?
By Pepe Escobar – THE ROVING EYE – 23 July, 2013

Amidst the incessant rumble in the (Washington) jungle about a possible Obama administration military adventure in Syria, new information has come to light. And what a piece of Pipelineistan information that is.

Picture Iraqi Oil Minister Abdelkarim al-Luaybi, Syrian Oil Minister Sufian Allaw, and the current Iranian caretaker Oil Minister Mohammad Aliabadi getting together in the port of Assalouyeh, southern Iran, to sign a memorandum of understanding for the construction of the Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline, no less.

At Asia Times Online and also elsewhere I have been arguing that this prospective Pipelinestan node is one of the fundamental reasons for the proxy war in Syria. Against the interests of Washington, for whom integrating Iran is anathema, the pipeline bypasses two crucial foreign actors in Syria – prime “rebel” weaponizer Qatar (as a gas producer) and logistical “rebel” supporter Turkey (as the self-described privileged energy crossroads between East and West).

The US$10 billion, 6,000 kilometer pipeline is set to start in Iran’s South Pars gas field (the largest in the world, shared with Qatar), and run via Iraq, Syria and ultimately to Lebanon. Then it could go under the Mediterranean to Greece and beyond; be linked to the Arab gas pipeline; or both.

Before the end of August, three working groups will be discussing the complex technical, financial and legal aspects involved. Once finance is secured – and that’s far from certain, considering the proxy war in Syria – the pipeline could be online by 2018. Tehran hopes that the final agreement will be signed before the end of the year.

Tehran’s working assumption is that it will be able to export 250 million cubic meters of gas a day by 2016. When finished, the pipeline will be able to pump 100 million cubic meters a day. For the moment, Iraq needs up to 15 million cubic meters a day. By 2020, Syria will need up to 20 million cubic meters, and Lebanon up to 7 million cubic meters. That still leaves a lot of gas to be exported to European customers.

Europeans – who endlessly carp about being hostages of Gazprom – should be rejoicing. Instead, once again they shot themselves in their Bally-clad feet.

Want war? Here’s the bill
Before we get to the latest European fiasco, let’s mix this Pipelineistan development with the new Pentagon “discovery” – via the deputy director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), David Shedd, according to whom the proxy war in Syria may last for “multiple years”. If that happens, bye-bye pipeline.

One wonders what those Pentagon intel wizards have really been doing since early 2011, considering they had been predicting Bashar al-Assad’s fall every other week. Now they have also “discovered” that jihadis in the Syrian theater of the Jabhat al-Nusra and al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) mould are actually running the (ghastly) show. Shedd admitted there are “at least 1,200” disparate “rebel” factions/gangs in Syria, most of them irrelevant.

Attesting to the appalling average IQ involved in foreign policy debate in the Beltway, still this information had to be spun to justify yet another military adventure on the horizon – especially after President Barack “Assad must go” Obama declared he would authorize the “light” weaponizing of “good” rebels only. As if the harsh rules of war obeyed some Weapon Fairy Godmother high up in the sky.

Into the ring steps General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. On the same day that Tehran, Baghdad and Damascus were talking seriously about the business of energy, Dempsey wrote to US senators of the John McCain warmongering variety that the US getting into yet another war would lead to “unintended consequences”. …more

Arabs, Beware the “Small States” Option
By Sharmine Narwani – Al Akhbar – 30 July, 2013 – Intifada

At the heart of all politics lies cold, hard opportunism. New circumstances, changed alliances and unexpected events will always conspire to alter one’s calculations to benefit a core agenda.

In the Middle East today, those calculations are being adjusted with a frequency unseen for decades.

In Egypt and Syria, for instance, popular sentiment is genuinely divided on where alliances and interests lie. Half of Egyptians seem convinced that deposed President Mohammed Mursi is the resident US-Israeli stooge, while the other half believe it is Egypt’s military that is carrying out those foreign agendas.

In Syria the same can be said for Syrians conflicted on whether President Bashar al-Assad or the external-based Syrian National Council (SNC) most benefits Israeli and American hegemonic interests in the region.

But Egyptians and Syrians, who point alternating fingers at Islamists or the state as being tools of imperialism, have this wrong: Empire is opportunistic. It has ways to benefit from both.

There is another vastly more destructive scenario being missed while Arabs busy themselves with conspiracies and speculative minutiae: A third option far more damaging to all.

Balkanization of Key Mideast States

At a June 19 event at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger touched upon an alarming new refrain in western discourse on Mideast outcomes; a third strategy, if all else fails, of redrawn borders along sectarian, ethnic, tribal or national lines that will shrink the political/military reach of key Arab states and enable the west to reassert its rapidly-diminishing control over the region. Says Kissinger about two such nations:

“There are three possible outcomes (in Syria). An Assad victory. A Sunni victory. Or an outcome in which the various nationalities agree to co-exist together but in more or less autonomous regions, so that they can’t oppress each other. That’s the outcome I would prefer to see. But that’s not the popular view…First of all, Syria is not a historic state. It was created in its present shape in 1920, and it was given that shape in order to facilitate the control of the country by France, which happened to be after UN mandate…The neighboring country Iraq was also given an odd shape, that was to facilitate control by England. And the shape of both of the countries was designed to make it hard for either of them to dominate the region.”

While Kissinger frankly acknowledges his preferred option of “autonomous regions,” most western government statements actually pretend their interest lies in preventing territorial splits. Don’t be fooled. This is narrative-building and scene-setting all the same. Repeat something enough – i.e., the idea that these countries could be carved up – and audiences will not remember whether you like it or not. They will retain the message that these states can be divided.

It is the same with sectarian discourse. Western governments are always warning against the escalation of a Sunni-Shia divide. Yet they are knee-deep in deliberately fueling Shia-Sunni conflicts throughout the region, particularly in states where Iran enjoys significant influence (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq) or may begin to gain some (Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen).

“Seeding” Sectarianism to Break Up States

If ever a conspiracy had legs, this one is it. Stirring Iranian-Arab and Sunni-Shiite strife to its advantage has been a major US policy objective since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran.

Wikileaks helped shed light on some of Washington’s machinations just as Arab uprisings started to hit our TV screens.

A 2006 State Department cable that bemoans Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s strengthened position in Syria outlines actionable plans to sow discord within the state, with the goal of disrupting Syrian ties with Iran. The theme? “Exploiting” all “vulnerabilities”:

“PLAY ON SUNNI FEARS OF IRANIAN INFLUENCE: There are fears in Syria that the Iranians are active in both Shia proselytizing and conversion of, mostly poor, Sunnis. Though often exaggerated, such fears reflect an element of the Sunni community in Syria that is increasingly upset by and focused on the spread of Iranian influence in their country through activities ranging from mosque construction to business. Both the local Egyptian and Saudi missions here, (as well as prominent Syrian Sunni religious leaders), are giving increasing attention to the matter and we should coordinate more closely with their governments on ways to better publicize and focus regional attention on the issue.”

Makes one question whether similar accusations about the “spread of Shiism” in Egypt held any truth whatsoever, other than to sow anti-Shia and anti-Iran sentiment in a country until this month led by the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood.

A 2009 cable from the US Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia continues this theme. Mohammad
 Naji al-Shaif, a tribal leader with close personal ties to then-Yemeni President Ali Abdallah 
Saleh and his inner circle says that key figures “are privately very skeptical of Saleh’s
 claims regarding Iranian assistance for the Houthi rebels”:

Shaif told
 EconOff on December 14 that (Saudi Government’s Special Office for
 Yemen Affairs) committee members privately shared his view that Saleh was providing false or exaggerated
 information on Iranian assistance to the Houthis in order to
 enlist direct Saudi involvement and regionalize the conflict. Shaif said that one committee member told him that “we know
 Saleh is lying about Iran, but there’s nothing we can do 
about it now.”

That didn’t stop Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lying through her teeth to a Senate Committee a few short years later: “We know that they – the Iranians are very much involved in the opposition movements in Yemen.”

US embassy cables from Manama, Bahrain in 2008 continue in the same vein:

“Bahraini government officials sometimes privately tell U.S. official visitors that some Shi’a oppositionists are backed by Iran. Each time this claim is raised, we ask the GOB to share its evidence. To date, we have seen no convincing evidence of Iranian weapons or government money here since at least the mid-1990s… In post’s assessment, if the GOB had convincing evidence of more recent Iranian subversion, it would quickly share it with us.”

Yet as Bahraini rulers continue to violently repress peaceful protest in the Shia-majority state two years into that country’s popular uprising, their convenient public bogeyman mirrors that of Washington: Iranian interference. …more

HRH the Prime Minister Chairs Extraordinary Cabinet Meeting
30 July, 2013 – BNA

Manama: July 30 — (BNA)– His Royal Highness Prime Minister Prince Khalifa bin Salman Al Khalifa chaired the Extraordinary Cabinet Meeting at the Gudaibiya Palace today conducted to discuss the National Assembly’s recommendations regarding security and increasing terrorism in the Kingdom of Bahrain. After the meeting Dr. Yaser bin Essa Al Naser, Secretary General of the Cabinet, released the following statement:

In the beginning of the meeting, HRH the Prime Minister informed the Cabinet of the content of the letter issued by HM King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, which commissioned the government to take the necessary decisions and procedures to implement the recommendations submitted by the National Assembly. HM the King stressed that the government immediately take all measures to expeditiously implement these recommendations. At the same time, the Prime Minister informed the Cabinet about his letter in reply in which he stressed that the Government will take the necessary measures to implement the recommendations on the ground as quickly as possible.

The Cabinet defined in its meeting the work mechanism, follow-up and deadlines for the implementation of the National Assembly’s recommendations and determined those entities that will be commissioned with their implementation as per HRH the Prime Minister’s previous direction to convert these recommendations into action within the proper legal framework, Legislatively and Executively according to their respective fields.

HRH the Prime Minister emphasized the need for Ministries and governmental entities to devote themselves to implement these recommendations with the highest integrated cooperation between them. The government is decisive and firm in dealing with violence and terrorism — increasing the punishment of instigators — and it will not retreat from or allow any substitution for the implementation of the citizens’ will. Moreover, the government is moving forward in light of the national consensus on the consolidation of security and stability in the fight against terrorism, sectarianism, spreading hatred and instigation, within the framework of the law and the Kingdom’s commitment to freedom of expression and Human Rights. The government will deal with anyone who breaks the law, compromises civil security, or damages public and private property, in order to impose security and civil peace; and will work to eliminate any gaps that allow for the incitement, support or funding of terrorism. …source

Bahrain raises alarm over rising violence
28 July, 2013 – By Reem Khalifa – The Associated Press

MANAMA, BAHRAIN — Bahrain’s king urged lawmakers Sunday to move ahead with proposed harsher measures against escalating attacks by Shiite-led opposition factions, including banning protest gatherings in the capital, after top government officials joined an emergency parliament session to discuss the Gulf nation’s nearly 30 months of unrest.

It was unclear what new steps could emerge more than two years after Bahrain lifted temporary martial law-style rule. But the endorsement for speedy action by the king virtually clears the way for tougher codes that also could include freezing bank accounts and stripping citizenship over links to violence.

The gathering also underscored the growing alarm in Bahrain that the Arab Spring-inspired uprising by the kingdom’s majority Shiites could be drifting into an even more violent stage. A spate of recent bomb attacks, including a blast Saturday, has wounded several policemen and suggests that militant groups are operating with greater autonomy.

Bahrain’s main Shiite political blocs have denounced the attacks, but also complain about widespread injuries among protesters from security forces using bird-shot fire and tear gas.

More than 60 people have died in Bahrain’s upheaval as Shiites press for a greater political voice in the strategic Sunni-ruled kingdom, which is home to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet. Activists and Shiite leaders place the death toll above 100.

The parliament session also appeared prompted by opposition calls for major protests Aug. 14 inspired by the crowds that helped topple Egypt’s President Mohammed Morsi. Authorities have already warned of a tough response to attempts at organizing large-scale marches that day.

Abdul Jalil Khalil, a top official with the main Shiite political group Al Wefaq, criticized Sunday’s emergency session and royal endorsement of tougher measures, saying “what came today is a green light to tighten laws that are incompatible with freedom of expression and human rights.”

On the other side of the political divide, Justice Minister Khalid bin Ali Al Khalifa told lawmakers that authorities must first quell “terrorism” before it can discuss reconciliation, but he stopped short of outlining any specific measures.

Samira Rajab, the information minister and government spokesman, said Bahrain should adopt a “zero-tolerance policy” against “violent acts that have affected the social fabric of its society.”

Parliament members, however, pressed government officials to impose tougher punishments and steps to control violence, including banning all protest gatherings in the capital, Manama, whose Pearl Square was the center of the uprising in its early days. Shortly after clearing the square of demonstrators in early 2011, wrecking crews brought down the six-pronged monument that towered above the area and was one of the city’s main landmarks. It is now ringed by razor wire and guarded round the clock.

“The dangerous escalation, which tries to pull the country into a whirlpool of insecurity and political tensions, should be faced,” said the parliament’s chairman, Khalifa bin Ahmed al-Dhahrani.

Nearly all the 80 members in both chambers of parliament back the Sunni monarchy. Shiite lawmakers walked out amid the crackdowns against protesters in early 2011.

One lawmaker, Latifa al-Qaood, urged authorities to wield “an iron fist against all traitors,” according to the official Bahrain News Agency.

Another, Sawsan Taqawi, called for banning any gatherings or rallies “that endanger national security” and take more decisions to strip citizenship from people convicted of “terrorism.” In November, Bahrain revoked citizenship for 31 Shiites for roles in the uprising — a move that brought widespread denunciations from international human rights groups.

Bahrain courts also have jailed prominent opposition figures and others, including some with alleged links to Iranian-backed groups such as Lebanon’s Hezbollah. Bahrain and other Gulf states claim Shiite power Iran has a hand in the protests, but there has been no clear evidence presented. Iran denies any direct role in Bahrain’s unrest.

Other lawmakers proposed freezing assets for suspects linked to attacks and ordering blanket curfews in areas of frequent clashes. …source

A hundred years of toxic humanitarianism
Anna Feigenbaum – 24 July, 2013 – Open Democracy

The history of tear gas traces a metamorphosis from chemical weapon of warfare to ‘legitimate’ crowd control technology. Whilst casualties are persistently blamed on ‘misuse’ by police and security forces, history reveals tear gas to be an inherently dangerous weapon.

In August 2012, eighteen months into protests in Bahrain, Physicians for Human Rights released a report documenting 34 tear gas-related deaths. These included deaths arising from tear gas fired into enclosed locations such as cars, homes and mosques, as well as from canister strikes to the head. Lost eyes, miscarriages, and respiratory failures also filled the list of causalities.

Human rights campaign groups put pressure on governments to stop shipments by describing injuries as a result of the misuse of tear gas. Amnesty International stated that tear gas in Bahrain was “being used inappropriately,” while Physicians for Human Rights titled their report ‘Weaponizing Tear Gas’.

Last week this language of ‘incorrect use’ appeared again. Human Rights Watch sent out a press release calling on Turkey to “End Incorrect, Unlawful Use of Teargas.” But what does it mean to ‘misuse’ a weapon like tear gas? How did tear gas become an acceptable weapon for public order policing in the first place? And why, as so many commentators point out, is tear gas banned in war but permitted for ‘keeping the peace’?
Tear gas: a chemical weapon of warfare

News stories on tear gas tend to cite the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibited the use of most chemical weapons, as the foundation of these anomalies. It was here that nations signed on to an exception, permitting the use of tear gases for “law enforcement including domestic riot control purposes.” Yet the origins of this exception date back much farther than 1997. To understand how tear gas came to be considered a humanitarian weapon for public order policing we must return to the trenches.

Although primitive forms of tear gas existed prior to World War I, it was during the war that research and resources were heavily invested to develop lachrymatory agents—what we commonly refer to as ‘tear gases’ (though they aren’t actually a gas). These chemical substances were used in efforts to lure the enemy out from trenches so as to ‘weaken his defences’. Designed for this purpose, tear gas was seen as a form of both physical and psychological attack.

It was precisely this aggressive use of tear gas that led to its initial ban under the Geneva Protocol of 1925—a ban the US had not signed on to. Having witnessed the ways tear gas was used as part of trench warfare, delegates in Geneva argued that it was inhumane. However, by the time the protocol was ratified, military and state officials were already busy promoting the benefits of such weapons for controlling the masses. …more

Saudi police raid houses in Awamiya
30 July, 2013 – ABNA

Saudi security forces have raided a number of cars and houses in the city of Awamiya in Eastern Province during an operation to arrest an anti-government human rights activist.

Saudi police raid houses in Awamiya

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) – According to a video posted online, the incident took place as Saudi security forces stormed the house of human rights activist Abbas Ali Mohammed Al-Mazra on Monday.

One person is reported to be injured by the security forces.

Abbas al-Mazra is one of the 23 Saudi activists wanted by the kingdom’s Interior Ministry for organizing anti-government demonstrations in the eastern cities of Awamiya and Qatif. Some of the activists on the list have already been arrested.

It was not clear whether Mazra was arrested in the operation.

Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province has been witnessing anti-government demonstrations since February 2011. Protesters demand political reforms, greater liberties, freedom of expression and the release of political prisoners, who have been held without trial for more than 16 years.

They have also condemned economic and religious discrimination in the oil-rich region and their government’s involvement in a brutal crackdown on protesters in neighboring Bahrain.

In Saudi Arabia, protests and political gatherings of any kind are prohibited. Activists say there are over 40,000 political prisoners in the country.

According to the activists, most of the detained political thinkers are being held by the government without trial or legitimate charges and have been arrested for merely looking suspicious.

In Saudi Arabia, protests and political gatherings of any kind are prohibited. …source

The Story of Bahrain
By As’ad AbuKhalil – 22 July, 2013 – Angry Corner – Al Akhbar

It is a story NOT of a democracy: but of a dictatorship that is headed by a ruling dynasty installed by the British colonial powers and then supported and sponsored by the US, the inheritor in the Middle East of British and French colonialism. The King has NOT been pressured or criticized, and there were NO calls for his dismissal or resignation. Obama and his secretary of state did NOT call on the King to step down. They NEVER said that the King “has to go.” Western government did NOT call on the Bahraini tyrant to heed the calls of his people. Unlike Syria, Bahrain is – we are told – “complicated.” Complicated is a word that is often invoked by Western governments and Western human rights organizations when they wish to cover up occupation, repression, and massacres by allies and clients of the West.

But the people of Bahrain were NEVER passive. They have a history of courageous opposition to the House of Khalifah. People of Bahrain were at the forefront of political activism and they produced diverse political movements over the decades: Arab nationalist and leftist causes were popular, and labor unionism had an exemplary history.

But Bahrain hosts the Fifth Fleet, which immediately gives Bahrain’s ranking in the politically bogus classification of Freedom House an elevated status. If Bahrain were to host another US fleet, or if it were to open a big base for US forces, like Qatar did, then Bahrain would have been declared a Free country. If Jeffrey Feltman famously declared back in 2011 that Egypt was not Tunisia, in order to reassure Zionists that Hosni Mubarak was safe and sound, then Bahrain is NOT Syria for sure.

The people of Bahrain have NO friends in the West or in any other country. There is no organization that calls itself “Friends of Bahrain.” That is not a sexy cause. The people of Bahrain have no friends at all, not even in the Arab world. The majority of the people in Bahrain are NOT Sunnis, which automatically places them in the enemy camp according to standards of the West and dominant Saudi-Qatari leadership of the Arab counter-revolution. The hundreds of thousands of people of Bahrain do NOT amount to “a revolution” in the language of Western media. They are NOT a people. This is a movement that just can NOT be called an uprising. They have to be referred to as Shia to implicate them with ties to the Iranian mullahs. This makes it easier for Western readers to understand.

There were NO panels, workshops, and conferences devoted to Bahrain. Western academics did NOT offer long articles about how to best arm and supply the Bahraini protesters. There were NO arms lists provided to Western governments, and Western foreign ministers did NOT feign concern and compassion about the people of Bahrain. There were NO debates held in Western media and on college campuses on how to best serve the people of Bahrain.

Western media did NOT strive to smuggle correspondents into Bahrain, and the few articles on Bahrain did NOT carry disclaimers about how the Bahraini tyrant did NOT allow journalists to freely roam the country to report on its affairs. Western correspondents based in Beirut did NOT obtain names of dissidents and activists in Bahrain to Skype with and to form the basis of long reports about the bravery and righteousness of a mass political movement. NEITHER Qatar NOR Saudi Arabia funded the Bahraini Observatory for Human Rights to provide the Western media with daily reports about the repression and brutality of the regime.

Western media do NOT report about the blatant sectarian propaganda, schemes and policies of the King of Bahrain. Instead, the mere sectarian affiliation of the majority of the Bahraini population is used as evidence of sectarian culpability and machinations. The Saudi military intervention in Bahrain is NOT categorized as the foreign intervention that bothers Western governments and media in Syria, but only when on the side of the regime. The bogus Western media narrative of Arab uprising would NOT refrain from including the Saudi sectarian-military intervention in Bahrain in the democracy tale in which Lawrences of Arabia get – yet again – the full credit, while supplying tyrants with advanced weaponry. …more