Brace for the worst in Bahrain
by Hussein Ibish, 24 January, 2012 – LebanonNow

The stage seems to be set for February and March to be the scene of a significant intensification of tensions in Bahrain. The period will mark the one-year anniversaries of the protest movement, the government crackdown, and the “Peninsula Shield” intervention by Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council forces. More importantly, recent developments have pushed almost entirely away from substantive moves toward national accommodation or reconciliation.

Since the failure of the “national dialogue” last summer, clashes between security forces and largely Shia protesters have regularly taken placed during emotional funerals following the deaths of individuals under suspicious circumstances.

The report of the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry, which found that security forces had engaged in the excessive use of force, appears to have done nothing to inhibit the use of tear gas and other suppressive measures. Indeed, this behavior seems to have intensified. At least eight protesters have been killed since the report was filed, mostly by tear gas inhalation, including reportedly a baby.

In their own defense, the authorities have pointed to changes in the leadership of the security services, the hiring of Western policing experts, and the investigation of a number of deaths in custody. They cite the impending trial of five security officers, none of them Bahraini, for the death of a blogger while being held by the police. And King Hamad has proposed some limited constitutional reforms that are supposed to enhance the power of the legislature.

None of this has impressed any major actors in the opposition. The main Shia opposition grouping, Al-Wefaq, has continued to boycott parliament and the by-elections intended to fill the seats opened by the mass resignation of its parliamentarians. There is still no vehicle for meaningful dialogue between the government and opposition forces. Hardliners on both sides appear to have been gaining ground over those interested in a meaningful compromise.

There are signs of a serious hardening of the position of important opposition voices and groups. Most significantly, on January 12, Nabeel Rajab, the president of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and a figure with both national and international credibility, gave a speech that seemed to break new ground for the mainstream opposition. He stated bluntly, “Our problem is with the king of Bahrain.” Addressing the king directly, he said, “If you cannot get rid of the heavy weights of your regime and the crimes that your regime has committed, then it is the appropriate time now for you to leave.”

It is not clear if he was calling for abdication or the end of the monarchy. However, the statement brings calls for what amount to regime change, which had previously been restricted to smaller and more radical opposition groups such as Al-Haq, much closer to the rhetoric of the mainstream Bahraini opposition. It may or may not prove to be a milestone, but it certainly represented a significant intensification of demands. It is worth noting that Rajab was beaten, detained and hospitalized following a January 6 protest.

There also appears to be more activity and influence by the shadowy, underground opposition groups calling themselves the “February 14 Youth Coalition,” whose rhetoric emphasizes a not-clearly defined “Right of Self-Determination.” The increased activity of the “February 14” groups demonstrates a growing impatience at the street and popular levels with mainstream organizations like Al-Wefaq that now are perceived as too conciliatory by some activists.

Some pro-government hardliners have also been escalating their rhetoric and pushing for stronger confrontation. When a civilian court overturned the death sentences handed down against two protesters by a military tribunal, extremist elements associated with the pro-government National Unity Gathering called for their lynching and created mock gallows in which they hanged photographs of the men.

Not enough has been done to defuse tensions, and an obvious step the government has so far unwisely avoided is a broad-based amnesty for the hundreds of people arrested and charged in connection with protests, and in many cases the simple exercise of free expression. In particular, the government cannot hope to open a meaningful dialogue with an opposition, 21 of whose leaders were jailed in a mass trial last year that did not distinguish between moderate and extreme figures. Their harsh sentences were upheld on September 28.

The release of important figures such as Abdulhadi Abdulla Hubail Alkhawaja, the former president and co-founder of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, and, above all, Ibrahim Sharif—the sole Sunni defendant in the mass trial, who is the leader of the social democratic reform group Al-Waad—would be an indispensible step away from confrontation. It is probably a sine qua non for real dialogue. Without such serious measures, the situation in Bahrain is set to deteriorate significantly in the coming months.

Hussein Ibish writes frequently about Middle Eastern affairs for numerous publications in the United States and the Arab world. He blogs at HERE

Julian Assange: The Rolling Stone Interview
Under house arrest in England, the WikiLeaks founder opens up about his battle with the ‘Times,’ his stint in solitary and the future of journalism
By Michael Hastings – 18 January, 2012

It’s a few days before Christmas, and Julian Assange has just finished moving to a new hide-out deep in the English countryside. The two-bedroom house, on loan from a WikiLeaks supporter, is comfortable enough, with a big stone fireplace and a porch out back, but it’s not as grand as the country estate where he spent the past 363 days under house arrest, waiting for a British court to decide whether he will be extradited to Sweden to face allegations that he sexually molested two women he was briefly involved with in August 2010.

Assange sits on a tattered couch, wearing a wool sweater, dark pants and an electronic manacle around his right ankle, visible only when he crosses his legs. At 40, the WikiLeaks founder comes across more like an embattled rebel commander than a hacker or journalist. He’s become better at handling the media – more willing to answer questions than he used to be, less likely to storm off during interviews – but the protracted legal battle has left him isolated, broke and vulnerable. Assange recently spoke to someone he calls a Western “intelligence source,” and he asked the official about his fate. Will he ever be a free man again, allowed to return to his native Australia, to come and go as he pleases? “He told me I was fucked,” Assange says.

“Are you fucked?” I ask.

Assange pauses and looks out the window. The house is surrounded by rolling fields and quiet woods, but they offer him little in the way of escape. The British Supreme Court will hear his extradition appeal on February 1st – but even if he wins, he will likely still remain a wanted man. Interpol has issued a so-called “red notice” for his arrest on behalf of Swedish authorities for questioning in “connection with a number of sexual offenses” – Qaddafi, accused of war crimes, earned only an “orange notice” – and the U.S. government has branded him a “high-tech terrorist,” unleashing a massive and unprecedented investigation designed to depict Assange’s journalism as a form of international espionage. Ever since November 2010, when WikiLeaks embarrassed and infuriated the world’s governments with the release of what became known as Cablegate, some 250,000 classified diplomatic cables from more than 150 countries, the group’s supporters have found themselves detained at airports, subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury, and ordered to turn over their Twitter accounts and e-mails to authorities.

…more

Despite Sanctions by EU & US, Irani Black Gold Turns into 24K Gold
25 January, 2012 – Jafria News

JNN 24 Jan 2012 Tehran : Despite fresh EU sanctions against Iran’s oil exports,India has agreed to pay the price of crude oil it imports from Iran in gold, which makes it the first country to drop the US dollar for purchasing the Iranian oil. China has shown interest in Iran’s oil with hiring at least two supertankers to ship oil from the country.

According to a report published by DEBKAfile news website, unnamed sources have stressed that China is also expected to follow suit.

India and China take about one million barrels per day (bpd), or 40 percent of Iran’s total exports of 2.5 million bpd and both of them have huge reserves of gold.

The report added that by trading in gold, New Delhi and Beijing enable Tehran to bypass the upcoming freeze on its Central Bank’s assets and the oil embargo which the European Union’s foreign ministers agreed to impose on Monday, January 23.

The EU currently buys around 20 percent of Iran’s oil exports.

On the other hand, experts say the vast sums involved in these transactions are expected to boost the price of gold and depress the value of the dollar on world markets.

“An Indian delegation visited Tehran last week to discuss payment options in view of the new sanctions. The two sides were reported to have agreed that payment for the oil purchased would be partly in yen and partly in rupees. The switch to gold was kept [in the] dark,” the report stated.

India is Iran’s second largest customer after China, and purchases around USD 12-billion-a-year worth of Iranian crude, or about 12 percent of its consumption.

Delhi is to execute its transactions, the report said, through two state-owned banks: the Calcutta-based UCO Bank, whose board of directors is made up of the Indian government, the Reserve Bank of India representatives, and Halk Bankasi (Peoples Bank) — Turkey’s seventh largest bank which is owned by the government.

US President Barack Obama signed into law, on December 31, 2011, new sanctions which seek to penalize other countries for importing Iran’s oil or doing transaction with Islamic Republic’s Central Bank.

Foreign ministers of the European Union also imposed sanctions on Iran’s oil imports over the country’s peaceful nuclear program during their Monday meeting in Brussels. …more

Weapons ‘R’ Us
Making Warbirds Instead of Thunderbirds
By William J. Astore, a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF)

Perhaps you’ve heard of “Makin’ Thunderbirds,” a hard-bitten rock & roll song by Bob Seger that I listened to 30 years ago while in college. It’s about auto workers back in 1955 who were “young and proud” to be making Ford Thunderbirds. But in the early 1980s, Seger sings, “the plants have changed and you’re lucky if you work.” Seger caught the reality of an American manufacturing infrastructure that was seriously eroding as skilled and good-paying union jobs were cut or sent overseas, rarely to be seen again in these parts.

If the U.S. auto industry has recently shown sparks of new life (though we’re not making T-Birds or Mercuries or Oldsmobiles or Pontiacs or Saturns anymore), there is one form of manufacturing in which America is still dominant. When it comes to weaponry, to paraphrase Seger, we’re still young and proud and makin’ Predators and Reapers (as in unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones) and Eagles and Fighting Falcons (as in F-15 and F-16 combat jets), and outfitting them with the deadliest of weapons. In this market niche, we’re still the envy of the world.

Yes, we’re the world’s foremost “merchants of death,” the title of a best-selling exposé of the international arms trade published to acclaim in the U.S. in 1934. Back then, most Americans saw themselves as war-avoiders rather than as war-profiteers. The evil war-profiteers were mainly European arms makers like Germany’s Krupp, France’s Schneider, or Britain’s Vickers.

Not that America didn’t have its own arms merchants. As the authors of Merchants of Death noted, early on our country demonstrated a “Yankee propensity for extracting novel death-dealing knickknacks from [our] peddler’s pack.” Amazingly, the Nye Committee in the U.S. Senate devoted 93 hearings from 1934 to 1936 to exposing America’s own “greedy munitions interests.” Even in those desperate depression days, a desire for profit and jobs was balanced by a strong sense of unease at this deadly trade, an unease reinforced by the horrors of and hecatombs of dead from the First World War. …more

The myth of “isolated” Iran
24 January, 2012 – by Pepe Escobar – Le Monde diplomatique
Following the money in the Iran crisis

Let’s start with red lines. Here it is, Washington’s ultimate red line, straight from the lion’s mouth. Only last week Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said of the Iranians, “Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they’re trying to develop a nuclear capability. And that’s what concerns us. And our red line to Iran is do not develop a nuclear weapon. That’s a red line for us.”

How strange, the way those red lines continue to retreat. Once upon a time, the red line for Washington was “enrichment” of uranium. Now, it’s evidently an actual nuclear weapon that can be brandished. Keep in mind that, since 2005, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has stressed that his country is not seeking to build a nuclear weapon. The most recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran from the U.S. Intelligence Community has similarly stressed that Iran is not, in fact, developing a nuclear weapon (as opposed to the breakout capacity to build one someday).

What if, however, there is no “red line,” but something completely different? Call it the petrodollar line.
Banking on Sanctions?

Let’s start here: In December 2011, impervious to dire consequences for the global economy, the U.S. Congress — under all the usual pressures from the Israel lobby (not that it needs them) — foisted a mandatory sanctions package on the Obama administration (100 to 0 in the Senate and with only 12 “no” votes in the House). Starting in June, the U.S. will have to sanction any third-country banks and companies dealing with Iran’s Central Bank, which is meant to cripple that country’s oil sales. (Congress did allow for some “exemptions.”)

The ultimate target? Regime change — what else? — in Tehran. The proverbial anonymous U.S. official admitted as much in the Washington Post, and that paper printed the comment. (“The goal of the U.S. and other sanctions against Iran is regime collapse, a senior U.S. intelligence official said, offering the clearest indication yet that the Obama administration is at least as intent on unseating Iran’s government as it is on engaging with it.”) But oops! The newspaper then had to revise the passage to eliminate that embarrassingly on-target quote. Undoubtedly, this “red line” came too close to the truth for comfort.

Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen believed that only a monster shock-and-awe-style event, totally humiliating the leadership in Tehran, would lead to genuine regime change — and he was hardly alone. Advocates of actions ranging from air strikes to invasion (whether by the U.S., Israel, or some combination of the two) have been legion in neocon Washington. (See, for instance, the Brookings Institution’s 2009 report Which Path to Persia.)

Yet anyone remotely familiar with Iran knows that such an attack would rally the population behind Khamenei and the Revolutionary Guards. In those circumstances, the deep aversion of many Iranians to the military dictatorship of the mullahtariat would matter little.

Besides, even the Iranian opposition supports a peaceful nuclear program. It’s a matter of national pride.

Iranian intellectuals, far more familiar with Persian smoke and mirrors than ideologues in Washington, totally debunk any war scenarios. They stress that the Tehran regime, adept in the arts of Persian shadow play, has no intention of provoking an attack that could lead to its obliteration. On their part, whether correctly or not, Tehran strategists assume that Washington will prove unable to launch yet one more war in the Greater Middle East, especially one that could lead to staggering collateral damage for the world economy. …more

Saudis rally against Al Saud rule
Voltaire Network – 22 January, 2012 – Voltaire

On Sunday, demonstrators took to the streets in Qatif and expressed determination to continue their anti-regime protests.

The protesters said those authorities involved in the killing of demonstrators in Eastern Province must face prosecution.

On Friday, Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a prominent Shia cleric in Saudi Arabia, warned the kingdom against the brutal crackdown on protesters in Eastern Province and called on the Al Saud regime to stop bloodshed.

Since February 2011, Saudi protesters have held demonstrations on an almost regular basis in the oil-rich Eastern Province, mainly in Qatif and the town of Awamiyah, calling for the release of all political prisoners, freedom of expression and assembly, and an end to widespread discrimination.

However, the demonstrations have turned into protest rallies against the Al Saud regime, especially since November 2011, when Saudi security forces killed five protesters and injured many others in Eastern Province.

The Saudi interior ministry issued a statement on March 5, 2011, prohibiting “all forms of demonstrations, marches or protests, and calls for them, because that contradicts the principles of the Islamic Sharia, the values and traditions of Saudi society, and results in disturbing public order and harming public and private interests.”

Saudi Arabia is a state party to the Arab Charter on Human Rights. Article 24 of the charter states that “every citizen has the right… to freely pursue a political activity [and] to freedom of association and peaceful assembly.” …source

Press TV loses UK licence, claims UK jamming IRIB signals from Bahrain
South Gate Amateur Radio News – 20 January, 2012

British authorities on Friday revoked the licence of Press TV, the Iranian state broadcaster’s English-language outlet, saying the channel had breached a string of regulations. The network hit back on its website, calling the decision ‘a clear act of censorship’.

Ofcom, Britain’s independent broadcasting reagulator, said in a statement that Press TV failed to obey a rule that its licence should be held by its Tehran headquarters, instead of by its London office as is currently the case. Press TV had also “indicated it is unwilling and unable” to pay a fine of £100,000 ($156,000, 117,000 euros) imposed in December for showing an interview in 2009 with an imprisoned journalist for a US magazine, Ofcom said.

The Ofcom statement said that under its broadcasting rules, all licence holders – in this case Press TV’s office in London – must have general editorial control of the channel. But the regulator said it was apparent that “editorial control of the channel rested with Press TV International” in Tehran, and that Press TV had ignored a 35-day deadline to transfer the licence there.

In December, Ofcom said Press TV had also invaded the privacy of Newsweek journalist Maziar Bahari by filming an interview without his consent while he was in detention during protests in Iran in 2009. It also ruled that its treatment of him was biased. At the time, Press TV alleged that Britain’s royal family had pressured the regulator to take action. Ofcom said there was no political influence.

Press TV said in a text on its website that the decision to revoke its licence was “questionable”. It also said that Ofcom had not given “a valid response” to its letters claiming influence by the royal family and allegations that the regulator was not independent of Britain’s government.

Full text of Ofcom ruling (PDF)

Meanwhile Press TV reports on its website: “The signal of Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) channels on the Hotbird satellite provider has reportedly been jammed by British technicians operating from Bahrain. The transmission of jamming signals on frequency: 12437 MHz, horizontal position, symbol rate: 27500, FEC 3/4 began on Tuesday afternoon. The Eutelsat telecommunication giant declined to comment on the problem after IRIB contacted them for clarification earlier on Tuesday.” …source

U.S. warns over Bahrain travel before anniversary
Reuters – 24 January, 2012

(Reuters) – The United States has warned Americans travelling to Bahrain of potential unrest in the Gulf kingdom as the anniversary of a failed pro-democracy uprising approaches.

The travel alert does not specifically mention the anniversary of the uprising on February 14 last year when protesters, mainly from Bahrain’s majority Shi’ite population, took to the streets of Manama to demand political rights.

The country is dominated by the ruling Al Khalifa dynasty, a Sunni family closely allied to other Gulf rulers, and a bulwark against Shia Iran’s influence in the Arabian peninsula. It is also home to the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

The U.S. State Department said the Bahrain government had recently refused entry to some U.S. citizens at Manama airport and that U.S. embassy employees were being relocated within the country because of violent demonstrations.

It also noted what it called “isolated examples” of anti-U.S. sentiment such as flag burning during protests and warned that foreigners could become targets.

“The Department of State strongly urges U.S. citizens to avoid all demonstrations, as even peaceful ones can quickly become unruly, and a foreigner could become a target of harassment or worse,” the alert, which runs to April 19, said.

It warned of spontaneous and sometimes violent anti-government demonstrations by protesters throwing rocks and petrol bombs, lighting trash cans and blocking highways.

“The Ministry of Interior maintains official checkpoints in some areas and routinely uses tear gas, stun grenades, and other crowd control measures against demonstrators,” it said.

Washington stood behind Bahrain’s government during the protests, while removing its support for rulers in Egypt and Tunisia. However, it has made an arms deal contingent on political reform.

The protest movement was crushed after a month when Saudi troops entered Bahrain to back the government, followed by nearly two months of martial law.

A rights commission headed by international lawyers said in November that 35 people – including protesters and security personnel – were killed up to June. Activists say deaths among Shi’ites apparently as a result of the clashes have taken the casualty list to around 60.

Bahraini employees of some companies say they have been told not to take any holidays in the coming months, in an apparent effort to discourage people from taking part in protests. …source

Ali almuwali from #Karanah got directly shot in the head with tear gas canister #Bahrain #humanrights #feb14

US relocates Bahrain embassy staff in safety move
(AFP) – 23 January, 2012

WASHINGTON — The United States said Monday it is relocating embassy staff and their families to new neighborhoods in Bahrain’s capital Manama as part of safety precautions amid anti-government unrest.

Tensions have remained high in Bahrain since a brutal government crackdown on pro-democracy protests in mid-March led to the death of 35 people. Sporadic violence has been on the upturn in recent weeks.

“The recent increase in violent demonstrations along the Budaiya Highway corridor has led to traffic disruptions, effectively restricting travel for those living in the area,” the State Department said in a new travel alert.

“The resulting inability to leave one’s home for an extended period poses significant safety and security concerns,” it said.

“As a result, embassy employees and their dependents are being relocated to different neighborhoods,” according to the alert that supersedes one issued on November 18 last year.

“We continue to urge US citizens to follow the latest security guidance and to avoid demonstrations.”

The State Department found no signs that Americans are being “targeted directly” but cited “isolated examples of anti-US sentiment” taking place on the streets while “US flags have occasionally been burned” during protests. …source

US Weapons Against Egypt Protesters
by: Geoffrey Mock, 23 January, 2012 – Human Rights Now

Egyptian protesters help man suffering from tear gas during clashes with riot police in Cairo on November 23, 2011 (Photo MAHMUD HAMS/AFP/Getty Images)

There’s something wrong when on one hand Americans continue to stand up in support for Egyptians’ aspirations for human rights and on the other the US government supplies weapons to the very military regime that is attacking protesters.

And yet, as we approach the first anniversary of the Egyptian Jan. 25 uprising, activists are still facing attacks by military and security forces, and some of the tools the military are using bear the stamp, “Made in the USA.”

Americans in large numbers offered loud and important support to the Egyptian activists in their efforts to build a new political and human rights culture. But that didn’t stop the US government from approving new shipments of weapons.

The most recent shipment for the Egyptian Ministry of Interior arrived from the United States on November 26, carrying at least seven tons of ammunition smoke, which includes chemical irritants and riot control agents such as tear gas.

Since that sale, the Egyptian military has continued to assault peaceful demonstrators. In December, female and opposition activists protesting military violence were attacked, leaving 17 activists dead, most of them reportedly from gunfire.

While US political and diplomatic officials have expressed concern about these actions, the Egyptian military express no regret or concern that they will face any consequences. One high-ranking military official even said that military forces were entitled to use live fire against protesters.

Meanwhile Egyptian activists are left to face the consequences. Egyptian women activists have made public shocking images of soldiers beating and stripping female demonstrators during previous protests. In more recent protests, Egyptian security officials have been documented beating and kicking women activists.

Sales to Egypt are just part of a larger concern that the US is undermining reform hopes throughout the Middle East with arms sales to allies such as Bahrain.

It’s time for a halt. The U.S. State Department must stop authorizing the shipment of weapons, ammunition, and equipment that Egypt’s government could use to violently suppress human rights. …source