Posts from — August 2012

Separate City to be Built for Saudi Women: Reductio ad absurdum
By: Colin S. Cavell, Ph.D. -August 26, 2012

On August 6, 2012, the Saudi Industrial Property Authority (MODON) issued a press release which highlighted, once again, the utter absurdity of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This writer has written previously on the rampant corruption, perversity, cruelty, and utter criminality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and this latest insight into the workings of the House of Saud—i.e. the family that runs this gulag—defies rationality and further exposes the insanity of the rulers of this captive nation. Once again, we see how monarchy distorts the mind, corrupts the body politique, and deforms society into bizarre contortions as it attempts to reconcile its contradictions.

MODON’s press release stated that it had initiated work on planning and development of “the first industrial city being readied for women workers in the Kingdom. It will be launched in Al-Ahsa 2nd Industrial city which is located in Hofuf near Al-Ahsa airport,” reads the release. And while the press notice indicated that job opportunities would be created for “both men and women,” it was the focus on the separation of the sexes in the workplace that caught the attention, and outrage, of news agencies and observers from around the world. With an estimated costs of 500 million riyals or about $133 million, the new city is expected to create only about 5000 new jobs.

“The city,” the development authority announced “is distinguished from other industrial cities for its proximity to residential neighborhoods to facilitate the movement of women to and from the workplace. It is also characterized by allocating sections equipped for women workers in environment and working conditions consistent with the privacy of women according to Islamic guidelines and regulations.”

Nearly half of Saudi Arabia’s 28 million population and over 60 percent of the country’s university students are female and yet only about 15 percent of the entire Saudi workforce is comprised of women. Al Arabiya reports that 78 percent of the Kingdom’s university graduates are unemployed.

Reporter Homa Khaleeli of the UK-based Guardian newspaper writes that the “country already has separate schools, segregated universities (and the biggest all-female university in the world) not to mention offices, restaurants and even separate entrances for public buildings. Now industrial hubs are to be built so that women can be hidden away even further than their current dresscode of abaya, headscarf and niqab allows.” The proposed KSA development is “so extreme,” remarks Khaleeli, that “the plans bring to mind the US’s racial divide under the Jim Crow laws, ensuring ‘separate but equal’ institutions for black and white people.” Furthermore, she correctly points out, “like the legalised discrimination in the US, ‘equal’ in this context means no such thing. The female half of the adult population of Saudi Arabia is considered unfit to control their own lives. Women cannot decide whether to leave the house, whether or who to marry, whether to work or study, whether to travel, what to wear, or even whether to have major surgery—without the consent of a male guardian.”

Brett Wilkins, writing in Digital Journal, notes that the city “is being billed as a way for women to achieve a greater degree of financial independence while obeying the strict gender segregation dictated by the kingdom’s Wahhabi Muslim rulers and enforced by the dreaded mutaween morality police.” Describing KSA as being “run by the world’s most repressive religious fundamentalist monarchs,” Wilkins lays bear the facts that in Saudi Arabia, “women are subject to a strictly enforced gender apartheid. They aren’t allowed to vote or drive. They cannot be treated in hospitals or travel without written permission from their husbands or male relatives. One woman who was kidnapped and raped by seven men was sentenced to 90 lashes of the whip for being in a vehicle with an unrelated male. When she went to the media with her story, her sentence was increased to 200 lashes. In 2002, 15 girls needlessly died when the mutaween locked them inside their burning school and stopped firefighters from saving them because they weren’t ‘properly’ dressed in black robes and headscarves.”

As The Week put it, “Saudi Arabia has a problem: The Persian Gulf kingdom has an increasingly educated, increasingly unemployed female population and ultraconservative laws and customs that forbid women from mingling, much less working, with men.” In other words, this is a recipe for civil war. Being prodded by its western ally, the USA, to reconcile its deformed society to contemporary production methods and enter into modernity—at least into the nineteenth century by western standards—King Abdullah, in September of 2011, announced that by 2015 women will be able to vote and run in local elections. But don’t hold your breath, as such statements are issued from time to time by the Saudi royals only to please their American protectors and never meant to actually be implemented.

Contradiction upon contradiction is plaguing the House of Saud, and nearly every solution they propose to address their multiplicity of problems is prone to failure by the contortions of their belief system. On the one hand, the house of Saud bills itself as “the custodian of the two holy mosques” in Mecca and Medina and, hence, as the “true” guardians and interpreters of Islam. On the other hand, they defy Islam and common sense by denigrating the female half of the population as either subordinate or inferior to men, if they consider women to be human at all.

In coddling these neanderthals, the US sets itself up for payback, as can be witnessed by the current Republican Party courting Saudi Arabian financial contributions as well as campaign donations from the other oil-rich monarchs of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council in their attempt to unseat Barack Obama from the US presidency. The latest example of this disparagement of women was spewed forth from the mouth of Missouri Congressman Todd Akin who claimed just last week that women cannot become pregnant from something he calls “legitimate rape”. This comment and others prompted the following response from Republican Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine: “the comments from Akin reinforce the perception that we in the Republican Party are unsympathetic to issues of paramount concern to women.” And, yet, the Republican Party continues to compete to see how extreme they can be in relegating American women back to the status of their Saudi counterparts: subordinated, strictly regulated, covered up, denied equal personhood, and stripped of their legal status as citizens.

Akin was only following the party line, as Republicans in the last year since becoming the majority in Congress in the 2010 midterm elections, have proposed redefining rape and thus limiting the charge to only cases described as ‘forcible rape’ in order to deny women access to health services, voted to defund Planned Parenthood (the nation’s leading sexual and reproductive health care provider and advocate), repeatedly tried to restrict women’s access to health care services, and held a Congressional House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on the Obama Administration’s contraception rule in February of this year with five men and no women. Indeed, as in much of the Republican Party’s assault on women, female input into formulating their proposals is entirely absent. It is no wonder that Olympia Snowe, quoted above, is stepping down from her position as a Republican senator.
[Read more →]

Britain’s barbaric ‘special relationship’ with Arab dictators
27 August, 2012 – By Finian Cunningham – PressTV

While the majority of Bahrainis struggle with poverty, discrimination in the labour market, unemployment, ill health and squalid housing, the Al Khalifa clan lives in luxurious palaces on confiscated lands, enriched through rampant business corruption, under-the-table deals with foreign banks and investors, and, of course, embezzlement of the island’s oil industry.”

The image of British Prime Minister David Cameron greeting Bahrain’s King Hamad on the steps of 10 Downing Street last week conveys a subtle message of Britain’s presumption of global superiority. It also betrays the real role of Britain’s rulers in the suppression of democracy and human rights around the world.

The taller Cameron, in dapper pinstripe suit, is seen extending a benevolent hand to the dumpy little Arab tin-pot king who is donning a medieval-looking headdress and robe.

It would appear, from the photo-op, that patronage is being afforded by a thoroughly democratic leader to an antiquated ally from the Arabian desert, the latter in need of jolly-good-old Anglo-Saxon tutelage in the art of modern statecraft.

How civilized. The British premier invites the Bahraini monarch into the iconic dwelling near the supposed “mother of all parliaments” for a serving of English tea and cakes over “low-key talks”.

On the agenda, according to one of Britain’s “liberal” newspapers, the Guardian, the prime minister raised, apparently, the troubling matter of human rights as well as – and this is the unmentioned significant bit – trade opportunities for British businesses in the Persian Gulf kingdom.

It is a scintillating scenario of British conceit and pretence of decency. We are thus inculcated with the impression that Britain is the epitome of refined democracy. Cameron, you see, is enquiring of business opportunities while also doughtily expressing to his Al Khalifa Arab guest concerns over human rights. The British rulers, you see, are not just wrangling for a quick pound. Oh no, they have ethics and principles to defend and uphold as well.

Commenting on the meeting, Bahrain’s foreign minister Shaikh Khalid Al Khalifa (a relation of the king – as is the whole government of that kingdom) said another subject on the agenda was “regional stability”. (In that disclosure, Shaikh Khalid let the cat out of the bag, but more on that later.)

Let’s cut through the woolly British media reportage that serves to reinforce, subliminally, a self-styled sense of civilised greatness. The truth is that the British government does not give two figs about human rights in the oil shaikhdom of Bahrain. It never had any concern and it still doesn’t. By reporting that Cameron raised the issue of human rights with King Hamad, the British media are indulging in conceit that there is genuine concern about the matter among its political establishment. But history shows that to this day, human rights in Bahrain (and elsewhere) are frankly anathema to Britain’s geopolitical interests.

The absolute Al Khalifa monarchy was installed in Bahrain by the British Empire more than 200 years ago. The so-called royal rulers of Bahrain were then nothing more than a tribe of Bedouins elevated by British military force to positions of lordly privilege in Bahrain. The Al Khalifas were, to put it plainly, barbaric impostors who were fortified on their new island abode to safeguard British trading interests in the Persian Gulf en route to imperial India. It was a typical British quid pro quo. The Al Khalifa cut-throats got a throne to sit on, underpinned with “Protectorate” status, while the ever-so polite British got to rule the waves.

The Sunni Al Khalifa band of brigands was imposed against the will or consent of the indigenous Shia population of Bahrain. To this day, that is the crux of the grievance among the Bahraini majority. The Al Khalifas enriched themselves by exploiting the people from their British-protected palaces. Older people in Bahrain will tell you about the times when the Al Khalifas would send their thugs into the villages to collect taxes and tributes from the farmers and fishermen on pain of death. The young shaikhs would also drive into hamlets and take any young female that they desired for their gratification.

Such crude suzerainty may not be quite as brazen today. Today, Bahrainis are exploited and raped in more insidious ways through rigged elections and ring-fencing of the economy to satisfy the Al Khalifa rulers. While the majority of Bahrainis struggle with poverty, discrimination in the labour market, unemployment, ill health and squalid housing, the Al Khalifa clan lives in luxurious palaces on confiscated lands, enriched through rampant business corruption, under-the-table deals with foreign banks and investors, and, of course, embezzlement of the island’s oil industry.

Bahrainis have consistently protested this British imposition of despotic monarchy. They want an elected government to run the island’s oil wealth democratically, for the wellbeing of the populace, not for the crony aggrandisement of the Al Khalifa dynasty and its entourage of hangers-on. This is a basic democratic demand, a fundamental human right. Yet how could such a distortion of natural justice be sustained? Enter the British government, and in recent decades, the American too.

Down through the decades when the indigenous Bahrainis – Shia as well as Sunni – would regularly rise up against their Al Khalifa overlords, it was the British government and its military might that safeguarded the position of monarchy. In the 1950s and 60s, British troops stationed on the island opened fire on striking oil workers.

When Bahrain was finally granted nominal independence in 1971, the British may have officially left by the front door, but they came back in through the back window, as one old Bahraini memorably described it. The state security apparatus was – and continues to be – overseen by British military intelligence. It is one of the most brutal security apparatuses in the world. A notorious founding figure was Colonel Ian Henderson who was the head of the kingdom’s national security agency from 1968 to 1998. Henderson oversaw the administration of unrelenting vicious repression, during which thousands of Bahrainis deemed to be a security threat were detained without trial and tortured often at the hands of Henderson himself. …more

Why was a Navy adviser stripped of her career?
By Jeff Stein – 21 August, 2012 – Washington Post

Gwenyth Todd had worked in a lot of places in Washington where powerful men didn’t hesitate to use sharp elbows. She had been a Middle East expert for the National Security Council in the Clinton administration. She had worked in the office of Defense Secretary Dick Cheney in the first Bush administration, where neoconservative hawks first began planning to overthrow Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

But she was not prepared a few years later in Bahrain when she encountered plans by high-ranking admirals to confront Iran, any one of which, she reckoned, could set the region on fire. It was 2007, and Todd, then 42, was a top political adviser to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet.

Previous 5th Fleet commanders had resisted various ploys by Bush administration hawks to threaten the Tehran regime. But in spring 2007, a new commander arrived with an ambitious program to show the Iranians who was boss in the Persian Gulf.

Vice Adm. Kevin J. Cosgriff had amassed an impressive résumé, rising through the ranks to command a cruiser and a warship group after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Following a customary path to three stars, he had also spent as much time in Washington as he had at sea, including stints at the Defense Intelligence Agency and as director of the Clinton White House Situation Room.

Cosgriff — backed by a powerful friend and boss, U.S. Central Command (Centcom) chief Adm. William J. “Fox” Fallon — was itching to push the Iranians, Todd and other present and former Navy officials say.

“There was a feeling that the Navy was back on its heels in dealing with Iran,” according to a Navy official prohibited from commenting in the media. “There was an intention to be far more aggressive with the Iranians, and a diminished concern about keeping Washington in the loop.”

Two people who were there said Cosgriff mused in a staff meeting one day that he’d like to steam a Navy frigate up the Shatt al Arab, the diplomatically sensitive and economically crucial waterway dividing Iraq and Iran. In another, they said, he wanted to convene a regional conference to push back Iran’s territorial claims in the waterway, a flash point for the bloody Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.

Then he presented an idea that not only alarmed Todd, but eventually, she believes, launched the chain of events that would end her career.

Cosgriff declined to discuss any of these meetings on the record. This story includes information from a half-dozen Navy and other government officials who demanded anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, many parts of which remain classified.

According to Todd and another witness, Cosgriff’s idea, presented in a series of staff meetings, was to sail three “big decks,” as aircraft carriers are known, through the Strait of Hormuz — to put a virtual armada, unannounced, on Iran’s doorstep. No advance notice, even to Saudi Arabia and other gulf allies. Not only that, they said, Cosgriff ordered his staff to keep the State Department in the dark, too.

To Todd, it was like something straight out of “Seven Days in May,” the 1964 political thriller about a right-wing U.S. military coup. A retired senior naval officer familiar with Cosgriff’s thinking said the deployment plan was not intended to be provocative.

But Todd, in an account backed by another Navy official, said the admiral “was very, very clear that we were to tell him if there was any sign that Washington was aware of it and asking questions.”

For the past year, the air had been electric with reports of impending U.S. or Israeli attacks on Iran. If this maneuver were carried out, Todd and others feared, the Iranians would freak out. At the least, they’d cancel a critical diplomatic meeting coming up with U.S. officials. Todd suspected that was Cosgriff’s aim. She and others also speculated that Cosgriff wouldn’t propose such a brazen plan without Fallon’s support.

Retired Adm. David C. Nichols, deputy Centcom commander in 2007, recalled in an interview last year that Fallon “wanted to do a freedom-of-navigation exercise in what Iran calls its territorial waters that we hadn’t done in a long time.” Nothing wrong with that, per se, but the problem was that “we don’t understand Iran’s perception of what we’re doing, and we haven’t understood what they’re doing and why,” Nichols said. “It makes miscalculations possible.”

Todd feared that the Iranians would respond, possibly by launching fast-attack missile boats into the gulf or unleashing Hezbollah on Israel. Then anything could happen: a collision, a jittery exchange of gunfire — bad enough on its own, but also an incident that Washington hawks could seize on to justify an all-out response on Iran.

Preposterous? It had happened before, off North Vietnam in 1964. In the Tonkin Gulf incident, a Navy captain claimed a communist attack on his ship. President Lyndon Johnson swiftly ordered the bombing of North Vietnam, touching off a wider war that turned the country upside down and left more than 58,000 U.S. servicemen dead.

Don’t tell anybody? No way.

Todd picked up the phone and called a friend in Foggy Bottom. She had to get this thing stopped. …more

Q&A: Government weighs in on Bahrain protests
By Nicole Dow – CNN – 24 August, 2012

(CNN) — For more than a year, Bahrain has been the site of anti-government protests. What does the government say about the demonstrations and rights groups’ accusations of a crackdown?

Spokesman Fahad AlBinali offers this take:

CNN: A Bahrain court sentenced activist Nabeel Rajab to three years in prison, a government spokesman said Thursday, and this week, the Court of Appeals acquitted him of defamation. Amnesty International has said the sentence questions the independence of the judiciary. How do you respond?

AlBinali: Nabeel Rajab had a number of cases against him. The one you mentioned, the defamation case, the Court of Appeals cleared Nabeel Rajab of that charge. However, he is in prison for other cases, for active incitements and indirect participation in illegal demonstrations and rallies, and through the use of petrol bombs and improvised weapons. There have also been numerous cases of assault against police officers. The minister of state for media affairs gave a press conference a few days ago detailing the decision in that case of inciting illegal rallies and marches in very busy areas and in the commercial district of the capital.

CNN: Najeeb Rajab is still in prison, correct?

AlBinali: Yes.

CNN: And there’s another sentence for which he’s in prison?
Bahrain: Jailed doctor, official speak

AlBinali: No. The minister of information — the minister of state media affairs — she pointed out that there were three specific incidents that took place earlier this year: the first on January 12, the second on February 14, and the third incident was on March 31. This is a form of behavior that has been engaged in regardless of numerous warnings and cautions regarding the illegal state of crowd incitement and detrimental effect it has on safety and public order.

As I said earlier, they have often led to violence through use petrol bombs, Molotov cocktails and also improvised weapons. Such violent activity and conduct has led to deaths in cases of those engaged in the violent activity as well as bystanders who happen to be in the area at the time or good Samaritans. There was a case of death of a person who tried to clear burning tires off the road. There are real consequences to such conduct and behavior. …more

A Look in the Press: Understanding Saudi Protests in Qatif
Mareike Transfeld – 24 August, 2012 – Muftah

Ever since protests in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province were re-ignited by the arrest of Shiite cleric and opposition leader, Sheikh Nimr Al-Nimr, in early July 2012, protesters have continued to voice their demands. Mainstream media and Western governments have, however, largely ignored the protests in the oil-rich region, a circumstance which is unlikely to change. Given the historic US-Saudi alliance, increased American reliance on Saudi oil, and the two states’ shared strategic interests in several regional countries rocked by the Arab Spring, including Syria, Yemen, and Bahrain, demands for political change in the oil-monarchy will likely continue to be ignored. While the protests remain limited and reported casualties from government violence are comparatively small, keeping an eye on the region is crucial.

Peter Fragiskatos, professor at the Western University in London, Canada, believes that although the protest movement is weak, it may be potentially devastating to both the Saudi ruling family and the world economy:

Calls for an end to Shiite discrimination, at least from the perspective of Saudi leaders, come off as disguised attempts to capture control over the Eastern Province, its oil and the system of domination it has made possible. This view persists despite the fact that the recent protests have not emphasized a desire for autonomy (although some Shiite activists have proposed reforms in the past, such as a constitution and legislative assembly for the Eastern Province, which hint at precisely this outcome).

Though the Shiite opposition is weak, it also has a potentially devastating trump card: access to vital oil pipeline networks that could easily be attacked if their plight remains unchanged. If and when that happens, there will be more at stake than a rise in oil price.

Chris Zambelis argues that “Saudi Arabia’s reaction to dissent among its Shi’a population provides insight into the way it interprets its evolving geopolitical position in a rapidly changing Middle East”:

Saudi Arabia also sees an Iranian hand behind Shi’a-led activism in the region. As evidenced by its decision to deploy security forces in neighboring Bahrain in March 2011 to crush an uprising led largely by a marginalized Shi’a majority that is agitating for greater freedoms under a Sunni-led, pro-Saudi monarchy, the Kingdom worries that its own Shi’a community will rise up in turn. Saudi Shi’a, many of whom maintain tribal and familial links with their Bahraini counterparts, organized protests in solidarity with Bahrainis while calling on Riyadh to remove its military from Bahrain (see Terrorism Monitor, June 15). In this regard, Saudi Arabia views the organized and sustained political opposition among its Shi’a community in the context of its regional rivalry with Iran. …more

US remains “deeply troubled” on Bahrain activist
24 August, 2012 – Bahrain Freedom Movement

The United States said Thursday that it remained troubled by a three-year sentence Bahrain handed to a leading rights activist, even though a court acquitted him on another charge.

State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland welcomed the decision of an appeals court in the US ally to acquit Nabeel Rajab, an activist from the Shiite Muslim majority, over alleged insults issued via Twitter.”However, we’re deeply troubled that the Bahraini court simultaneously sentenced Mr. Rajab to three years last week in prison on charges of leading illegal gatherings,” Nuland told reporters.

“We take this opportunity to urge the government of Bahrain to consider all available options to resolve this case and in general to take more steps to build confidence across Bahraini society and begin a meaningful dialogue with the political opposition, civil society and the government,” she said.

Rajab has led protests among Shiite Muslims who accuse the Sunni leaders of discrimination. Unlike the main Shiite opposition, the activist has insisted on protests in Manama even after the government crushed demonstrators in the capital’s Pearl Square last year.

The United States has faced criticism by human rights groups for supporting and selling arms to Bahrain – a major US military base which has longstanding tension with neighboring Iran – in contrast to its pressure on other Arab leaders to quit in the face of public protests. …more

BBC censors video showing dark side of Syrian rebels
Voltaire Network – 24 August, 2012

The BBC has sensationally censored a news story and a video showing Syrian rebels forcing a prisoner to become a suicide bomber, a war crime under the Geneva Conventions, presumably because it reflected badly on establishment media efforts to portray the FSA as glorious freedom fighters.

The video, a copy of which can be viewed below (the original BBC version was deleted), shows Free Syrian Army rebels preparing a bomb that is loaded onto the back of a truck to be detonated at a government checkpoint in the city of Aleppo.

The clip explains how the rebels have commandeered an apartment belonging to a Syrian police captain. The rebels are seen sneering at photos of the police captain’s family while they proclaim, “Look at their freedom, look how good it is,” while hypocritically enjoying the luxury of the man’s swimming pool.

The video then shows a prisoner who the rebels claim belonged to a pro-government militia. Bruises from torture on the prisoner’s body are explained away as having been metered out by the man’s previous captors. The BBC commentary emphasizes how well the rebels are treating the man, showing them handing him a cigarette.

However, the man has been tricked into thinking he is part of a prisoner exchange program when in reality he is being set up as an unwitting suicide bomber. The prisoner is blindfolded and told to drive the truck towards a government checkpoint.

“What he doesn’t know is that the truck is the one that’s been rigged with a 300 kilo bomb,” states the narrator.

The clip then shows rebels returning disappointed after it’s revealed that the remote detonator failed and the bomb did not explode. The BBC narrator admits that forcing prisoners to become suicide bombers “would certainly be considered a war crime.” …more

Shia killings condemned, protests planned across Europe
Shia Post – 24 August, 2012

LONDON: Europe’s biggest Shia Muslim organisation has announced to launch Europe-wide protest movement against the brazen target killings of Shias in Pakistani cities by extremists from the banned terrorist outfits.

At an emergency meeting held at Markaz-e-Ahle Bait in Tooting here, Majlis-e-Ulema Shia Europe announced that it would launch a series of protests in European countries and would approach the world human rights bodies including the United Nations to call for help to protect the lives of Shias in Pakistan who are under attack all over the country.

Their target killings have increased dramatically in recent weeks and militants now act with impunity as the state agencies seem helpless to counter the killers who wear either the police or military uniforms, said Maulana Jafar Ali Najam.

He announced that a meeting of Shia leaders from Europe will be convened before start of the movement in capitals of European cities to highlight the “plight of Shias in Pakistan who are cut like vegetables by sectarian hate-mongers”.

Maulana Azmat Abbas Zubairi alleged that sectarian killers have the support from within the security agencies of Pakistan and there were powerful people in the agencies who do not want the law to go near them.

“These are the myopic people who are still obsessed with the wrong type of foreign policy agenda. They have not changed with times and they still believe their view will dominate and that will happen with the help of terrorists.

Their thinking is fallacious,” he said, appealing to human rights and peace organisations to take notice of the killings of Shias.

He said that western countries were shedding tears over human rights violations in oil-rich countries but neglected Shia persecution in most Islamic countries by their fellows in faith and some international forces.

Maulana Syed Kalbe Abbas from the World Federation, an NGO in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council (Ecosoc) of the United Nations, said Shias make up the second largest Muslim sect after the Sunnis and they have lived in harmony historically but some people wanted them to fight each other in the name of religion and sects.

“Those killing Shias are doing it in army uniform but there is no one to check them. The state has failed and the outlaws have taken it upon themselves to kill every Shia. This is a conspiracy against Pakistan,” he said.

Abbas said Pakistani media was being complacent and was not doing enough to expose the killers of Pakistanis despite knowing well who the killers were and who their mastermind is. …source

UN Experts Urge Bahrain To End Persecution Of Human Rights Defender
24 August, 20120 – RTT

(RTTNews) – A group of U.N. human rights experts have called on the Bahraini authorities to comply with the rights to peaceful assembly and expression and immediately release those arbitrarily detained for exercising their legitimate freedoms.”

They also called for the immediate release of prominent human rights defender Nabeel Rajab, who was recently sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. The call comes amid serious concerns about the ongoing persecution of human rights defenders in the oil-rich Gulf Kingdom.

Rajab was convicted on three charges of illegal assembly related to his participation in peaceful gatherings in favor of fundamental freedoms and democracy, including a peaceful protest to denounce the detention of fellow human rights defender Abdulhadi Al Khawaja.

“The sentencing of Rajab represents yet another blatant attempt by the Government of Bahrain to silence those legitimately working to promote basic human rights,” said the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, Margaret Sekaggya. She called on the Bahraini government to immediately cease its campaign of persecution of human rights defenders in the country.

The Special Rapporteur on freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, Maina Kiai, stressed that “the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly should not be subject to prior authorization from the authorities.” For the rights expert, “the criminalization of people participating in peaceful assemblies for the sole reason that they did not seek the approval of the authorities to hold such assemblies contradicts international human rights law.”

Rajab is also currently serving three months imprisonment for alleged libel through a social networking site.

“The continuing repression of free speech in Bahrain runs counter to international law and standards that individuals will not be prosecuted for peaceful political speech”, said the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue. …source

Behind Morsi’s Momentous Decision
by ESAM AL-ALMIN – Counter Punch

Ever since early April when he became an official candidate in the first post-revolution presidential election, Dr. Mohammad Morsi has been generally dismissed by most political observers as a weak and unimpressive politician. In fact, he was an accidental contender since he was the stand-in candidate for the Muslim Brotherhood’s (MB) first choice, senior leader KEgypt Muslim Brothairat Al-Shater. The MB fielded Morsi as its back-up candidate on the last day of filing because it predicted correctly that its original candidate would be disqualified by the pro-SCAF Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC).

As Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) took the reigns of power in February 2011, many observers believed that a tacit understanding existed between the powerful Egyptian military and the MB, the most organized political and social group in Egypt. For the next eighteen months, this complicated and largely behind the scenes contentious relationship between these two powerful entities had its ups and downs.

When SCAF sided with millions of Egyptians in ousting Hosni Mubarak in early Feb. 2011, it was not to advance the objectives of the revolution but rather to sacrifice the president in order to save his regime. Throughout 2011, there were three centers of powers in the country: SCAF with its apparent military power, the MB with its enormous capacity for organization and mass mobilization, and the other revolutionary and grassroots groups (dominated by the youth but politically unorganized and inexperienced) taking to the streets throughout the year while paying a terrible price with dozens martyred, hundreds wounded, and thousands detained in military show trials.

When SCAF cracked down on the revolutionary groups, especially during the fall of 2011, the MB refrained from challenging the military as it was in the midst of its campaign for the parliamentary elections. By January 2012, it was clear that the Islamist groups led by the MB had won almost seventy five percent of the seats in both parliamentary chambers. As the MB flexed its muscle and asked to be allowed to form the next government, SCAF refused and threatened the group with the dissolution of parliament. Shortly after, the MB reversed its public promise not to field a contender and actually filed for two presidential candidates.

Within days the military revealed its preferred candidate, Gen. Ahmad Shafiq, the last prime minister of the Mubarak regime. Consequently the tension of the two groups came to the fore as SCAF and the Egyptian deep state (where the remnants of the Mubarak regime still occupied strategic positions and were in control of the state bureaucracy) did everything in their power during the first round of the presidential elections in late May to split the opposition and support their candidate in order to get him to the second round.

Despite their apprehension over the MB’s past broken promises, the revolutionary groups largely coalesced behind Morsi, the other winner of the first round, in the runoff elections, which he barely won with just over 51 percent of the vote. When it became clear on the last day of the runoff elections on June 17 that its candidate might lose, SCAF carried out a sweeping power grab as it dissolved the MB-dominated parliament, reclaimed all legislative powers to itself, issued a constitutional declaration that largely diminished the office of president, and assigned itself the right to appoint the constitution-writing committee if the current one was invalidated as expected by the SCC. In short, by the time Morsi took the oath of office on June 30, SCAF -which essentially ruled the country for the past 16 months- was effectively in control of the most important levers of power relegating the elected president to the position of a figurehead with diminished authority. …more

British Policy Towards The Arab Spring Has Been Entirely Consistent
24 August, 2012 – by Dan Glazebrook – JUST

Over the past year, the British government have bombed rebels into power in Libya – and are desperately hoping to do the same in Syria –whilst simultaneously aiding and abetting the crushing of rebel forces in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. Some commentators have called this hypocritical. In fact, there is no contradiction: the British government is engaged in a vicious, region-wide attack on all independent, anti-colonial forces in the region, be they states or opposition movements. Client regimes – in many cases monarchies originally imposed by the British Empire – have been propped up, and states outside the orbit of Western control have been targeted for destruction. The policy, in other words, has been entirely consistent: a drive towards the total capitulation of the Arab world; and more specifically the destruction of any potential organised resistance to an attack on Iran. What is more, it has been planned for a long time.

The Arab spring did not come out of the blue; it was both predictable and predicted. All demographic, economic and political trends pointed in the direction of a period of instability and civil unrest across the region, and especially in Egypt. The combination of growing and youthful populations, rising unemployment, corruption and unrepresentative government made some kind of mass manifestation of frustration a virtual certainty – as was recognised by a far-reaching speech by MI6-turned-BP operative Mark Allen in February 2009. In August 2010, Barack Obama issued Presidential Study Directive Number 11, which noted “evidence of growing citizen discontent with the region’s regimes” and warned that “the region is entering a critical period of transition.” Four months later, Mohamed Bouazizi set himself on fire in Tunisia, sparking off the unrest that led to the downfall of President Ben-Ali.

For the world’s imperial powers, wracked by their own economic crises – Britain, France and the US – it was clear that this unrest would present both a danger and an opportunity. Whilst it threatened to disrupt the Gulf monarchies imposed by Britain during the colonial period (Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait et al), it could also create the ideal cover for the launching of long-planned proxy wars against old enemies. …more

Bahrain, UK pledge closer ties
By Habib Toumi – 24 August, 2012 – Gulf News

Manama: Bahrain and Britain have agreed to boost cooperation to safeguard stability and security in the region, Bahrain’s foreign minister has said.

King Hamad Bin Eisa Al Khalifa on Thursday met British Prime Minister David Cameron in London for official talks.

“The visit by HM King Hamad is highly significant and is happening at a time when closer ties between Bahrain and London are required,” Shaikh Khalid Bin Ahmad Al Khalifa said.”

The talks between King Hamad and Cameron covered bilateral relations and ways to safeguard stability and security in the region. The two leaders also discussed ways to safeguard peace in the Middle East as well as the latest developments in Syria. “There is common concern about the bloodshed [in Syria] and its repercussions for security in the region,” Shaikh Khalid said in a statement carried by the Bahrain News Agency. …source

New Project to Track Govt Spin Campaign Shows Over $32M Spent on PR

BAHRAIN GOVT HIRES 18 WESTERN COMPANIES TO IMPROVE IMAGE AFTER UNREST
August 23, 2012 – Bahrain Watch

[Manama] The Government of Bahrain has spent or allocated at least US$ 32.5 million for the services of eighteen different London and Washington DC based companies, to improve its image in the Western media, since the start of pro-democracy protests last February. This according to a new project called PR Watch <http://bahrainwatch.org/PR> launched on Thursday by research and activist group Bahrain Watch. The ongoing goal of PR Watch is to monitor and document the activities of each public relations company working for Bahrain’s government.

When Arab Spring-inspired protesters took to Bahrain’s streets in February 2011, security forces responded with a bloody crackdown, killing two protesters in the first two days and over 60 to date in the ongoing unrest. Although coverage in the Western media was relatively limited, it shone a spotlight on the Government’s darker side: torture and police abuse, sectarian discrimination, and the concentration of political power in the ruling family and its allies. Its carefully-cultivated facade of tolerance and progressivism under threat, the government turned to an array of Western public relations (PR) and PR-related firms.

Using information primarily from media reports and official government documents, PR Watch uncovers how these companies have sought to transform the narrative about Bahrain in the Western media. The information is organized and presented on a website: . While PR Watch has identified eighteen different Western PR-related companies receiving payments or contracts worth at least $32.5 million since February 2011, these figures are based only on publicly-available information. Actual spending by the Bahraini government on PR is likely to be considerably higher.

Among the eighteen firms hired are some of the biggest names in Western PR, such as London-based Bell Pottinger, and Washington DC-based Qorvis Communications. Both have been previously criticised for PR contracts with other repressive governments.

In general, the activities undertaken by PR companies on behalf of the Bahraini government include:

While this is part and parcel of the regular PR trade, some companies, such as DC-based Policy Impact Communications, play a more dubious role. To skirt rules barring lobbyists from paying for US Congressional travel, Policy Impact established a non-profit front organization that funded a visit to Bahrain by Representative Dan Burton. The same group also organized a trip to Bahrain for Representative Eni Faleomavaega. Both Congressmen made statements in support of the government while in Bahrain, and upon their return to the US.

In general, activities by PR companies seek to promote the following myths about Bahrain’s political situation:

The country is not ruled by an autocrat, but by an enlightened monarchy shepherding its subjects towards democracy;

The opposition protesters are wolves in sheep’s clothing who may be calling for democracy, but are actually backed by Iran and want to impose a Shia theocracy;

Any violence carried out by security forces against protesters is always only in reaction to violence carried out by protesters, labelled as “terrorists” or “vandals”;

Torture and police abuse is not systematic, but is the result of just a few bad apples rather than the orders of any senior officials;

The government has made amends for any mistakes it made last year.

The findings of the PR Watch project directly contradict a statement made by Bahrain’s Minister of State for Information in July 2012, in which she characterized claims that the government has hired Western public relations companies as “one of the fabrications among the fabrications of the Opposition to tarnish the image of Bahrain.”

“That the Bahraini government is pouring so much money into Western PR firms suggests it cares more of its international image, than it does ending the ongoing human rights violations against its own citizens,” said Bahrain Watch member Marc Owen Jones. “PR companies protecting the image of the Bahraini government simply offer excuses to those who should be pressuring the Kingdom for reform, accountability and social justice.” …source

U.S government turns a blind eye to human rights violations in Bahrain: Nabeel Rajab jailed for three years over ’illegal gatherings’, but U.S reaction is delayed and weak
21 August, 2012 – International Federation for Human Rights

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) welcomes the U.S. State Department’s long overdue public statement last week in response to the Bahraini government’s sentencing of Nabeel Rajab, a prominent human rights defender, to three years in prison. However, the State Department’s call for “the verdict and sentence [to] be reconsidered in the appeals process” is a woefully insufficient response considering Nabeel’s predicament and the ongoing repression and human rights violations committed by the government of Bahrain.

Nabeel Rajab, one of several human rights defenders currently imprisoned and threatened in Bahrain, was condemned to 3 years in prison last Thursday for organizing and participating in peaceful marches. He is also scheduled appear in court this Thursday, August 23rd, to appeal another sentence of 3 months in prison for simply having Tweeted his criticism of his government. These charges not only violate Nabeel’s basic rights to freedom of expression and assembly, but Nabeel’s family and colleagues were denied access to his trial on August 16th, calling into question the fairness and transparency of the legal proceedings.

As a member of the Human Rights Council, which in July of this year passed a resolution reaffirming the right to freedom of expression “through any media of one’s choice” (A/HRC/RES/20/8), the United States has an even greater responsibility to uphold international human rights standards including the freedom of expression. Moreover, given that the United States is one of Bahrain’s closest military allies (approving continued arms sales to the Kingdom of Bahrain in May 2012 despite clear evidence of Bahraini security forces using excessive force against civilians), it is in a unique position to pressure Bahraini authorities to respect their citizens’ fundamental freedoms. Rather than doing so, the U.S. government has until today stayed silent on Nabeel Rajab’s ongoing harassment, and is still failing to publicly and clearly condemn what is without any doubt a violation of international human rights law.

FIDH calls on the U.S. government to publicly denounce the continued persecution of human rights defenders in Bahrain, and to insist on the immediate and unconditional release of Nabeel Rajab and all other prisoners of conscience. …source

Deafening Toll Of Nabeel Rajab’s Injustice
21 August, 2012 – The Trench

Three weeks ago Michael Posner, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State, paid a visit to the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission with a deceptive blueprint under his arm. In addition to his normal duties, Posner has served as Bahrain’s de facto ambassador throughout the island’s 18-month democratic uprising. The Secretary would employ a number of arguments to shield King Hamad Bin isa Al-Khalifa’s monarchy from Congressional scrutiny, weaving criticisms of the government’s repression between an overarching defense of its actions. His general conclusion: Bahrain may share some similarities with Syria, Libya or Tunisia, but each country’s “unique history” must “shape U.S. policy accordingly.”

As if local history is the only force dictating U.S. policy on and around the island.

King Hamad has certainly played some parts of his counterrevolutionary hand with skill. While his modest security forces are not equipped to cause the same destruction as Muammar Gaddafi or Bashar al-Assad’s armies, Hamad and his royal circle could employ a variety of lethal tactics to break the opposition’s will to resist. Instead they have chosen pellet guns [shotguns] and U.S.-made tear gas canisters over automatic weapons as their primary instruments. Beatings, night arrests and other non-lethal tactics also keep the island’s casualties, international pressure and media exposure to a minimum. Applying lessons from Western crowd control tactics – including the so-called Free Speech Zones abused by the Bush administration – Hamad’s government even contracted Western police figures John Timoney and John Yates to add to his performance’s realism.

Yet the King’s circle is prone to lapses in strategic thinking, particularly the entry of Saudi Arabian forces (along with Jordanians and Pakistanis) and the destruction of Pearl Monument. The monarchy believes in firmly prosecuting opposition activists to make examples of them, a tactic that simply contributes to their political influence and the country’s instability. Conversely, King Hamad’s government has thrown away every opportunity to establish a genuine dialogue with the opposition’s diverse network, holding all dissident parties responsible for the island’s political breakdown. State media’s interpretation of Posner’s speech illustrated the reckless mindset of both governments: “Bahrain is more stable than a year ago.”

Posner would claim that Bahrain’s violence has “reduced significantly” in recent months, but nothing could be further from the truth. That Bahrain’s violence sits at the opposite end of Syria’s spectrum is true, except relativity doesn’t negate the repressive environment that its opposition labors under. 2012’s casualties and injuries have maintained a similar pace as 2011, pushing the death count closer to 100, and police abuse remains a frequent occurrence. The island is only becoming more divided over time. Nabeel Rajab, Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, his daughter Zainab and other peaceful figures of the opposition remain incarcerated for political reasons, antagonizing Bahrain’s democratic movement and foreign supporters. Meanwhile a U.S.-backed dialogue with Al Wefaq and its allies drifts lifeless down a river of mistrust, and this collective marginalization is venting into the streets.

Now the harsh sentencing of Rajab threatens to top all of the King’s blunders and add more drag on U.S. policy.

Rajab and his family counted themselves among the few who weren’t surprised by last Thursday’s verdict, because even hardened observers of Bahrain’s uprising shook their heads in disbelief. Ego and fear offer a plausible explanation for the monarchy’s counterproductive behavior. Leaving aside the injustice of his three-year sentence, one each for three different charges of instigating protests and violence, imprisoning Rajab will not accomplish the government’s objective of restoring order. Hero-making makes for flawed counterrevolution and is thus perplexing at the strategic level: three years in prison equates to at least three more years of protests. Jail walls won’t stop his Twitter account or his followers from marching in his place.

Furthermore, Rajab’s harsh treatment at Jaww prison suggests that his appeal process is as fake as King Hamad’s commitment to democracy. …more

The New York Police Department infiltrated Muslim student groups, put informants in mosques, monitored sermons and catalogued every Muslim in New York who adopted new, Americanized surnames.

Spying on Muslims led to no leads or terror cases: NYPD
21 August, 2012 – Al Arabiya News – By ADAM GOLDMAN and MATT APUZZO – Associated Press

In more than six years of spying on Muslim neighborhoods, eavesdropping on conversations and cataloguing mosques, the New York Police Department’s secret Demographics Unit never generated a lead or triggered a terrorism investigation, the department acknowledged in court testimony unsealed late Monday.

The Demographics Unit is at the heart of a police spying program, built with help from the CIA, which assembled databases on where Muslims lived, shopped, worked and prayed. Police infiltrated Muslim student groups, put informants in mosques, monitored sermons and catalogued every Muslim in New York who adopted new, Americanized surnames.

Police hoped the Demographics Unit would serve as an early warning system for terrorism. And if police ever got a tip about, say, an Afghan terrorist in the city, they’d know where he was likely to rent a room, buy groceries and watch sports.

But in a June 28 deposition as part of a longstanding federal civil rights case, Assistant Chief Thomas Galati said none of the conversations the officers overheard ever led to a case.

“Related to Demographics,” Galati testified that information that has come in “has not commenced an investigation.”

The NYPD is the largest police department in the nation and Mayor Michael Bloomberg has held up its counterterrorism tactics as a model for the rest of the country. After The Associated Press began reporting on those tactics last year, supporters argued that the Demographics Unit was central to keeping the city safe. Galati testified that it was an important tool, but conceded it had not generated any leads.

“I never made a lead from rhetoric that came from a Demographics report, and I’m here since 2006,” he said. “I don’t recall other ones prior to my arrival. Again, that’s always a possibility. I am not aware of any.”

Galati, the commanding officer of the NYPD Intelligence Division, offered the first official look at the Demographics Unit, which the NYPD denied ever existed when it was revealed by the AP last year. He described how police gather information on people even when there is no evidence of wrongdoing, simply because of their ethnicity and native language. …more

Turkey, US hold “operational” meeting on Syria
23 August, 2012 – Al Akhbar

Turkish and US officials Thursday began their first “operational planning” meeting aimed at bringing about the end of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s embattled regime.

The meeting is expected to coordinate military, intelligence and political responses to the crisis in Syria where a deadly crackdown on peaceful protests that began in March 2011 has, according to the United Nations, claimed more than 18,000 lives.

Turkish foreign ministry deputy under-secretary Halit Cevik and US ambassador Elisabeth Jones are leading the delegations made up of intelligence agents, military officials and diplomats at the meeting in Ankara, a foreign ministry source told AFP.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had announced their plans for such a mechanism to hasten the end of Assad’s regime on August 11.

Thursday’s meeting come just days after US President Barack Obama warned Syria that any movement or usage of its chemical weapons would be a “red line” that would change his perspective on how to respond to the conflict.

Syria has said it would not use its chemical weapons against rebels, reserving them only for “external aggressors,” in a veiled reference to a potential Israeli or Turkish strike on the country.

On Monday, Davutoglu said Turkey can handle no more than 100,000 Syrian refugees and has proposed setting up a UN buffer zone inside Syria to shelter them.

Some analysts believe Turkey is attempting to build a case for Turkish military intervention, having previously threatened to enter Syria to crush Kurdish rebels suspected of moving into the country’s northeast.

The threat of armed groups including the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and al-Qaeda which could exploit a power vacuum in Syria is also expected to figure high on the agenda of the Ankara meeting.

In Istanbul, Clinton had said she shared “Turkey’s determination that Syria must not become a haven for PKK terrorists whether now or after the departure of the Assad regime.”

The PKK are a Kurdish separatist group that has waged a military campaign against Ankara since 1984 in a bid to gain greater Kurdish autonomy in Turkey’s southeast. …more

Principles set aside in federal government’s dealings with Saudia Arabia iPolitics Insight
By Yves Engler – 23 August, 2012 -iPolitics

Yves Engler is the author of a number of books on Canadian foreign policy. His forthcoming book, The Ugly Canadian: Stephen Harper’s foreign policy, will be published in October. Dubbed “Canada’s version of Noam Chomsky” (Georgia Straight), “one of the most important voices on the Canadian Left today” (Briarpatch), “in the mould of I. F. Stone” (Globe and Mail), “ever-insightful” (rabble.ca) and a “Leftist gadfly” (Ottawa Citizen), Yves Engler’s six books have been praised by Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, William Blum, Rick Salutin and many others.

Stephen Harper’s Conservatives have strengthened military, business and diplomatic ties with Saudi Arabia, one of the most misogynistic and repressive countries in the world. The country is ruled by a monarchy that’s been in power for more than seven decades. The House of Saud has outlawed labour unions and stifled independent media. With the Qur’an ostensibly acting as Saudi Arabia’s constitution, over a million Christians (mostly foreign workers) in the country are banned from owning bibles or attending church.

Outside its borders, the Saudi royal family uses its immense wealth to promote and fund many of the most reactionary, anti-women social forces in the world. They aggressively opposed the “Arab Spring” democracy movement through their significant control of Arab media, funding of establishment political movements and by deploying 1500 troops to support the 200-year monarchy in neighbouring Bahrain. The Saudi monarchy may be the worst regime in the world. (The U.S., of course, is responsible for far more violence but it is relatively free domestically. North Korea is as repressive, but its foreign policy is benign compared to Saudi Arabia’s.)

The Conservatives have been extremely deferential towards the Saudi leadership. When Crown Prince Nayef bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud died in June foreign minister John Baird gushed with praise. “Saudi Arabia has lost an honourable man of great achievement who has dedicated his life to the security and prosperity of the people of Saudi Arabia.”

In fact, Nayef bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud, interior minister for three and a half decades, was considered a fairly conservative member of the Al Saud family who resisted the weakening of Wahhabi religious doctrine as a threat to the monarchy’s grip on power.

When defence minister and deputy premier Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz Al Saud died in October 2011 Baird issued a similar assessment. “The Kingdom has lost a man of great achievement who dedicated his life to the well-being of its people.” Appointed defence and aviation minister in 1962, Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz Al Saud was a leading figure in the country for five decades. He pushed a stridently anti-communist position and was implicated in a number of major corruption scandals.

Bahraini Regime Attacks Homes of Opposition Forces with Toxic Gasses
23 August, 2012 – FARS

TEHRAN (FNA)- The Bahraini security forces have started spraying toxic gasses in areas where members of opposition groups reside and in those areas and districts which witness daily popular protests against the Al-Khalifa regime, reports said.

Several Bahraini news websites reported on Thursday that large groups of al-Khalifa forces attacked a large number of districts in the Bahraini cities and villages to suppress and arrest those who had attended the protest rallies against the ruling system.

They also sprayed toxic gasses at residential districts and people’s houses.

Earlier reports from the Arab country said that as protests continue in Bahrain, the police keep bombarding dissenters with tear gas, which local residents say is now getting both stronger and thicker. It’s not only affecting just protesters, either – tear gas is getting into people’s homes. For many, it’s now becoming part of everyday life.

Bahraini human rights groups have cried out against the widespread use of tear gas, which they say is being spread haphazardly in areas where the authorities believe protesters live, notably lower-income Shiite neighborhoods. Several cases of death by suffocation have been reported, including of people inside their homes.

Anti-government protesters have been holding peaceful demonstrations across Bahrain since mid-February 2011, calling for an end to the Al Khalifa dynasty’s over-40-year rule.

Violence against the defenseless people escalated after a Saudi-led conglomerate of police, security and military forces from the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (PGCC) member states – Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Qatar – were dispatched to the tiny Persian Gulf kingdom on March 13, 2011, to help Manama crack down on peaceful protestors.

So far, tens of protesters have been killed, hundreds have gone missing and thousands of others have been injured.

Police clampdown on protesters continues daily. Authorities have tried to stop organized protests by opposition parties over the past month by refusing to license them and using tear gas on those who turn up.

The opposition coalition wants full powers for the elected parliament and a cabinet fully answerable to parliament. …source

Bahrain Defender Rajab Wins Twitter Appeal, Remains in Jail
23 August, 2012 – Human Rights First

Washington, DC – Leading Bahraini human rights defender Nabeel Rajab, President of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), has won his appeal of a three-month prison sentence for criticizing the country’s Prime Minister in a tweet. His comments were about Khalifah ibn Sulman al-Khalifah, the uncle of the King of Bahrain and the country’s unelected Prime Minister for more than four decades. Last week, in a separate case, Rajab was sentenced to three years in jail for his part in “illegal gatherings.”

“It’s hard to celebrate when the Bahrain authorities admit their mistake in jailing Nabeel Rajab for the tweet but keep him in prison until 2015 on other spurious charges,” said Human Rights First’s Brian Dooley. “They’ve found another way to silence him, and that’s what matters.”

During today’s appeal verdict, Rajab was removed from the court after complaining about his treatment and conditions in jail.

Rajab is one of the region’s leading human rights figures, with over 168,000 followers on the social network site Twitter. Before today’s ruling, he had already served more than a month in jail for his tweet criticizing Bahrain’s unelected Prime Minister.

Rajab is the President of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights. He and the BCHR have won several international awards for their work in exposing human rights violations in the country over the last 18 months, including the 2012 Roger Baldwin Medal of Freedom, awarded by Human Rights First, the 2011 Ion Ratui Democracy Award, from the Woodrow Wilson Center, and the 2011 Silbury Prize, from UK parliamentarians.

Bahrain: Detained leading activists and opposition figures protest increased restrictions in prison

Bahrain Center for Human Rights
23rd August, 2012

BCHR has learned that the detained 13 leading activists and opposition figures have submitted a letter to the prison authorities informing them that they will start a series of protest actions including a hunger strike if the increased restrictions in prison are not removed by Thursday.

“Today we submitted a letter to prison authorities that we will start a series of actions to protest against the violations and new restrictions, including on calls to families and lawyers, prevention from daily newspapers as well as prevention from daily exercise in the open air. The protest will include a hungerstrike.”

Further to the earlier report by Bahrain center of Human rights regarding an increased level of restrictions applied on the detained leading activists and opposition figures at Bahrain central prison (Jaw), new information has been received that these restrictions are not limited to the monitoring, interrupting and cutting phone calls of the detained activists to their families, but also includes prevention from access to newspapers and prevention from the daily exercise in the open air.

Mrs Fareeda Ghulam, the wife of detained leading activist, Ebrahim Sharif had reported earlier that an officer had interrupted a call between her and her husband, then the call was cut while she was describing the situation in Bahrain after the killing of 16 years old child Hussam AlHaddad by the security forces.

These increased restrictions come in time as the activists wait for a final verdict from the higher court of appeal which has postponed issuing the ruling from 14 August 2012 to 4 Sep 2012 for no obvious reason. It also synchronize with the increased level of security attacks on protesters as a 16 years old has been shot dead by police on 17 August 2012 and the leading human rights defender Nabeel Rajab has been sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.

The Bahrain Centre for human rights urges for the release and full exoneration of the prisoners who were arrested and sentenced in unfair military trials for practicing their legitimate right of expression and assembly.

The 13 opposition activists are as follows:

1-Abdulwahab Hussain ( life sentence imprisonment)
2-Ebrahim Sharif ( 5 Years imprisonment)
3-Hassan Mushaima( life sentence imprisonment)
4-Abdulhadi Al Khawaja ( life sentence imprisonment)
5-Abduljalil Al Singace.( life sentence imprisonment)
6-Mohammed Habib Al Miqdad ( life sentence imprisonment)
7-Saeed Mirza AlNouri ( life sentence imprisonment)
8- Abduljalil Al Miqdad ( life sentence imprisonment)
09-Abdullah Isa Al Mahroos.( 5 years imprisonment)
10-Salah Hubail Al Khawaj.( 5 years imprisonment)
11-Mohammed Hassan Jawad.( 15 years imprisonment)
12-Mohammed Ali Ismael. ( 15 years imprisonment))
13-Abdul Hadi AlMukhodher ( 15 years imprisonment)

More information: http://www.bahrainrights.org/en/node/5384

A Brief Analysis on Dr. Abdulrahman Al-Zuhayyan’s “What the World Should Tell Bahraini Opposition Groups” [1]
by Um Aisha – 23 August, 2012

I thought that the article would raise a few valid points about the Bahraini uprising until I got halfway through it. Dr. Abdulrahman Al-Zuhayyan, of course, exaggerated a few facts. It is hard to imagine that “millions” of people visited Bahrain as tourists each year.

In the beginning, Dr Al-Zuhayyan tried to show the nature of the Shi’a community in Bahrain and Saudi. He first portrayed them as a less conservative community and stated that they have “less restrictive religious traditions that permits both sexes to socialize and communicate to Westerners”. By doing so, I assumed that he does not believe that the protests in Bahrain had a sectarian drive. So what does this “Affinity with Iran” concern? Why does he then make note of a Shi’a Bahraini-Irani relation if what binds them together (religious sect) is not a strong force anymore?

What’s more, shortly after explaining how Shi’as are more socially advanced, Dr. Al-Zuhayyan accuses them of “hampering” the development of the “country”. In my opinion, this contradiction is not accidental but carefully thought. He is either trying to seem friendly and objective towards the shi’a community or trying to use their own argument against them.

If the primary intention was to develop public services and not only private businesses, the government would welcome drawing comparisons between Bahrain and its neighboring Arab countries. I have encountered other Bahraini’s that made a similar argument and insisted that “there is no need for protests in Bahrain if we are not starving like the Egyptians.” I reply that the world would be a giant zoo if our only purpose was to end hunger.

During the Bahraini uprising, when the tents were set up around the Pearl Roundabout, Wa’ad (The National Democratic Action Society) gave a lecture on Constitutional Monarchies. This lecture was followed by a discussion where the participants could take part in accurately defining a constitutional monarchy and what they would like the structure of their country’s government to be. I witnessed that almost all participants agreed that Bahrain was, in fact, not a Constitutional Monarchy.  If we were able to participate in the political decision-making process of our affairs as Dr. Al-Zahyyan puts it, we would now be in the process of voting for a new prime minister and I would be able to publish what I am writing in one of our local newspapers without fear.

________________________________

[1] Al-Zuhayyan, Abdulrahman. “What the World Should Tell Bahraini Opposition Groups.” Equities.com-Global Financial Network. Al Bawaba Ltd, n.d. Web. 5 Aug. 2012. <http://www.equities.com/news/headline-story?dt=2012-08-04&val=345839&cat=energy>.

What the world should tell Bahraini opposition groups
by Dr. Abdulrahman Al-Zuhayyan – 4 August, 2012

History and geography determine the relationships between Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. The two countries are proximate to each other and many Saudis and Bahrainis have familial relations. It was and still normal to see Bahraini nationals living and working in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. This has become part of everyone’s history in this part of our country.

Bahrain has long been known among the Gulf’s inhabitants as a modern and liberal society, even way before the discovery of oil in the 1940s, and the subsequent boom in oil prices in the 1970s. Bahrain was a British colony and gained independence on Aug. 15, 1971. The British were practically running the civil services, including security and traffic systems. Subsequently the English language dominated the management system and the Bahraini social life. So, Bahrainis’ first exposure to Western lifestyle and the English language was through the British, and many of them spoke their language.

Those British traditions inherited by Bahrainis proved to be economically practical, specifically for Western companies, who were engaged in mega projects in the oil industry and the construction sectors, since early oil exploration in Saudi Arabia, and eventually in the rest of the Arab Gulf countries in the 1970s. Moreover, Bahrain has become a regional trade center, involving maritime agencies, offshore banks and other international trade business.
Over the years, Bahrain became a tourist attraction for Westerners and others from neighboring countries. Bahrain receives millions of visitors every year, and the total number of visitors reached eight million in 2008. Considering its small area — with a length of 34 miles and a width of 11 miles — and absence of natural resources or advanced industry, this island can be described as an economically thriving country that has a GDP of $ 31.101 billion and per capita income of $ 27.556.

However, many Saudis and Bahrainis sometimes wonder whether Bahrain is still nostalgically connected to their history or is drifting away. Since the outbreak of Iranian revolution, Bahrain has not been the same, specifically the Bahraini Shiites. Most Saudis did not distinguish between Bahraini Sunnis or Shiites, who were working in the Eastern Province. Both were considered as part of the local Saudi community.

Now, that affinity is not as strong as in the past. Bahraini Shiites are engaged in clamoring over victimization and presenting themselves to the world, particularly Westerners, as victims of allegedly oppressive political regime. They have succeeded. The characteristics of Bahrain as being an international trade center and a place of tourist attraction, provided Bahrainis with an opportunity to learn and speak the English language, exposed them to Western lifestyles and modes of interacting and communicating with Westerners. Their relatively less restrictive religious traditions also permitted male and female Shiites to socialize and communicate with Westerners. In addition to using those social skills, Shiites use their computer skills to convey their alleged grievances to Western journalists and human rights groups in English and give them their version of the story. Hence, communication with Westerners take both direct or indirect forms. The direct form is through establishing personal relationships with journalists covering events in the Gulf region while the indirect communication is via the Internet, including e-mails, Facebook, twitter, and other social media outlets.
[Read more →]