Summary:Bahrain, British Imperialism
12 October 2012 – Bahrain Center for Studies in London

The Bahrain Centre for Studies in London (BCSL) has issue a paper under the title of: “Bahrain, and British Imperialism”by the British journalist Chris Bambery.

The author indicates that the deep links between the ruling circles of Britain and Bahrain were demonstrated by the presence of King Hamad at Queen Elizabeth 11’s diamond jubilee celebration dinner held at Windsor Castle in the spring of 2012. Hamad’s visit went ahead despite the killings, torture, sackings and demolitions being administered to those demanding democracy and self-determination for the Bahraini people.

Britain was the key force in shaping modern Bahrain and in installing and defending the Al Khalifah ruling house. That and its continuing support for the regime mean it must accept a large responsibility for the kingdom’s current problems.

In 1967 Harold Wilson’s government in London announced they would withdraw all British forces east of Suez. The British were quitting HMS Juffair in Bahrain. Worried about Iranian and Iraqi ambitions to control the Gulf the US stepped in. In 1970 they reached agreement with the Sheik to take over HMS Juffair. The American negotiator reported:

“His Highness was very clear that Bahrain desired a continued US presence.”

The British author sees that the Al Khalifa’s were now under US ‘protection’ but the British continued to run the security forces through appointees.

The presence of a former Scotland Yard senior policeman, John Yates, as the current adviser to King Hamad upholds a tradition established by Belgrave and Henderson – it constitutes a living legacy of British imperialism. It is a tradition which should not be upheld in the 21st century by the Queen, Prime Minister David Cameron and the British banks and corporations who make a tidy penny in Bahrain. …source full report

Obama’s Syria policy in shambles as Assad opposition squabbles
Hannah Allam – McClatchy – 25 March, 2013

WASHINGTON The Obama administration’s Syria policy was unraveling Monday after weekend developments left the Syrian Opposition Coalition and its military command in turmoil, with the status of its leader uncertain and its newly selected prime minister rejected by the group’s military wing.

State Department officials said they still planned to work with the coalition, to which the United States has pledged $60 million, but analysts said the developments were one more sign that the Obama administration and its European allies had no workable Syria policy.

The opposition coalition, already in its second incarnation, has proved to be as beset by factionalism as its predecessor, the Syrian National Council, exacerbated this time by the meddling of foreign donors, analysts said. But, the analysts added, the United States has no other entity to back in a war that pits the regime of President Bashar Assad against a jihadist-dominated rebel movement.

“This is it. The U.S. can’t reboot it a third time. If they can’t make this work, they’ve got nothing,” said Joshua Landis, the director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma and the author of the blog Syria Comment.

Syrian Opposition Coalition leader Mouaz al Khatib announced his resignation Sunday, citing his frustration with unspecified foreign powers, which he accused of trading funding for control of the group. The coalition said it had refused the resignation, and Khatib later announced on his Facebook page that he’d lead a delegation representing Syria this week at the Arab League summit in Qatar, leaving his precise status uncertain.

State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said it was unclear whether Khatib had resigned and that events were still “playing out.”

“What’s important is that the Syrian opposition continues to work toward what they’ve laid out, which is a vision for a tolerant, inclusive Syria,” Ventrell said. “There may be different leadership that will come and go, there may be different folks who play different roles, but we are going to continue to focus on that important vision.”

The confusion over Khatib’s resignation was compounded by word over the weekend that the head of the Supreme Military Command, the semi-affiliated military wing of the coalition, refused to recognize newly chosen Prime Minister Ghassan Hitto, saying the premier had been improperly elected and pushed through by Qatar, one of the biggest backers of the opposition movement and its armed rebels.

Hitto, a longtime Texas resident who recently returned to the region to join the opposition, heads what was envisioned as an interim government that’s poised to take over once Assad falls. But his credibility is deeply in doubt now that Khatib appears to have resigned and Hitto’s military commanders reject his leadership. The rejection also casts a pall over American efforts to pass through the coalition millions in U.S. money destined for Syrians whom the fighting has forced from their homes; Hitto was in charge of the coalition’s nascent aid organization.

Opposition activists who were privy to details of the negotiations say Hitto’s nomination was backed by Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood, the conservative Islamist organization that’s fought the Assad regime for three decades and is at the forefront of the political opposition.

Qatar, a Muslim Brotherhood patron, supported Hitto over the objections of rival Persian Gulf nation Saudi Arabia. In retaliation, opposition activists say, Saudi Arabia, which is a key supplier of weapons to the rebels, pressured the Supreme Military Command’s leader, defected Gen. Salim Idriss, to reject Hitto, essentially putting negotiations back at square one.

“With a clear absence of the U.S., small players like the Qataris and Saudis will take over,” said a prominent Syrian opposition activist who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivities of the topic. “It’s bringing the government down, when the goal was to put an end to the chaos and vacuum.”

The setbacks over the weekend only underlined the lack of progress the Syrian political opposition has made after two years and millions of dollars in outside aid.

The lack of opposition cohesion raises the specter of a bloody free-for-all should Assad fall, perhaps plunging Syria into anarchy with no credible body poised to take charge.

“We have a leader who resigned, an interim prime minister whose election was conducted without transparency and the formal opposition has failed. I don’t know what happens if Assad falls,” said Rafif Jouejati, a spokeswoman for the Local Coordination Committees, a network of activists with more than 80 branches throughout Syria.

Jouejati, who’s consulted with the State Department on Syria policy, said key developments to watch were whether the coalition-linked rebel command would live up to its promise of accepting civilian leadership and whether cooperation could improve amid both sides complaining of being sidelined.

“The Syrian opposition needs to look at itself in the mirror and realize it’s been a colossal failure to the Syrian people,” Jouejati lamented. “It’s time for a complete overhaul.”

Landis predicted that the United States will try to restore some type of role for Khatib, who’d fallen out with the Muslim Brotherhood by calling for conditional talks with Assad, a track that the U.S. and Europe are quietly pursuing in hopes of preventing a total collapse of Syrian institutions but that Brotherhood activists reject after decades of heavy losses to the Assad dynasty. It’s in the U.S. government’s interest that the coalition doesn’t totally collapse, especially as a rebel group that the U.S. government has labeled an al Qaida-linked terrorist group, Jabhat al Nusra, gains ground throughout the country.

“It’s going to limp along because they need it,” Landis said. “They need a political organization that’s pro-West.”
…source

Syria opposition leader demands Patriot missiles, UN seat
26 March, 2013 – Al Akhbar

Syria’s opposition leader Moaz al-Khatib, taking Syria’s seat at an Arab summit for the first time on Tuesday, said the United States should use Patriot missiles to protect rebel-held areas from government warplanes.

Khatib said the United States should play a bigger role in helping end the two-year-old conflict in Syria, blaming President Bashar al-Assad’s government for what he called its refusal to solve the crisis.

“I have asked [US Secretary of State John] Kerry to extend the umbrella of the Patriot missiles to cover the Syrian north and he promised to study the subject,” Khatib said, referring to NATO Patriot missile batteries sent to Turkey last year to protect Turkish airspace.

“We are still waiting for a decision from NATO to protect people’s lives, not to fight but to protect lives,” he said.

In a fiery address, Khatib also demanded that he be allowed to represent Syria at the United Nations.

“We demand … the seat of Syria at the United Nations and at other international organisations,” Khatib said, addressing Arab leaders at the Doha summit.

Khatib, a Sunni cleric, took over Syria’s vacant chair at the Arab League summit in Doha after it had been empty since the Arab League suspended Syria’s membership in November 2011.

Qatar had lobbied other Arab League to promote Syria’s opposition National Coalition to fill the country’s spot.

Khatib had announced his resignation from his position as leader of the Syrian National Coalition Sunday, confusing the situation and throwing the fragmented opposition into disarray and denting its credibility.

Despite his resignation, which has not yet been accepted by the coalition, Khatib had said he would address the summit “in the name of the Syrian people,” and that his attendance “is not linked to the resignation which will be later discussed.”

Khatib had told Al Jazeera television that his main reason for quitting was frustration with world inaction. He also acknowledged that the coalition had been divided, referring to last week’s decision in Istanbul to appoint Islamist-leaning technocrat Ghassan Hitto as provisional prime minister.

Last year during the summit, Russia and Iran threw their backing behind a UN-sponsored peace plan in Syria, as Arab foreign ministers met in Baghdad to debate a draft resolution calling on Damascus to end the continuing violence.

The plan’s six-points had called for a ceasefire and withdrawal of government forces from cities and towns, but did not specify that Assad must step aside as a precondition for dialogue. …source

US training ‘secular’ Syrian rebels: Officials
The Associated Press – 26 March, 2013 – Hurriyet Daily

WASHINGTON – The United States is training secular Syrian fighters in Jordan in a bid to bolster forces battling President Bashar Assad’s regime and stem the influence of Islamist radicals among the country’s persistently splintered opposition, American and foreign officials said.

The training has been conducted for several months now in an unspecified location, concentrating largely on Sunnis and tribal Bedouins who formerly served as members of the Syrian army, officials told The Associated Press. The forces aren’t members of the leading rebel group, the Free Syrian Army, which Washington and others fear may be increasingly coming under the sway of extremist militia groups, including some linked to al-Qaida, they said.

The operation is being run by U.S. intelligence and is ongoing, officials said, but those in Washington stressed that the U.S. is providing only nonlethal aid at this point. Others such as Britain and France are involved, they said, though it’s unclear whether any Western governments are providing materiel or other direct military support after two years of civil war that according to the United Nations already has killed more than 70,000 people.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly about the program.

Officially, the Obama administration has been vague on the subject of what type of military training it may be providing, while insisting that it is doing all it can – short of providing weapons to the rebels or engaging in its own military intervention – to hasten the demise of the Assad family’s four-decade dictatorship.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday the U.S. has “provided some logistical nonlethal support that has also come in handy for the Syrian rebels who are, again, fighting a regime that is not hesitating to use the military might of that regime against its own people. …more

Hugo Chávez: 1954-Forever
22 March, 2013 – By Jordan Katz

Just inside the entrance to New York’s Church of St. Paul the Apostle, a line to sign a book of condolences for the late Hugo Chávez snaked around tables at the ecumenical service held just over a week after the former Venezuelan president’s death. Piled on the tables were t-shirts imprinted with the slogan, “Yo Soy Chávez.” Beneath the slogan in smaller print: “1954-Forever.”

Mourners from Venezuela and throughout the Americas filled the church on the night of March 13 to pay their respects and look toward the future. According to Venezuela’s recently appointed Minister of the People’s Power for Foreign Affairs, Elías Jaua, who spoke at the event, Venezuela’s future holds an expansion of the Chavista socialist program, and most importantly, a “radicaliz[ing] of participatory democracy.” Jaua expressed confidence that Chavez’s predecessor and Venezuela’s interim president, Nicolas Maduro, will win the election scheduled for April 14th.

Jaua’s words were met with cheers from an emotional and inspired audience, which included a host of progressive organizations. The Workers World Party, the Urban Justice Center, and leaders of several unions attended the memorial.

Among the slew of political activists who came out to show their support were some familiar faces. Actor Danny Glover sent a letter to be read in his absence and former Congressman Joseph Kennedy gave a speech, condemning those who spoke ill of Chávez and praising his redistribution of the country’s wealth. Citing Chávez’s reorganization of Venezuela’s previously ailing state oil program, PDVSA, he asked, “What possible benefit could that oil monster have been to the poor of Venezuela?”

The speakers glorified rather than analyzed Chávez, but individual audience members’ reactions were more critical. A Venezuelan national who attended the service and wishes to be named only as Max, said things in Venezuela are progressing little by little. “You have to give it time,” he said. “Chávez did quite a lot. He had his problems, but no one is perfect in this life. He achieved more than anyone else did, especially in education, which is what the people need…We’re not going to become like Cuba. To become like Cuba, where people can’t even leave their country, we’d have to move backward.”

Carmen Martinez, an occupational therapist originally from Venezuela, said her support for Chávez largely stems from what he did for the handicap community. “The president actually was the one who promoted the love for the handicap people there,” she said. “In the past, they didn’t have any wheelchairs. They really didn’t have any equipment there… and [Chávez] created a mission where he was able to provide not only the care, but also all the equipment that they lacked before.” She said she was deeply saddened and devastated by his death, but believes Nicolas Maduro is the right person to carry out the programs that Chávez put in place.

When asked about Maduro’s opposition, Henrique Capriles, Martinez said she doesn’t think that his campaign has been honest. “Because of the campaign, they were saying ‘Oh, well we promise every handicapped child a wheelchair.’ Well we had that… They forgot that we already have the mission,” she said. “So somebody who can lie on the TV just to try to make people happy, I don’t think I can trust.”

Despite controversy surrounding the constitutionality of Maduro’s taking over the presidency in the interim, he is the favored candidate. And considering Maduro’s recent declarations that the United States was behind Chávez’s illness, it doesn’t look like U.S.-Venezuelan relations will be softening in the near future. Whoever wins the election inherits some of the highest inflation rates in the world and an extremely high crime rate–Venezuela’s homicide rate is second only to Honduras. The best way to tackle those challenges is by constructing programs that have lasting positive impact, whether the president is Chavista or not. …more

School students and bank workers are among those protesting in Cyprus, after the country reached a painful bailout deal with European creditors. A 3,000-strong crowd of high school pupils marched to the presidential palace in Nicosia, while workers from the Bank of Cyprus staged an occupation of the headquarters in the capital. A banking restructure and a tax of 40% on bank savings over €100,000 are part of the painful measures designed to keep the country from going bankrupt

Gulf: rise in arrests and convictions of cyber critics
25 March, 2013 – ANSAmed

(ANSAmed) – DUBAI, MARCH 25 – In the cyber-savvy but socially conservative Persian Gulf, the duel between modernity and tradition, free speech and subservience to king and country is being played out on the social media platform, as shown by a rise in trials of activists, bloggers and tweeters on charges of blasphemy or sedition.

The latest conviction came yesterday in Kuwait, where blogger Rashid al-Hajiri was sentenced to two years in jail for offending the emir and encouraging people to join in illegal demonstrations. Two similar cases are pending in Kuwaiti courts, while a third ended with a fine. In June 2012, blogger Hamad al-Naqi, 26, was sentenced to 10 years in prison for blasphemy. While bloggers have been arrested from Bahrain to Oman to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kuwait is the only country with a bill pending that calls for capital punishment for social media users convicted of offending Allah and the Prophet Mohamed.

In Saudi Arabia, Grand Mufti Abdul Aziz al-Shaiki has spoken out against social networks, without explicitly banning them. In December, the UAE arrested the country’s youngest activist, an 18-year-old blogger, after a presidential decree set jail time of up to three years for anyone convicted of using cyber media to deride or damage the country’s reputation, institutions or symbols.

In Bahrain, where a Sunni minority rules over a Shiite majority, the most glaring case of repression is the life sentence handed to activist and blogger Abdel Hadi al-Khawaja, thought to be among the promoters of the Bahraini Arab Spring uprisings. His daughter Zainab is also in prison, and both father and daughter went on thirst strike after they were denied visits from relatives, according to the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, which is chaired by Khawaja’s other daughter, Maryam.

Zainab is in danger of cardiac arrest, doctors said.

Oman has so far been the only country to buck the regional trend of repressing free cyber speech. While dozens of critical social media users have been arrested over the past months, the authorities have pardoned them all. …more

News blackout imposed on trial of 94 activists on national security charges
25 March, 2013 – Reporters without Borders

Reporters Without Borders roundly condemns the news blackout that the UAE’s authorities have imposed on the trial of 94 political activists and human rights defenders before the supreme court in Abu Dhabi on charges of endangering the country’s security.

The authorities have allowed the UAE media to attend the four hearings so far held but not the international media. International observers and relatives of the defendants have also been banned from fifth hearing, which is due to be held tomorrow.

In a related development, the netizen Abdulla Al-Hadidi was arrested on 22 March on trumped-up charges of attacking a security guard outside the court on 19 March and disseminating false information on Twitter. He is being held in Abu Dhabi’s Khaledyya district police station.

The second charge has been brought under a new cyber-crime law (Federal Legal Decree No. 5/2012), which was adopted at the end of 2012 and which is regarded as pretext for drastically curbing freedom of expression and information in the UAE.

The Emirates Centre for Human Rights said it believes that 41 relatives of the 94 defendants could also be arrested soon because of what they have allegedly posted on social networks about the trial.

Six human rights organizations including Reporters Without Borders issued a joint statement on 28 January condemning the crackdown on human rights defenders and political activists on the eve of the UAE’s Universal Periodic Review by the UN Human Rights Council. …source

America’s Other Dark Legacy In Iraq
By Joy Gordon – 25 March, 2013 –

When the United States, the United Kingdom, and the “coalition of the willing” attacked Iraq in March 2003, millions protested around the world. But the war of “shock and awe” was just the beginning. The subsequent occupation of Iraq by the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority bankrupted the country and left its infrastructure in shambles.

It’s not just a question of security. Although the breathtaking violence that attended Iraq’s descent into sectarian nightmare has been well documented in many retrospectives on the 10-year-old war, what’s often overlooked is that by far more mundane standards, the United States did a spectacularly poor job of governing Iraq.

It’s not that Iraq was flourishing before the occupation. From 1990 to 2003, the UN Security Council imposed economic sanctions on Iraq that were the harshest in the history of global governance. But along with the sanctions, at least, came an elaborate system of oversight and accountability that drew in the Security Council, nine UN agencies, and General Secretary himself.

The system was certainly imperfect, and the effects of the sanctions on the Iraqi people were devastating. But when the United States arrived, all semblance of international oversight vanished.

Under enormous pressure from Washington, in May 2003 the Security Council formally recognized the occupation of Iraq by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Resolution 1483. Among other things, this resolution gave the CPA complete control over all of Iraq’s assets.

At the same time, the Council removed all the forms of monitoring and accountability that had been in place: there would be no reports on the humanitarian situation by UN agencies, and there would be no committee of the Security Council charged with monitoring the occupation. There would be a limited audit of funds, after they were spent, but no one from the UN would directly oversee oil sales. And no humanitarian agencies would ensure that Iraqi funds were being spent in ways that benefitted the country.

Humanitarian concerns

In January 2003, the UN prepared a working plan anticipating the impact of a possible war. Even with only “medium impact” from the invasion, the UN expected that humanitarian conditions would be severely compromised.

Because the Iraqi population was so heavily reliant on the government’s food distribution system (a consequence of international sanctions), the UN anticipated that overthrowing the Iraqi regime would also undermine food security. And because the population already suffered from extensive malnutrition, this disruption would be quite lethal, putting 30 percent of Iraqi children under five at risk of death. The UN noted that if water and sewage treatment plants were damaged in the war, or if the electrical system could not operate, Iraqis would lose access to potable water, which would likely precipitate epidemics of water-borne diseases. And if electricity, transportation, and medical equipment were compromised, then the medical system would be unable to respond effectively to these epidemics. …more

In response to the criticisms made by western States and organizations against the Bahraini regime, a Bahraini government writer in a quasi-government daily paper called openly for the founding of al-Qaeda in Bahrain.

A suspicious call for an existence of al-Qaeda in Bahrain
25 March, 2013 – ABNA

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) – In response to the criticisms made by western States and organizations against the Bahraini regime, a Bahraini government writer in a quasi-government daily paper called openly for the founding of al-Qaeda in Bahrain.

The government writer made this threat in order to mix things up amidst the wide demands for democracy and respect of human rights, and as a direct threat to the western States and parties which demanded Bahrain to respect human rights.

The Media Centre in Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society denounced such a call that incites terrorism and destroys the country in order to serve suspicious interests and desires.

The Media Centre demands a national and international humanitarian prompt and firm stance to protect this country from destruction.

Democracy is the choice of all peoples including the people of Bahrain who have come very close to it after the nationwide demands movement proved readiness to reach its goal. …source

Is U.S. Trying To Gut Arms Trade Treaty?
Amnesty International – 25 March, 2013

The US is trying to strip the Arms Trade Treaty of critical human rights protections.

By Nate Smith, Arms Trade Treaty Negotiations Observer

Late on Friday, the latest draft of the Arms Trade Treaty was shared publicly. It’s not looking good.

Here’s what it boils down to: Will world leaders take the necessary steps now to prevent sending weapons to countries where they will likely be used for torture, summary executions, and other human rights abuses? Or will they allow business as usual and wait until even more staggering numbers of civilians have been killed until they finally decide to stop arms shipments to those who are targeting civilians?

The second option is called the “body bag” approach. The US government is among those who actually think this is a good idea. It wants to allow critical human rights protections to be kept out of the treaty. These would require countries to exercise some due diligence in making sure they aren’t transferring weapons to places where they know they’ll be used in extrajudicial executions, disappearances, or torture – a global “background check” for arms transfers. …more

Police occupy New York City neighborhood After shooting of Kimani Gray
By Sandy English; 25 March 2013 – WSWS

The New York City Police Department (NYPD) has stationed hundreds of police officers in the Brooklyn neighborhood of East Flatbush since protests erupted after the shooting of 16-year-old Kimani Gray on March 9.

Over the weekend, WSWS reporters in the area saw horse-mounted officers waiting alongside dozens of police motorcycles. Police were stationed at every corner of East Flatbush’s Church Avenue and nearby Nostrand Avenue, close to the location where the killing took place.

Mobile command centers with sophisticated surveillance equipment were stationed in the area, and convoys of squad cars and vans filled with police could be seen speeding along the streets. Groups of officers congregated in the side streets, and in adjoining neighborhoods metal police barricades were stacked on sidewalks.

While the police presence was heightened because of the funeral of Kimani Gray on Saturday and another protest march on Sunday, heavy police presence has been constant since March 10. At that time, protesters began a series of marches to the NYPD 67th Precinct building in the neighborhood. Youth confronted the police and ransacked a store that night. Police arrested nearly 50 people at a protest the next evening.

Protests began after two undercover officers from the Brooklyn South Anti-Crime Patrol shot Gray on March 9, a Saturday night, after he left a group of young men who were congregating in front of a private residence.

The police allege that Gray pulled a gun on the officers, and that the officers warned him and then fired. Witnesses have contradicted the NYPD version, and told the media that no weapon was visible. An official autopsy revealed that of the seven shots that hit Gray, three entered his body from behind.

Hundreds of mourners attended Gray’s funeral on Saturday while police officers stood nearby and were stationed on a roof across the street. Police also had a substantial presence at Sunday’s protest.

Carol Gray, Kimani’s mother, has called for an independent inquiry into the shooting of her son.

According to a report in the Daily News, one of the police officers who shot Gray, Sgt. Mourad Mourad, had at least three suits brought against him when he was a plainclothes officer on Staten Island. The other officer involved, Jovaniel Cordova, had two suits brought against him while he was stationed at Brooklyn’s 70th Precinct. All of the suits alleged civil rights violations surrounding false arrest and illegal stop-and-searches.

The police occupation of East Flatbush is an intensification of the decade-long stop-and-frisk policy. Initiated by Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2002, this policy directs officers to randomly stop passersby on the streets and in front of residences, question them and pat them down for drugs or weapons. As a rule, only the poorest neighborhoods in the city are affected. …more

Globalizing repression, from Hebron to Brooklyn
Joshua Stephens – 24 March, 2013 – NOW

BROOKLYN, NY – On March 12th, 25-year-old Mahmoud al-Titi was shot and killed by Israeli forces in the West Bank town of Hebron, where he was a journalism student and an organizer on behalf of Palestinians held in Israeli prisons. His death marks just the most recent casualty of Israel’s use of live sporting ammunition against Palestinians, banned by the IDF since the Second Intifada. Some speculate it reflects an Israeli strategy to undermine unarmed resistance by forcing protestors to resort to violence, a terrain in which they would easily be dominated by the IDF. Similar to the fallout from the recent murder of Arafat Jaradat in an Israeli prison, al-Titi’s death was followed by an escalation in confrontations with soldiers. “Hebron is very hot, people are very angry; about this situation and about everything around them,” says Issa Amro, an organizer with the Hebron group Youth Against Settlements. “There are almost daily clashes.”

Three days prior to al-Titi’s murder, in the Brooklyn neighborhood of East Flatbush, undercover NYPD officers shot and killed sixteen year-old Kimani Gray, after seeing him allegedly adjust his waistband in a suspicious fashion, and claiming he’d pulled a gun when they approached him. At least one witness has publicly disputed the police story, and claims the officers continued to fire into Gray’s body once it had hit the sidewalk – behavior incommensurate with the police officer’s claim of self-defense. The borough has responded with fury, organizing nightly anti-police protests, and spreading news of the event on social media using the hash tag #BrooklynUprising. Aside from the protests, often in defiance of pleading local politicians, the neighborhood has seemingly turned on the police. “The anger has been impossible to contain,” says Chepe, an Occupy Wall Street organizer and Brooklyn resident. Seeing bottles rain down on violent cops from balconies and windows is nothing new, he says. “But this isn’t a matter of a few drops. It’s a downpour.”

In Brooklyn and the West Bank, the backlash against brutality has instigated a state response. Over the last week, according to Amro, Hebron has rather predictably been subject to increased Israeli military activity. “More restriction, more checkpoints, more house raids at night,” he says. Similarly, in East Flatbush, the NYPD recently declared a “Frozen Zone”: an official designation that bars all media access and authorizes the arrest of anyone who ignores or defies a police order – a rare measure implemented in the weeks following the 9/11 attacks.

While these vignettes suggest a certain correspondence, and even appear to share a timeline, a rather glaring error is committed in drawing equivalencies. As one Palestinian organizer pointed out, “Talking about police brutality under a state is different than talking about the acts of an occupying army.”

In addition to flattening the differences between the two scenarios, equating the two obscures rather stark larger trends. Legal acts dating back to the US Civil War bar the military from performing in a domestic law enforcement capacity, but the militarization of police the world over has been underway for some time, amidst discourses within which even public health matters are constructed as ‘wars’. In the paranoid post-9/11 era, war is no longer confined by space or time; war since 2001 has morphed into a permanent state of exception in which civil liberties and necessities of the democratic process are often radically curtailed. From unmanned drones, to spying operations, to the low-scale warfare unleashed on nonviolent demonstrators during the Occupy movement in the US, the exploded notion of warfare against diffuse enemies such as ‘terror’ have fundamentally altered the contours of not only war, but policing. As Chepe points out, “it’s important to understand that police precincts like the 67th [in East Flatbush] consider their beats to be war zones.”

These trends are not ones lost on those looking to turn a profit. Israel and its private sector increasingly position themselves as exporters of surveillance and security technology, as well as technologies for crowd control and the management of civil disturbance – even to their sworn enemy, Iran. China, India, and Finland have all recently pursued acquiring Israeli surveillance and security tools as well.

Aside from providing a captive market for Israeli goods, the occupation is a major engine for the Israeli defense industry. The West Bank effectively serves as a proving ground for both tactics exported to official agencies, and the technologies best suited to those tactics. The correspondences between Hebron and East Flatbush are not a matter of mirroring or reducibility, but their strikingly similar timelines bring into focus key features at the intersection of militarization and neoliberal globalization. From Spain, to Greece, to Tunisia, to Egypt – and increasingly the United States and Canada – a pronounced shift in the management of nonviolent civil society movements has taken shape in recent years; one that casts democratic aspirations as a threat to security, and responds with overwhelming force. Perhaps more importantly, it’s a shift that puts Palestine and the methods of repression and justification refined on its population front and center – especially as they become key Israeli exports. …source