---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marx Laboratory <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, May 13, 2011 at 4:29 PM
Subject: Fascism in the Gulf
To: Marx Laboratory <[email protected]>



Fascism in the Gulf

By Lawrence Davidson

Welcome to Bahrain

May 11, 2011 "Information Clearing House" --If you want to see how an
ostensive religious regime can be corrupted into something close to
fascism, just take a look at contemporary Bahrain. In February 2011
there were a series of non-violent demonstrations staged mostly by the
small kingdom’s Shia majority (approximately 70% of the country’s
Muslim citizens.) These were held to protest the discriminatory
practices of the country’s Sunni monarchy. The protests were soon
violently suppressed by the Bahraini army and police, with the help of
troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. However, it was
what followed the crushing of the demonstrations that smacks of
fascism.


Here is how a report, dated 6 May 2011, by Roy Gutman of the McClatchy
Newspapers, puts it, "authorities have held secret trials where
protesters have been sentenced to death, arrested prominent mainstream
opposition politicians, jailed nurses and doctors who treated injured
protesters, seized the health care system that had been run primarily
by Shiites, fired 1,000 Shiite professionals and canceled their
pensions, beat and arrested journalists, and forced the closure of the
only opposition newspaper. Nothing, however, has struck harder at the
fabric of this nation, where Shiites outnumber Sunnis nearly 4 to1,
than the destruction of Shiite worship centers."


As an important aside that can only shake your faith in the
effectiveness of international law, it is to be noted that this
repression is being carried out by a regime that, as Stephen Lendman
tells us, "is a signatory to nearly every major international
humanitarian and human rights law, including: the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Convention Against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; and the
Convention of the Rights of the Child, among others." Signing such
instruments is an easy act of hypocrisy for most dictatorships and, as
we will see, the one in Bahrain treats them as a form of convenient
deception.

Sunnis and Shiites

Today, Shiites make up approximately 20% of the world’s Muslim
population and are particularly concentrated in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon
and Bahrain. The tension between Sunnis and Shiites has its roots in a
disagreement over the proper order of succession following the death
of the prophet Mohammad. As a consequence the Sunni majority has
always seen Shiites as not quite orthodox, and so has often treated
them in a discriminatory fashion. This led to over a 1000 years of
periodic struggle and competition, sometimes violent, between the two
sects. Though none of this has been as horrid or prolonged as the wars
of religion experienced by the Christian West, the potential for
comparable blood letting is there.


I think that there is little doubt that the prophet Mohammad would
strongly disapprove of this aspect of Muslim history. In his last
sermon to his followers, delivered during his final pilgrimage to
Mecca in 632 CE, he said, "Oh ye men, listen to my words and take them
to heart: every Muslim is a brother to every other Muslim and you are
now one brotherhood." Over the years this message has been disregarded
all too often.


The Bahraini regime, which happens to be Sunni, has certainly
forgotten this important message and treated their majority Shiite
citizenry as anything but brothers. And, just as in every other case
of prolonged discrimination, the result has been growing resentment.
The popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt served as incentives for
Bahrain’s Shiites to once more express their discontent in a
non-violent way. That the regime blames this all on Shia Iran is just
an excuse. It is the Bahraini monarchy’s prejudicial policies that
have brought about this situation--the truth is that King Hamad (the
present ruler), his family and rest of the kingdom’s ruling clique,
pursue bigoted policies and then call that government.


So when it comes to Bahrain, you can forget about the fact that this
is suppose to be a Muslim government. Islam has nothing to do with its
ruling policies. What you have is a minority regime which refuses to
reform its indecent and inhumane ways. It is going to hold on to power
by brute force and by doing so join the ranks of other regimes such as
Pinochet’s Chile, the military dictatorship that once massacred its
own people in Argentina, the death squad regimes of Central America,
ad nauseam. The next time King Hamad appears on the balcony of his
palace to address his supporters, the man standing next to him will no
doubt be the regime’s "Lord High Executioner." The probable candidate
for this position is Hamad’s uncle, Salman al Khalifa, who is 75 years
old and has been the country’s prime minister for forty years. As the
Gutman piece tells us, that is "a current world record." This is not a
Muslim Bahrain. This is a Fascist Bahrain.


And What of the United States?

What is the American connection to all of this? The US Fifth Fleet,
which patrols the Persian Gulf, is headquartered at a small 100 acre
naval base at Bahrain (the base is presently being enlarged). The US
has also designated Bahrain a "major non-Nato ally" and has a "defense
pact" with that country. Thus the United States is concerned about the
fate of Bahrain. It is reported that, at the time of the Egyptian
protests, President Obama told both the Bahraini and the Saudi regimes
that they should carry out major political reforms so as to prevent
similar unrest in their own countries. Both were aghast at this advice
and furious that the Obama administration abandoned the Mubarak
dictatorship. Obama has since been publically silent on the issue of
Bahrain. This is what happens when you climb into bed with dictators.
If you are not willing to walk away from them, you must turn a blind
eye to their behavior. Historically, this has not been a problem for
most American administrations. Abandoning Egypt’s Mubarak seems to be
an exception to the rule.


Ever since the Egyptian protests ousted Mubarak, Washington’s rhetoric
has been confusing. President Obama has often attempted to lay down
what sounds like basic principles – ones reflecting "who we
(Americans) are as a nation." That is the kind of language he invoked
to justify intervention in Libya. We were going to "protect civilians"
because that is who we are and that is what people like us do. Well,
if this is a basic principle, if we allegedly act in this humane way
as a function of who we are, should we not be consistent in our
behavior? What about the unfortunate Bahraini Shiites who are being
trampled in a fascist manner by a dictatorship every bit as bad, if
not worse, than the one in Libya? I could easily throw in a number of
other friendly regimes which have equal fascist potential such as
Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Syria and Iran don’t quite fit here because
they are presently not our friends. Obama, with his principled
rhetoric, has run into the inevitable problem of double standards. It
is the kind of problem that makes you want to be an isolationist.


However, there is supposedly too much at stake to just walk away from
a place like Bahrain. For one thing there is the issue of keeping
Middle East oil in "friendly" hands. And just how big an issue is
that? There is an old saying that has gone around Washington for
decades and it is framed in the form of the question, "what are the
Arab leaders who sit on a lot of oil going to do with it? Drink it?"
In other words, oil is a commercial product. It does not matter if the
Saudis or the Bahrainis or the Iraqis or the Iranians, etc. agree with
you or not. Whoever ends up in charge is going to sell their oil. So
why support dictatorial regimes? Why not back the protesters? We are
all for democracy, or so we claim.


Alas, this is about more than oil. The dictators we now back are
accepting of Israel and turn blind eyes to the destruction of the
Palestinian people. The democracies that might replace them are not
likely to feel the same way. We already have intonations of this in
post Mubarak Egypt. This situation has actually made undeclared allies
of Israel and bloody regimes such as that in Bahrain (King Hamad has
admitted cooperating with Israel). Israel, in turn, has one of the
strongest lobbies in Washington and, most of the time, shapes
America’s Middle East foreign policy, particularly in Congress. Then
there is our shared, if exaggerated, fear of Shia Iran. Israel and its
allied lobbies drive this fear forward in the US and our dictator
friends, like the Saudis and the Bahrainis, are also obsessed by it.


Remember, the protestors in Bahrain are overwhelmingly Shiite. If they
were successful, Bahrain would most likely be a place friendly toward
Iran. That would never do.


Conclusion

2011 is not the first time Bahrain’s Shiites have protested their
plight. There were protests throughout the 1990s which ended with the
proclamation of the National Action Charter promising equality of
opportunity for all. This statement of theory has obviously not been
sufficiently translated into practice. It turned out to be a
convenient deception–hence the 2011 troubles.

There is no reason to believe that the suppression of the 2011
protests marks the end of Bahrain’s problems. As noted, most of the
kingdom’s protests have been non-violent. However, with the fascist
tactics now adopted by the regime, non-violence is probably not going
to be the popular response next time around. It is simply the case
that, over time, the violence of the oppressed rises to the level of
the violence of the oppressor. The next time there will likely be
civil war in Bahrain.

Professor Lawrence Davidson - Department of History - West Chester University




-- 


You cannot build anything on the foundations of caste. You cannot
build up a nation, you cannot build up a morality. Anything that you
will build on the foundations of caste will crack and will never be a
whole.
-AMBEDKAR



http://venukm.blogspot.com

http://www.shelfari.com/kmvenuannur

http://kmvenuannur.livejournal.com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to