Iran Has Little to Do With Bahrain Protests
By Nima Tamaddon - Iran
23 Feb 11

Reporting on the protests in Bahrain has included some suggestions
that the mainly Shia demonstrators have gained inspiration from
neighbouring Iran.

IWPR’s Iran editor Nima Tamaddon discusses whether this is true, and
whether the claimed Tehran connection will colour the western response
to Bahrain’s version of the protests flaring across the Middle East.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There have been allegations that the Shia majority in Bahrain enjoys
Iranian backing, so that demonstrators in the island kingdom may not
ultimately be seeking to build a democracy. How accurate are
suspicions of an external element to these protests?
In my view, what we’re seeing is an allergic reaction to the word
“Shia”. The only external element here is the inspiration the
protesters in Manama have gained from uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt,
and even from the Iranian disturbances that followed the disputed 2009
election.

These protests in Bahrain are purely about democracy, rule of law and
human rights.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most of the protesters are Shia – do you see their actions as somehow
religious in tone?
No, this story can’t be reduced to a Sunni-versus-Shia narrative.

There’s no doubt that Shia concerns have been the main engine of
rebellion in Bahrain over the past two decades. Shia Muslims make more
than 70 per cent of the population, and it’s generally accepted that
they have faced discrimination in a country ruled by a Sunni dynasty.

However, many Sunni Muslims have taken part in the unrest alongside
the Shia. So it’s not a religion-based protest. It’s all about rule of
law and asking the administration to be accountable to its people.

>From the start, the demonstration was organised by a group of young
people using social media networks. It isn’t even clear whether they
were Shia or Sunni.

They began by pushing for a constitutional monarchy. In other words,
they were demanding a restriction in the absolute power of kings, not
the dismantling of the system.

Since the bloodshed, however, the demands have changed, with some
calling for an end to the entire system, others participation in the
reform process, and the launch of a national dialogue.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How do Shia Bahrainis view Iran?
They are not necessarily fans of the regime in Tehran, and it’s very
hard to conclude that they’re looking for an Iran-style Islamic
republic.

Tehran likes to pretend to be a role model, but in the case of Bahrain
there’s no evidence to suggest this is well-received. Of the six
senior Shia figures in Bahrain – all of whom have supported the
protests – the two leading figures, Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Ahmad Ghassem
and Sheikh Ali Salman, are regarded as moderates who oppose hardline
clerics. Last year, Ghassem was criticised by the Bahraini opposition
for urging people to vote in a parliamentary election.

There are also many families of Iranian origin in Bahrain, but as they
came from southern parts of Iran, they include Sunnis as well as Shia.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Wouldn’t Tehran have an interest in fomenting unrest in Bahrain?
Iran is certainly trying to gain leverage from the Bahraini unrest,
insofar as any kind of instability there is to its own advantage.
Bahrain hosts the US Navy Fifth Fleet and a major British naval force
in the Gulf, and is thus of crucial strategic importance to Washington
and London, for instance in facing down Iran over its nuclear
programme.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Isn’t it a bit risky for the Iranian regime to be encouraging a Shia
population in one place to rise up against its rulers, when it has no
intention of allowing something similar at home?
It isn’t necessarily a risk. Over recent weeks, the regime has been
encouraging people across the Middle East to stand up against their
governments – in Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan, Yemen and now Bahrain.

The discrepancy in approaches to dissent at home and abroad is
illustrated by the Iranian response to the Bahraini police’s pre-dawn
assault on sleeping protesters in Manama on February 17, in which at
least five people were killed. Very quickly, Ayatollah Nasser Makarem
Shirazi described the attack as a “massacre” and urged the
international community and Shia around the world “not to remain
silent about these heinous crimes”. This response contrasts sharply
with Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi’s silence on the brutal crackdown on
Iranian protesters in 2009. Despite appeals from opposition leaders
and activists, senior ayatollahs said nothing, apart from those
already known to back the Green Movement.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The West has very particular interests in Bahrain – naval bases
conveniently close to Iran, and the island’s location in the middle of
a key waterway used to transport the world’s oil. Does this make a
difference to the way the West is going to deal with this crisis,
compared with protests elsewhere?
I think the US has taken the right approach on this, by lending
support to the protesters’ demands and urging King Hamad bin Isa
Al-Khalifa to address those grievances. In my view, this is the main
reason why tensions in Bahrain have reduced. Since then, we’ve seen
that some of the protesters are still marching, people are discussing
the offer of a national dialogue, and the king has pardoned a number
of opponents. We can therefore conclude that the US mediating role has
saved lives.

If we are to believe WikiLeaks, it seems Washington has taken a
sceptical view of allegations of Iranian meddling in Bahrain.
According to a recently-released diplomatic cable, an American
diplomat in Manama said that despite being pressed to come up with
evidence, the Bahraini authorities had produced “no convincing
evidence of Iranian weapons or governmental money here since at least
the mid-1990s”.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JFD 
info" group.
To post to this group, send 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/jfdinfo?hl=en.

Reply via email to