04-25-2011, 09:13 AM
WE MUST SPEAK OUT ABOUT BRUTALITY IN THE GULF
The Observer Guardian.co.uk 17 April11
To have different levels of tolerance for different despots raises awkward questions. One obvious lesson for the west from recent upheaval in the Middle East is that propping up authoritarian regimes on the grounds that they make stable allies is a terrible policy.
The stability procured by despotism is an illusion. Brittle police states can contain, but never satisfy, a captive people's appetite for better lives. Eventually, they shatter and the more rigid the apparatus of repression, the more explosive the change when it comes.
That has been demonstrated clearly enough in North Africa and yet the west struggles to apply the lesson to the Arabian Peninsula. The contagious spirit of democratic springtime that provoked protests in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya also reached Bahrain, Yemen, Saudi Arabia. But there the west has been markedly less inclined to cheer it on.
The Observer carries the chilling testimony of a young Bahraini caught up in the small Gulf kingdom's brutal crackdown on civil dissent. It is a story that struggles to be heard as foreign media are increasingly denied access to the country and the local press is muzzled.
As many as 30 people are thought to have been killed as anti-government demonstrations have been violently suppressed. Hundreds of protesters have been detained and employees have been dismissed from state-owned enterprises in a move to purge dissent.
As our report makes clear, the unrest is increasingly sectarian in character. The Khalifa royal family and ruling elite are Sunni, while the majority of the population is Shia. That religious, cultural and economic division was politicised before the current crackdown, with the main parliamentary opposition coming from Shia parties. The government has flirted with a plan to ban those groups on the grounds of "disrespect for constitutional institutions". There has been widespread intimidation and abuse of Shia communities, carried out in part by security forces "invited" from neighbouring Saudi Arabia.
It would be unfair to say that the violence carried out by Bahraini authorities has passed entirely without comment from the UK. There have been pained expressions of discomfort and urgings of restraint on all sides.
Elsewhere in the region, those noises were precursors to more robust language. But in the Gulf there is a subtle difference of tone. In a statement to Parliament, William Hague, foreign secretary, was keen to recognise "important political reforms" which he welcomed in the context of "the long friendship between Bahrain and the UK".
Why does this Gulf regime get the benefit of the doubt when other authoritarian Arab rulers do not? Clearly, there is no question of intervention in Bahrain or in any other state where protest is being crushed. The entanglement in Libya leaves no appetite for giving active support, whether diplomatic or military, to other rebellions.
If only one villain in the region had to be singled out for attack, Colonel Gaddafi was surely the most deserving candidate. But to have different levels of tolerance for different despots still raises awkward questions about Britain's role in the region. It plainly compromises the government's credentials as an advocate for democracy.
There are many reasons for western reluctance to criticise Gulf rulers, but two stand out: oil and Iran.
The latter's aspirations to be a regional superpower, armed with nuclear weapons, is the source of perpetual anxiety in much of the Middle East and in every western capital. Iran has a proven record of exporting aggressive Shia fundamentalism, chiefly by sponsoring Hezbollah in Lebanon, but also by fomenting insurgency in southern Iraq. As a result, Sunni Arab regimes and their western allies assume Iranian mischief when Shia communities get restive – as in Bahrain.
That fear is eagerly stoked by the Gulf monarchies and emirates, largely without evidence, but safe in the knowledge that Washington and London are allergic to the suggestion of Tehran's advancing influence.
The main strategic bulwark against Iranian power is Saudi Arabia, which happens also to be the world's largest oil exporter. It is hardly a coincidence that the Saudis are keen buyers of British military exports and close partners in antiterrorism operations. It is easy enough to see the immediate utility of this relationship, but it is ultimately toxic. The Saudi regime is an unstable mix of ferocious religious zealotry and hypocritical monarchial decadence. It has no interest in or agenda for democracy and yet it is our key ally in the Middle East.
That partnership has a corrupting influence on commercial relationships and moral judgements. It is the reason why Saudi troops can enter Bahrain and carry out thuggish acts with impunity. Their weapons might well have been made in the UK. There is nothing new in the accusation that the west operates "double standards" in foreign policy. Plainly it does. The only defence is that inconsistency does not rule out an authentic aspiration to do the right thing, at least some of the time. It is surely better to encourage the spread of democracy where strategic calculations allow than to abandon it as a goal altogether because it cannot be universally applied.
That is not an excuse for turning a blind eye to repression in Bahrain. The policy contortions and contradictions Britain has been forced into in recent weeks must serve as a warning. Our reliance on regimes that fear and despise democracy is no more sustainable than those regimes are themselves stable. Weaning ourselves from that strategic dependency is the work of many years, possibly decades. But some exit route must be mapped.
Meanwhile, it is not sufficient to mutter only mild disapproval when our allies murder their citizens.When first confronted by Arab political revolutions, Britain vacillated, reluctant to abandon useful and grubby friendship with corrupt regimes. It should never have required such a complicated effort of calculation to support vocally and unequivocally those forces in oppressed societies who want civil rights, political pluralism and democracy. Having belatedly found that voice in North Africa, it would be a strategic error and a moral failure immediately to let it fall silent in the Gulf.
UK bankers take Bahrain to court over human rights 'violation'
Three British bankers detained in Bahrain for more than a year are taking the Gulf kingdom to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) over what they describe as “serious and systemic violations” of their rights. Alistair MacLeod, Anthony James and Cliff Giddings were held in Bahrain for nearly 17 months after Awal Bank, where they worked, collapsed in 2009, and have said they were the victims of an “arbitrary and illegitimate” travel ban. The men were allowed to leave Bahrain in December after a personal intervention by Salman bin Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa, the crown prince of Bahrain.
In papers filed with the UNHRC and seen by The Telegraph, the bankers said that their “gentleman’s agreement” with the Bahraini government not to take further action was “morally and legally void” because of the continued harassment by officials in the kingdom’s central bank.
“We regret having to do this, but the persistent behaviour of officials at the CBB [Central Bank of Bahrain] and the Public Prosecutor’s Office, who are behaving in a manner not as your King had led us to believe, leave us with no alternative,” wrote the men in a letter to Sheikh Khalifa bin Ali Al-Khalifa, the Bahraini ambassador to Britain.
Among the allegations made are that the prosecutors in Bahrain have suppressed documents that could exonerate the men over their role in the collapse of Awal Bank.
Bell Pottinger's Bahrain brief suspended amid country's crisis
Bell Pottinger's controversial work on behalf of the Economic Development Board of Bahrain has been suspended, PRWeek has learned.
The account, thought to be worth well in excess of seven figures annually, has been suspended during the three-month period of emergency rule declared last month. Bell Pottinger has come under fire from a small group of protesters for its work in Bahrain, which has seen violent uprisings in recent weeks. Lord Bell, chairman of Chime Communications, confirmed the suspension of the account, but stressed this did not necessarily point to a permanent disengagement.
'We had different contracts with the Bahrain government - most of them have been suspended,' he said. 'Clearly it is not possible to attract inward investment at this time.' He added that the situation would be revisited as and when the period of emergency rule ended and that the agency continued to work for a number of clients in Bahrain.
Meanwhile, Good Relations, part of the Bell Pottinger group, has won the UK and European consumer tech and b2b PR account for Research in Motion. The makers of BlackBerry previously used Hotwire
Escalating unrest in several Middle Eastern countries is sparking growing interest in the role PR agencies are playing on behalf of the region’s beleaguered governments. Facing particular scrutiny is the Government of Bahrain, which has retained Bell Pottinger for the past two years. The agency appears to have expanded its role since first being appointed to promote investment in the country; over the past week, it emerged that Bell Pottinger has helped set up a media centre to help journalists cover protests within the country. Bell Pottinger CEO Paul Bell confirmed that the agency represents Bahrain’s Economic Development Board (EDB) but declined to comment further, stating that the agency did not discuss its work for clients. Earlier today, protesters appeared outside the firm’s London HQ, attacking its work for the country.
Last year, The Guardian claimed that PR firms were making London the world capital of reputation laundering. Lobbyists in Washington DC, meanwhile, have also seen their work on behalf of foreign governments examined in detail. The launch of the media centre has attracted criticism among journalists, after a BBC producer was held for 15 hours at Bahrain International Airport. However, a source familiar with the situation said that the development represents a “highly atypical” response, “in the context of the region”. “This is unfamiliar territory,” said the source. “Governments in this region are used to controlling information. This has been a very credible response by the government of Bahrain, and highly atypical in the context of the region.”
“What people assume with PR agencies is their real business is burying the truth,” continued the source. “Not so – this is where you step out with as much real information as you can provide. It is the kind of thing you expect to see from a full-fledged democracy”. Mass protests are continuing in Bahrain today, after authorities released 308 political prisoners. The unrest has seen Bahrain’s credit rating downgraded but the Gulf Arab kingdom’s central bank governor Rasheed al-Marak has insisted there has been “no indication of major capital flight.”
In the US, State Department filings reveal that PR counsel for Bahrain’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is subcontracted by Bell Pottinger to Washington DC lobbying firm Qorvis. Meanwhile, the Holmes Report understands that last month Edelman New York began handling Bahrain’s EDB brief in the US.Qorvis, one of DC’s leading lobbying firms, also represents the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Equatorial Guinea. Another DC consultancy, The Livingston Group, has previously represented Libya.
According to this story, Bell Pottinger also handled some work for the Government of Egypt last year. Bell confirmed that his firm is no longer handling any Egyptian assignments of this nature. It has also emerged that the firm is representing exiled Libyan royal Muhammad Al-Senussi, the country’s crown prince. Bell Pottinger is one of a number of agencies that retain lucrative Middle East government contracts. Abu Dhabi’s Executive Affairs Authority retains Edelman as its primary PR agency, while Hill & Knowlton works Egypt’s IT Industry Development Agency and its General Authority for Foreign investment. Financial agencies such as Brunswick, FD and Citigate are also particularly active, handling assignments for the various financial centres and investment vehicles that are government-owned.
The Observer Guardian.co.uk 17 April11
To have different levels of tolerance for different despots raises awkward questions. One obvious lesson for the west from recent upheaval in the Middle East is that propping up authoritarian regimes on the grounds that they make stable allies is a terrible policy.
The stability procured by despotism is an illusion. Brittle police states can contain, but never satisfy, a captive people's appetite for better lives. Eventually, they shatter and the more rigid the apparatus of repression, the more explosive the change when it comes.
That has been demonstrated clearly enough in North Africa and yet the west struggles to apply the lesson to the Arabian Peninsula. The contagious spirit of democratic springtime that provoked protests in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya also reached Bahrain, Yemen, Saudi Arabia. But there the west has been markedly less inclined to cheer it on.
The Observer carries the chilling testimony of a young Bahraini caught up in the small Gulf kingdom's brutal crackdown on civil dissent. It is a story that struggles to be heard as foreign media are increasingly denied access to the country and the local press is muzzled.
As many as 30 people are thought to have been killed as anti-government demonstrations have been violently suppressed. Hundreds of protesters have been detained and employees have been dismissed from state-owned enterprises in a move to purge dissent.
As our report makes clear, the unrest is increasingly sectarian in character. The Khalifa royal family and ruling elite are Sunni, while the majority of the population is Shia. That religious, cultural and economic division was politicised before the current crackdown, with the main parliamentary opposition coming from Shia parties. The government has flirted with a plan to ban those groups on the grounds of "disrespect for constitutional institutions". There has been widespread intimidation and abuse of Shia communities, carried out in part by security forces "invited" from neighbouring Saudi Arabia.
It would be unfair to say that the violence carried out by Bahraini authorities has passed entirely without comment from the UK. There have been pained expressions of discomfort and urgings of restraint on all sides.
Elsewhere in the region, those noises were precursors to more robust language. But in the Gulf there is a subtle difference of tone. In a statement to Parliament, William Hague, foreign secretary, was keen to recognise "important political reforms" which he welcomed in the context of "the long friendship between Bahrain and the UK".
Why does this Gulf regime get the benefit of the doubt when other authoritarian Arab rulers do not? Clearly, there is no question of intervention in Bahrain or in any other state where protest is being crushed. The entanglement in Libya leaves no appetite for giving active support, whether diplomatic or military, to other rebellions.
If only one villain in the region had to be singled out for attack, Colonel Gaddafi was surely the most deserving candidate. But to have different levels of tolerance for different despots still raises awkward questions about Britain's role in the region. It plainly compromises the government's credentials as an advocate for democracy.
There are many reasons for western reluctance to criticise Gulf rulers, but two stand out: oil and Iran.
The latter's aspirations to be a regional superpower, armed with nuclear weapons, is the source of perpetual anxiety in much of the Middle East and in every western capital. Iran has a proven record of exporting aggressive Shia fundamentalism, chiefly by sponsoring Hezbollah in Lebanon, but also by fomenting insurgency in southern Iraq. As a result, Sunni Arab regimes and their western allies assume Iranian mischief when Shia communities get restive – as in Bahrain.
That fear is eagerly stoked by the Gulf monarchies and emirates, largely without evidence, but safe in the knowledge that Washington and London are allergic to the suggestion of Tehran's advancing influence.
The main strategic bulwark against Iranian power is Saudi Arabia, which happens also to be the world's largest oil exporter. It is hardly a coincidence that the Saudis are keen buyers of British military exports and close partners in antiterrorism operations. It is easy enough to see the immediate utility of this relationship, but it is ultimately toxic. The Saudi regime is an unstable mix of ferocious religious zealotry and hypocritical monarchial decadence. It has no interest in or agenda for democracy and yet it is our key ally in the Middle East.
That partnership has a corrupting influence on commercial relationships and moral judgements. It is the reason why Saudi troops can enter Bahrain and carry out thuggish acts with impunity. Their weapons might well have been made in the UK. There is nothing new in the accusation that the west operates "double standards" in foreign policy. Plainly it does. The only defence is that inconsistency does not rule out an authentic aspiration to do the right thing, at least some of the time. It is surely better to encourage the spread of democracy where strategic calculations allow than to abandon it as a goal altogether because it cannot be universally applied.
That is not an excuse for turning a blind eye to repression in Bahrain. The policy contortions and contradictions Britain has been forced into in recent weeks must serve as a warning. Our reliance on regimes that fear and despise democracy is no more sustainable than those regimes are themselves stable. Weaning ourselves from that strategic dependency is the work of many years, possibly decades. But some exit route must be mapped.
Meanwhile, it is not sufficient to mutter only mild disapproval when our allies murder their citizens.When first confronted by Arab political revolutions, Britain vacillated, reluctant to abandon useful and grubby friendship with corrupt regimes. It should never have required such a complicated effort of calculation to support vocally and unequivocally those forces in oppressed societies who want civil rights, political pluralism and democracy. Having belatedly found that voice in North Africa, it would be a strategic error and a moral failure immediately to let it fall silent in the Gulf.
UK bankers take Bahrain to court over human rights 'violation'
Three British bankers detained in Bahrain for more than a year are taking the Gulf kingdom to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) over what they describe as “serious and systemic violations” of their rights. Alistair MacLeod, Anthony James and Cliff Giddings were held in Bahrain for nearly 17 months after Awal Bank, where they worked, collapsed in 2009, and have said they were the victims of an “arbitrary and illegitimate” travel ban. The men were allowed to leave Bahrain in December after a personal intervention by Salman bin Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa, the crown prince of Bahrain.
In papers filed with the UNHRC and seen by The Telegraph, the bankers said that their “gentleman’s agreement” with the Bahraini government not to take further action was “morally and legally void” because of the continued harassment by officials in the kingdom’s central bank.
“We regret having to do this, but the persistent behaviour of officials at the CBB [Central Bank of Bahrain] and the Public Prosecutor’s Office, who are behaving in a manner not as your King had led us to believe, leave us with no alternative,” wrote the men in a letter to Sheikh Khalifa bin Ali Al-Khalifa, the Bahraini ambassador to Britain.
Among the allegations made are that the prosecutors in Bahrain have suppressed documents that could exonerate the men over their role in the collapse of Awal Bank.
Bell Pottinger's Bahrain brief suspended amid country's crisis
Bell Pottinger's controversial work on behalf of the Economic Development Board of Bahrain has been suspended, PRWeek has learned.
The account, thought to be worth well in excess of seven figures annually, has been suspended during the three-month period of emergency rule declared last month. Bell Pottinger has come under fire from a small group of protesters for its work in Bahrain, which has seen violent uprisings in recent weeks. Lord Bell, chairman of Chime Communications, confirmed the suspension of the account, but stressed this did not necessarily point to a permanent disengagement.
'We had different contracts with the Bahrain government - most of them have been suspended,' he said. 'Clearly it is not possible to attract inward investment at this time.' He added that the situation would be revisited as and when the period of emergency rule ended and that the agency continued to work for a number of clients in Bahrain.
Meanwhile, Good Relations, part of the Bell Pottinger group, has won the UK and European consumer tech and b2b PR account for Research in Motion. The makers of BlackBerry previously used Hotwire
Escalating unrest in several Middle Eastern countries is sparking growing interest in the role PR agencies are playing on behalf of the region’s beleaguered governments. Facing particular scrutiny is the Government of Bahrain, which has retained Bell Pottinger for the past two years. The agency appears to have expanded its role since first being appointed to promote investment in the country; over the past week, it emerged that Bell Pottinger has helped set up a media centre to help journalists cover protests within the country. Bell Pottinger CEO Paul Bell confirmed that the agency represents Bahrain’s Economic Development Board (EDB) but declined to comment further, stating that the agency did not discuss its work for clients. Earlier today, protesters appeared outside the firm’s London HQ, attacking its work for the country.
Last year, The Guardian claimed that PR firms were making London the world capital of reputation laundering. Lobbyists in Washington DC, meanwhile, have also seen their work on behalf of foreign governments examined in detail. The launch of the media centre has attracted criticism among journalists, after a BBC producer was held for 15 hours at Bahrain International Airport. However, a source familiar with the situation said that the development represents a “highly atypical” response, “in the context of the region”. “This is unfamiliar territory,” said the source. “Governments in this region are used to controlling information. This has been a very credible response by the government of Bahrain, and highly atypical in the context of the region.”
“What people assume with PR agencies is their real business is burying the truth,” continued the source. “Not so – this is where you step out with as much real information as you can provide. It is the kind of thing you expect to see from a full-fledged democracy”. Mass protests are continuing in Bahrain today, after authorities released 308 political prisoners. The unrest has seen Bahrain’s credit rating downgraded but the Gulf Arab kingdom’s central bank governor Rasheed al-Marak has insisted there has been “no indication of major capital flight.”
In the US, State Department filings reveal that PR counsel for Bahrain’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is subcontracted by Bell Pottinger to Washington DC lobbying firm Qorvis. Meanwhile, the Holmes Report understands that last month Edelman New York began handling Bahrain’s EDB brief in the US.Qorvis, one of DC’s leading lobbying firms, also represents the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Equatorial Guinea. Another DC consultancy, The Livingston Group, has previously represented Libya.
According to this story, Bell Pottinger also handled some work for the Government of Egypt last year. Bell confirmed that his firm is no longer handling any Egyptian assignments of this nature. It has also emerged that the firm is representing exiled Libyan royal Muhammad Al-Senussi, the country’s crown prince. Bell Pottinger is one of a number of agencies that retain lucrative Middle East government contracts. Abu Dhabi’s Executive Affairs Authority retains Edelman as its primary PR agency, while Hill & Knowlton works Egypt’s IT Industry Development Agency and its General Authority for Foreign investment. Financial agencies such as Brunswick, FD and Citigate are also particularly active, handling assignments for the various financial centres and investment vehicles that are government-owned.