Powered by WebAds

Monday, February 21, 2011

Bahrain at a standoff

In Bahrain, protesters and the government have been at a standoff since the government - apparently under pressure from the United States - put its weapons away and allowed the protesters to occupy Pearl Square in the center of the country's capital, Manama.
The crown prince, Sheik Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa, continued to call for a national dialogue and period of mourning as a step toward reconciliation. But officials with the leading opposition party, the Shiite movement called Al Wafeq, said that with six people dead, one brain dead in the hospital, hundreds injured and many still missing, King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa would first have to convince them that he was willing to compromise after repeatedly unleashing his security forces on civilians.

The party called for the dismissal of the long-serving prime minister, Sheik Khalifa bin Salman al-Khalifa, and the appointment of an interim unity government.

“You can’t send your troops with machine guns, kill people and then expect to start a dialogue,” said Abdul Jalil Khalil Ebrahim, one of the 18 party members to withdraw from Parliament in protest over the deaths. “The cabinet has to go. This government has failed. How can we trust them in a dialogue?”

The government has repeatedly declined requests for comment or to make an official available for an interview. The crown prince’s office also did not respond to an interview request.

There are three main players besides the king in the royal family, part of the Sunni minority that controls the country. They are the crown prince, known as the most moderate among the group; the prime minister, who is said to be wealthy, but whose power has ebbed as popular anger at him has peaked; and the minister of the Royal Court, Sheik Khalid bin Ahmed al-Khalifa, known as the hard-liner of the three, opposition leaders say.

At the moment, the crown prince apparently has the upper hand in discussions among the king’s close aides, but opposition leaders say that the king has been known to play members of his inner circle against one another and that the dynamic could change at any time.
The longer this continues, the more tempted the government is going to be to start shooting protesters again.

What could go wrong?

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, November 26, 2010

Change! 'Further withdrawal of traditional British support for Israel'

This one seems to have escaped the media this week - at least here in Israel.

Queen Elizabeth visited Abu Dhabi this week and is heading to Oman from there. We knew that much already. What we may not have known is the context for this visit: An abandonment of what little support for Israel that Britain maintained and a hard shift to toeing the Arab line (Hat Tip: Russel H).
British foreign policy will change to reflect Arab concerns over the Middle East peace process as part of the Coalition's efforts to seal a strategic agreement with the Gulf during the Queen's visit to the region.

Whitehall officials said Foreign Secretary William Hague's decision to reach out to Gulf states in an effort to secure better diplomatic and trade ties meant Britain had to "take on board" Arab foreign policy goals.

Requesting better ties would be a two-way street, not just plea for more defence contracts and exports, they said.

"It will be a six lane highway with movement in both directions," said one diplomat. "We have to respond to what Gulf States want. If we want a long-term partnership on foreign policy, then changes in our stance have to be part of it."

The Queen arrived in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday, the capital of the United Arab Emirates, at the start of a five-day visit that will also take in Oman.

...

Officials in both Abu Dhabi and London make no bones about stressing the significance of the defence relationship as the West and its regional allies gear up to a possible confrontation with Iran.

That may mean yet further withdrawal of traditional British support for Israel, with criticism of its government already more marked under Mr Hague than it was under New Labour government.

In another indication of the Foreign Office's new sensitivity to Arab opinion, officials admitted to The Daily Telegraph that policies on the Israel-Lebanon war of 2006, Israel's invasion of Gaza in 2008-9, and its occupation of the West Bank and settlements policy were "motivators" for the Islamic radicalism that they confronted daily in the Gulf.
If you're all getting the impression that the only one left on our side is God, that's probably the impression you're supposed to be getting. Isn't it great when every country thinks it's a superpower? Aren't you glad that President Obama did away with the idea of American exceptionalism?

Here's a video of the Queen visiting a mosque in Abu Dhabi, dressed in a hijab and acting like a submissive dhimmi.

Let's go to the videotape.



It sounds like the royal wedding isn't the only change taking place in London these days. What could go wrong?

UPDATE 2:08 PM

British columnist Melanie Phillips discusses this story in her Friday column.
Really, Britain is displaying the geopolitical equivalent of an auto-immune disease – attacking its friends while embracing its destroyers. One could say that it was ever thus; with the rare exception of Christian Zionist leaders such as Arthur Balfour, Britain has always sided with the Arabs believing that its national interest has always lain with them rather than with the Jews. What’s so unforgiveable is that this is now happening against the backdrop of a global campaign to delegitimise Israel in order to soften up the world for its destruction. In other words, it’s the 1930s all over again; for Britain, history is being repeated not as farce but as tragedy.

For sure, there’s another side to this: Britain and Israel remain close allies in the intelligence sphere. But Israel should surely now regard Britain rather as it presumably regards Saudi Arabia – as a hostile entity with which it sometimes has to do business.
Read the whole thing.

Labels: , , ,

Google