Alarm at Shia gains in Bahrain’s elections
By Kim Sengupta
Belfast Telegraph
28 November 2006A radical Shia Islamist group has made significant gains in Bahrain’s national elections, raising serious concern among neighbouring conservative Sunni monarchies in the region.
Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society has won 16 of the 40 seats in parliament and the party declares that its gains are even more significant than the figures suggest, because it had won all but one of the seats it had contested.
The outcome of the polls has had international reverberations. Bahrain is the base of the US Navy’s 5th Fleet and one of the clutch of pro-Western states in the area. Developments here have been watched with trepidation in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.
Bahraini officials accuse Iran of interfering in the elections by bankrolling Shia parties and even giving some factions arms training – claims strongly denied by Tehran.
Shias, who make up 60 per cent of the population of the kingdom, protest that they are economically underprivileged and have long been sidelined from the political process.
Government officials pointed out that the Shia party had targeted just the constituencies where it had a power base and had run a sectarian campaign. The opposition gains, they insisted, showed that the electoral process has been fair. Liberal candidates got a poor share of the votes.
I looked up the author on Google, and found a link with all of her (or his?) articles on a site called WorldSecurityNetwork and just the titles she uses stopped me from going further. It seems that it is someone who fancies themselves as “an expert”, and of course they are, their “analysis” in the article posted above vouches for their expertise.
That really doesn’t concern me at all. What does concern me is – if indeed the quotes from our government officials is true – that we are in for a very rocky four years, and based just on the spirit of this article, I would be extremely shocked if this parliament actually goes the full term. Of course if this parliament is cut short (again), then chaos will ensue and we all would lose Bahrain. Maybe for ever.
What is to be done now?
Turn a blind eye and hope for the best? Continue to stoke the fires of sectarianism? Throw hurdles in the path of a parliament that hasn’t even convened and hope for it to flounder? Or should we fight this fire intelligently and put our hands together and look forward to a good life, a good Bahrain, and good social cohesion completely away from sectarian tensions?
I think the answer is quite apparent.
However, the parliament as it stands at this very moment is composed of traditional foes, not because of the presence of Shi’a in this parliament who cannot be defined – by any stretch of the imagination – as “extreme” as our good writer above suggests, but by those who have already demonstrated their extremism the world over, not just by actions in the previous assembly. So far we have nine of those gentlemen gracing our yet-to-be inaugurated parliament.
The scary thing is that there is no buffer between the two groups and without that buffer, I’m afraid tension will ensue and all it will take is a stupid remark to set the course of animosity for at least four years in parliament, and much more importantly, throughout the society. This benefits no one.
One would think even without the astonishing report above and its extremely fragile and fear mongering conclusions that the powers that be in this country would have evaluated that situation; scratch that, let us forget about the powers that be for a moment, The people themselves should have thought of this conclusion while they were electing these new politicians and strived to provide that buffer. That buffer of course by definition cannot be anything but liberals and independents who will act not only as a bridge between the two camps, but as importantly, provide the voice of reason and allow the agenda to be set to serve the country and its people, concentrate on the real issues of business, economy, education, tourism, services, industry and the myriad of factors which are the main concerns of a modern country.
Not having that centrist liberal influence might well give rise to nothing but sectarian tensions and we all know, from very close examples, where that could take this country to.
It is time, my friends, to tell the whole world that we are Just Bahraini. It is time to put our hands together and forget our differences and work very hard, much harder than we imagined, at ensuring that we do not fall into the pit of sectarianism. It behooves us to ensure that this parliament does not descend into chaos and fist fights.
To make this effective, we need to translate this unity into practical terms and I think the best way of doing so is to continue to monitor parliament’s performance, to ensure that our MPs are held accountable and that if their veer from the right path then we should be ready and willing to show our concern by writing and talking to them to tell them that we are watching them and that we will not stand for this country to be used as a scapegoat in lieu of closed or very narrow minds.
We cannot afford to fail. And we cannot afford to allow the forces of darkness and doubt take over.
Comments
I read this article in the independent newspaper,UK earlier today, I felt so sick and disgusted. I am pretty sure that this journalist has been paid to say what he said. the wording of this article reflects that. nothing has been mentioned about the election it self, nothing has been mentioned about AL-Wefaq history for the last 20 years or so, before during and after its establisment. Nothing has been mentioned about the agenda of the opposition, nothing!
Whoever this journalist is,he ionly serves one thing, the government, not the people.
Looks like this Kim guy is a hired gun. William Bowles has ripped Kim Sengupta a few new holes to contend with when he dissected one of his “articles” about Al-Qa’ida.
Any bets on who paid him to write this?
Anyone.. Anyone?
Our brother Mahmood,
We do not know : Are you political analyst or expert in computer or an expert in agriculture or an expert in cars or or or !!!!!!!!
Our brother Mahmood, every day we read analysis from you and we not know what you wanted !!!!!!!
😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod:
Hey Hassan Ali, I can tell you one thing. You sure aren’t an expert in grammar. fa fa! 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆
Hassan ali is probably the troll who keeps changing his name from time to time.
He has all the marks to prove it – poor grammar, over-use of animated smilies at the end and general stupidity.
Piss off =).
I knew Kim Sengupta about fifteen years ago when he was, mainly, a crime reporter for a middle-market tabloid. He had one or two very good sources in Scotland Yard and a good basis of mutual trust with them, so he had a small string of exclusive stories, and inside information about others.
Now he writes for the Independent, a broadsheet newspaper with a pronounced political bias that affects everything they publish. The key part of the piece you quoted is: “Bahrain is the base of the US Navy’s 5th Fleet and one of the clutch of pro-Western states in the area. Developments here have been watched with trepidation in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.”
It is difficult to describe the political stance of The Independent, but it is anti-American, anti-moderation in Islam; it supports Islamic extremists and will accept Iraq style chaos in any Middle Eastern country if that helps with its pre-existing agendas. It is deeply sympathetic to the bizarre and sinister alliance that has formed between hard left Socialists and the Jihadis.
Sengupta, like any professional journalist, is probably just following the editorial line of his employer, just as he followed the old-fashioned conservative line of the newspaper that employed him when I knew him. That makes him a good, professional journalist.
What sort of human being it makes him is, of course, a different matter.
Mahmood,
Part of the problem the way I see it is that there is no Bahraini political party that best resembles your/our hopes… or is there?
Where is the Bahraini political party committed to human rights, non-sectarianism, and the rest? If there is none, perhaps the proper course of action is to try and create one.
-Ibn
The bottom line is that the gains made by the opposition party, coming after so many decades of sectarian repression for family and religious reasons, means that there is bound to be conflict ahead.
Here is how the future will pan out.
The opposition, which to be fair does have some radical Islamic elements sprinkled in it from offshore locations, will attempt to force the ruling clique to make changes.
They will not succeed so supporters will continue to take to the streets over the coming years.
Khalifas will play the “Iranian Infiltration card†and send out their usual private armies to crack heads.
The status quo will not change.
The Khalifas will continue to rule Bahrain as a personal fiefdom unless forced to do otherwise.
Force can only come from external sources but there is no force capable of threatening Bahrain until Iran goes nuclear.
Then successful pressure will be put on Bahrain’s allies by Iran to force changes in Bahrain, giving Shias greater power in the control of the State.
Power may be then given to the majority in Bahrain but if it is power with Islamic fundamentalism attached, Bahrainis would be swapping one set of despots for another.
Not a very palatable prospect either way.
“The scary thing is that there is no buffer between the two groups and without that buffer, I’m afraid tension will ensue and all it will take is a stupid remark to set the course of animosity for at least four years in parliament, and much more importantly, throughout the society. This benefits no one.”
I’m afraid this is yet another case of huge risks that come with multiculturalism, other than the feel-good variation where everyone shares the same liberal fundamental values and where differences between groups are largely cosmetic. Later in your piece you wish for a stronger Bahraini identity to prevent sectarian tensions. It makes a lot of sense.
Sometimes there is no reasoning to be had.
Sometimes split societies just have to fight themselves to a standstill.
Bahrain is like an Arabic Northern Ireland, rife with sectarianism.
There is no forseeable solution in sight
Of course there is a forseeable solution! Everything has a solution. The Northern Irland case is a bunch of hard heads bouncing off each other and no brains in those heads to even TRY to find a solution. Britian is where ALL sectarianism & racism originated. Brits still think their better than others. If it werent for the Brits there wouldnt have been any sectarianism in Bahrain. There never was until their rule in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. Four decades was enough for Belgrave to do the damage.
Now its up to us to stop this British ideology and go back to our lives.
Western Commentator,
… Umm… the “risk of multiculturalism”? … Have you made a typo? What we need is more, not less multicultularism. In fact I would say part of the problem is that there isnt enough multicultularism in Bahrain, and the rest of the middle east. From Israel to Bahrain, its all about which sect you belong to, and what your tribe did to my tribe 1000 years ago.
There is a need for greater multicultularism in our countries. Strength through diversity. There needs to be a celebration of all our cultures – not xenophobic political platforms based on my “superiour” culture trumping yours.
-Ibn
Honestly, I don’t see how Bahrain can be compared to Iraq, just because we have Sunnis and Shiaa who I guess yes have voted among secretarian lines, but still. Not everyone did, a lot of Shiaa voted for Abul, Fakhro, etc… and a lot of Shiaa I’m sure voted for Salman bin Sager. In Bahrain, especially this time around both parties want this to work and progress more than anything else… We have a Crown Prince that wants reform and has pushed for Education, Labor, and Economic reforms. I honestly see his work complemented by this parliament and by Al-Wefaq. We are becoming less and less reliant on Government spending for economic growth, and even if we look at business startup, the fact that licenses to open various businesses from hotels and telecom, and even the mean industry are not monopolized among a few. So we have come a long way, and hopefully we will move even faster now …. I’m hopeful I’m a Sunni but I work and studied with Shiaa all my life.. I don’t live in Iraq where Saddam Hussein has terrorized Kurds and Shiaa with chemical weapons, or where regions would break and maintain more natural resources among secretarian lines etc… I live in a little place where everyone knows everyone… and where I identify with being a Bahraini above anything else. I am proud we have so many newspapers even if we have the idiot Jamal Dawood at the MOI….yes we’ve got glitches but the glass is half full from my point of view.
Ali M says
If it werent for the Brits there wouldnt have been any sectarianism in Bahrain.
Ibn says
In fact I would say part of the problem is that there isn’t enough multicultularism in Bahrain, and the rest of the middle east. From Israel to Bahrain, its all about which sect you belong to, and what your tribe did to my tribe 1000 years ago.
I vote for Ibn
I second the motion.
Both Hassan Ali’s worst nightmare and Chimi^ is a cover names for ouer Brother Mahmood (expert)in
😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod: 😆 :grinnod:
“Western Commentator,
“”I’m afraid this is yet another case of huge risks that come with multiculturalism,””
“… Umm… the “risk of multiculturalismâ€Â? … Have you made a typo? What we need is more, not less multicultularism.”
No, that was not a typo.
“In fact I would say part of the problem is that there isnt enough multicultularism in Bahrain, and the rest of the middle east.”
Well, either there is a semantic problem or we just genuinely disagree.
“From Israel to Bahrain, its all about which sect you belong to, and what your tribe did to my tribe 1000 years ago. ”
Exactly. Too much multiculturalism – the serious kind in which people identify more strongly with their separate cultures than the land which they were born (=nationalism).
What the Middle East needs more than anything else is nationalism. Isreal has the strongest sense of nationhood of all Middle Eastern countries. The Jewish nation is big abstract tribe as opposed to its neighbouring Arab countries where extended family ties still matter in a very concrete sense. When extended family loyalties are stronger than nationalism, trustworthy institutions cannot emerge. Israel is a fully modern nation state, which explains its economic and military superiority compared to it’s neighbours.
“There is a need for greater multicultularism in our countries. Strength through diversity. There needs to be a celebration of all our cultures – not xenophobic political platforms based on my “superiour†culture trumping yours.”
I’m sorry to say but the paragraph above sounds more like high-faluting idealism than well-grounded political realism.
Diversity breeds disagreement. In soft-core multiculturalism, differences are about superficial things like dress, cuisine, holidays, or music. Such differences have hardly any serious public policy implications, and are easily accommodated by basic civility, tolerance, and mutual consideration. In hard-core multiculturalism, differences are about the fundamental organizing principles of public matters. Separate countries exist to accommodate such differences. Iraq and Lebanon remind us of the risks involved when factional loyalties supercede national ones.
Hassan Ali (IF THIS IS YOUR NAME?)
Be a bit more grown up. Anyway why do you call him brother ?
“Not Mahmood”
=D
Just ignore him, otherwise all this is doing is encouraging him!
Western Commentator,
…. ? So too much multiculturalism = judging me by what my tribe did to yours eons ago, and my sect?
Yes, this is a semantic disagreement. Your definition is the reverse of the mainstream. And I subscribe to the mainstream meaning of it.
Now I dont pretend to be a linguist, but the word multicultural, strongly indicates embracing other cultures, and accepting others. (example: “So and so is very multicultural”). Being hostile to them just because they are culturally different, and judging individuals on their sect, cultural background is the opposite of embracing them. And the Mid-East we do the latter quite alot. We are not too multiculturally accepting. (At least on the political arena – its a very different story in interpersonal and social interactions).
Yes. The political-realism is that multiculturalism is not there, and the “high faluting” idealism wishes that it is. Gotta start somewhere.
-Ibn
“…. ? So too much multiculturalism = judging me by what my tribe did to yours eons ago, and my sect?”
Not quite.
“Yes, this is a semantic disagreement. Your definition is the reverse of the mainstream. And I subscribe to the mainstream meaning of it.”
The way I see it, the adjective multicultural used of a country or simply describes a condition where several distinct cultures co-exist in the same country (in practice, usually under the same jurisdiction).
“Now I dont pretend to be a linguist, but the word multicultural, strongly indicates embracing other cultures, and accepting others. (example: “So and so is very multiculturalâ€Â). Being hostile to them just because they are culturally different, and judging individuals on their sect, cultural background is the opposite of embracing them.”
That use of the word is propagandistic because it puts a positive spin to a neutral descriptor of a fact, sometimes totally contra-factually.
“And the Mid-East we do the latter quite alot. We are not too multiculturally accepting. (At least on the political arena – its a very different story in interpersonal and social interactions).”
Yes, you Middle Easterners are generally not very multiculturally accepting. But your societies are often multi-cultural. For instance, all Gulf countries have both signifigant numbers of shiites and sunnis living in them (not entirely sure about UAE or Oman). Iran is signifigantly multi-ethnic. And finally, we have the horrible messes of Iraq and Lebanon, both of which have the greatest religious and ethnic diversity of all Middle Eastern countries.
Western Commentator,
But close enough to draw attention to the fact that your definition 180 degrees out of step with the word’s general usage, and meaning. 🙂
Well yes, in the context of a country. “This country is multicultural”. But we are talking in the context of people. Specific people in fact: Politicians. So what we mean when we say we need more multiculturalism, is that politically, our politicians need to stop judging others based on their cultures, and demonizing others who happen to be from a different culture, tribe or sect. This is the meaning when this word is used in this context pertaining to people. Thus, they need to be more multi-cultural-tolerant. More multicultural, for short.
In that case, I will ask that you not phrase this following sentence you wrote in this propagandistic way:
Afterall, its puts a negative spin (all-you-middle-easterners) to a neutral descriptor of a fact (not multiculturally accepting), sometimes contra-factually (our social/personal norms).
Instead, I would ask that you be more specific next time (MidEast governments/politicians), instead of damning the lot of us for being xenophobes, because we are Middle Eastern.
So going back to the word multicultural, ‘spin’ comes from the context and usage otherwise neutral words are being used in. Take another adjective, “fat” for example. One can say:
Ugh! Look at her! She’s so fat!
Here one has put a negative spin on the word “fat”, because our hypothetical girl cant say no to twinkies.
But one can also say:
You are recovering, so we need you to gain more fat and strengthen your immunity.
Here “fat” is getting a positive rep, because its adding to our hypothetical patients’ vitality after an operation.
As you can see, there is nothing “propagandic” about adding spins to neutral adjectives such as “fat” – we do it all the time, just as how it is not “propagandic” to use the neutral adjective “multicultural”, and ask our politicians to be multicultural, especially for the purpose of learning how to tolerate and accept all our diverse and rich sects, tribes and ethnicities.
-Ibn
“”Yes, you Middle Easterners are generally not very multiculturally accepting.”
Afterall, its puts a negative spin (all-you-middle-easterners) to a neutral descriptor of a fact (not multiculturally accepting), sometimes contra-factually (our social/personal norms”
I said “generally not very multiculturally accepting”, not “all-you-Middle-Easterners”.
But in any case, I agree with you that it would help a lot of more people (including politicians) were more accepting of other cultures, sects of whatnot. A stronger sense of local or national identity would help. Mahmood’s slogan “Just Bahraini” works toward that end because it downplays sectarian differences and emphasizes local identity.
Hi Mahmood
Why don’t you put up the link for the FT article (p7) from yesterday’s edition —- things are looking too bright.
I’m stuck in London and missing Bahrain a lot.
Johnster
where did THAT flag come from????? need to change it — how?? =O
Fly to Bahrain! That’s how you would change the flag.
I didn’t know that there was another article in the FT. I’ll go on the web and check. Post a link just in case if you can.
thanks
You mean this one?
Yep, that’s the one. Ach, it’s 4.30, drak outside and chilly. The skies are leaden and the underground is full of grey commuters. :no:
Looking forward to coming back home then? :yes:
Western Commentator,
Yes, I know you didnt say it. But the ambiguity inherent in the statement “Yes, you Middle Easterners are generally not very multiculturally accepting.” is what gives rise to the ‘spin’ on a normally neutral observation. And in this case, negative spin.
“you Middle Easterners” is what? All of us? Some of us? Few of us? Politicians? People in the street? People over 40? Hairstylists? What?
“generally not very multiculturally accepting” means what? What does it mean to generally-not-be-very- multiculturally-accepting? Does it mean you balk at the sight of a foreign tribe member? Does it mean you do not deal with people of other cultures at all? Does it mean you deal with them but deal with them badly? Does it mean you talk behind their backs?
Just about all possibilities are negative statements, even though we deal with our multitude of ethnicities and cultures amongst ourselves all the time, on personal and social levels. (In your own words, “contra-factual”).
This is why it is important to be very specific in matters such as this.
Yup.
-Ibn
That will be a “YES”, Mahmood.
With my new Apple bought in NYC!
woohooo! one more for the mac club! welcome above convert! :grinnod:
im getting me an imac once im back too. sick of windows =(