|
22 March 2011 By Tariq Alhomayed US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the
Arab Gulf states are following the wrong track by
getting involved in Bahrain, with regards to the
dispatching of the Gulf Cooperation Council [GCC]
Peninsula Shield Force into the country to protect its
security. She also called on the Bahraini government
to open dialogue with the popular opposition. This statement, in itself, is strange, and causes
those monitoring the situation to wonder: is the US
Secretary of State well-informed about what is
happening on the ground in Bahrain? This is because
she is acting like the Iranian Foreign Minister,
rather than the US Secretary of State, for she
criticized Gulf troops being sent to Bahrain whilst
the White House's comment on this was that the
deployment of Gulf troops to Bahrain does not
represent an invasion. The entry of Peninsula Shield
Force troops into Bahrain has taken place according to
GCC agreements, and their mission is to maintain the
security of Bahrain's infrastructure, for these are
security forces, not military personnel! Of course,
the series of strange statements issued by US
Secretary of State Hilary Clinton does not stop here,
for she also said that the Gulf States were following
the wrong track by getting involved in Bahrain, and
this is despite all the clear and explicit [security]
agreements and conventions between the GCC states
which were signed more than two decades ago.
Therefore, how can the US Secretary of State, despite
all of this, criticize the GCC involvement in Bahrain,
but think it is permissible for herself to get
involved in Bahraini internal affairs? This is the
truly puzzling issue! What is even more curious is that the US Secretary
of State said – in the same interview – that "the Arab
countries, with their statements through the Arab
League last Saturday, made it very clear that they
wanted to see action so we need Arab leadership and
Arab participation in whatever the UN decides to do."
So how can the involvement of a country from the same
region [as Bahrain], united by international charters
and agreements, and a joint international body [the
GCC], be considered a mistake and something that is
undesirable, whilst at the same time Arab involvement
in Libya is not just desirable, but something that the
US has demanded? What can be more contradictory than
this? Of course, the questions regarding the US Secretary
of State's comments do not stop here, for is Hillary
Clinton not aware that the popular opposition in
Bahrain occupied the Salmaniya Medical Complex in
Manama and were only allowing Shiites to receive
treatment there? Did the US Secretary of State not
hear about the clashes that occurred in some Bahraini
schools between Sunni and Shiite students? Is the US
Secretary of State not aware that the entire country
has been paralyzed by this uprising? Isn't the US
Secretary of State aware that Bahrain is not just made
up of Shiite citizens, but that there are also Sunnis
there, and that therefore any demands for reform would
affect the composition of this country, and moreover
that Bahrain, or indeed any country, must follow a
national consensus, rather than a sectarian one? When the US Secretary of State talks about the
necessity of dialogue, and calls on the Bahraini
government to open dialogue with the opposition, is
she not aware the Bahraini government has been calling
on the Shiite opposition to sit down and engage in
dialogue since this crisis first began? The Bahraini
King mandated the Crown Prince to launch dialogue with
the opposition, and the only response from the
Bahraini opposition to this was rejection, indeed the
opposition escalated its demands, until these reached
the point of calls for the establishment of a Republic
of Bahrain. Therefore the best thing that can be said about the
statements made by US Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton – which are more like statements that we could
expect from the Iranian Foreign Minister – is that
these either indicate that she is not aware of what is
happening on the ground in Bahrain, or that the
objective of these statements is nothing more than to
score public opinion points – especially as they have
been issued after the security forces succeeded in
dispersing the demonstrators and liberating Bahrain's
main roads and the Salmaniya Medical Complex – or that
statements such as this reveal the degree to which
Washington is floundering in the region! Whatever the
reason, each one is worse than the last.
Tariq Alhomayed is the Editor-in-Chief of Asharq Al-Awsat, the youngest
person to be appointed that position. He holds a BA degree in Media studies from
King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah, and has also completed his Introductory
courses towards a Master's degree from George Washington University in
Washington D.C. He is based in London.
|