21 Oct, 2013 –
Response to the Independent’s article “Tear-gas shells replace the Pearl as the symbol of Bahrain” by Patrick Cockburn
The Independent article “Tear-gas shells replace the Pearl as the symbol of Bahrain” intentionally misinterprets pieces of information in an attempt to support the writer’s hypothesis that the Government has turned Bahrain into a “repressive police state”.
The same process could be followed for any country in the world: If you put together every bad story circulated in the global media about Great Britain for example, it would end up sounding like a terrible place to live!
Far from the author’s description of a protest movement, which has “not been cowed by persecution”, we could count on the fingers on one hand the number of times significant numbers of protesters have turned out over the past six months.
The opposition spent months building up to a much-hyped “rebellion” event in mid-August, but on the big day, only a small number of people turned out in isolated areas, despite a notably low-key police presence.
The author has relied on numerous conveniently anonymous opposition voices making allegations of police brutality. For example, one unnamed opposition “journalist” declares: “Basically everything is banned”. So how does an opposition newspaper like Al-Wasat get away with criticizing the Government day after day? How come Al-Wefaq’s Khalil Marzouq was permitted to make continual public speeches and media interviews for over two years prior to his detention, which happened only after associating himself with the 14 February Coalition which has declared its responsibility for a series of violent attacks?
Yes, there are people in prison. But what Government doesn’t lock up people who throw Molotovs at police, destroy property and manufacture bombs? The Government has indeed made mistakes, and some of the measures it has taken have been highly controversial; but this doesn’t justify the highly partisan, naïve and extremely unfair portrayal of the situation in Bahrain that Patrick Cockburn presents to us.
Mr. Cockburn appears shocked that Bahrain is purchasing tear gas. However, we would ask what he would suggest when the Interior Ministry sends small teams of police officers into riot zones against well-armed youths? Each month tens of police officers are hospitalized in such encounters. How should they be protecting themselves so as to maintain order? With water pistols?
The article wrongly states that journalists are not permitted entry to Bahrain. Only a month ago, the BBC’s Bill Law broadcast an hour long documentary, mainly filmed from some of the notorious areas of unrest. However, we would advise the Bahraini authorities to be more proactive in facilitating the entry of journalists and human rights monitors, if only to allow them to see for themselves how normal and calm most of Bahrain actually is and to counter the ridiculous propaganda of the opposition.
Sadly left-wing writers like Mr. Cockburn take their starting point from the misguided attitude that a Monarchial system – even Bahrain’s Constitutional Monarchy with its developing Parliamentary system – is a horribly outdated idea that should be swept away at the earliest opportunity.
However, after the disastrous experiments with democracy in Egypt, Libya, Yemen and elsewhere, more care should be taken to look at what alternative the revolutionary opposition is putting forward.
Al-Wefaq Islamic society; the biggest opposition grouping which held nearly half the Parliamentary seats before its 2011 walk out; is dominated by hardline clerics like Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim and Sheikh Ali Salman. We shouldn’t be looking to such radical and extremist figures to bring about a model “democratic republic” in Bahrain.
Upon his accession to the throne a decade ago, King Hamad, ushered in the highly progressive National Action Charter “constitutional amendments”; approved in popular referendum by 98.4% of the population. The King’s reform process identified and promoted tolerant and progressive figures who put Bahrain on a reformist and moderate path.
Alternatively, we could cite the Crown Prince who has done more than any Bahraini to promote the National Dialogue and Reconciliation processes. Prince Salman’s role was enhanced by his recent appointment as Deputy Prime Minister, giving him a powerful executive role to expedite reform – a move that was welcomed by the opposition, because of Prince Salman’s unique reputation as a moderate and conciliatory figure.
So instead of writing tedious and recycled articles citing every shortcoming by Bahrain’s authorities, journalists should take a realistic look at the leadership’s efforts to revitalize and renew the political system; while also making a critical examination of the opposition’s shady liberal and democratic credentials. This may help them understand why the vast majority of Bahrainis – Sunni and Shia alike – have distanced themselves from an intolerant, sectarian and backwards protest movement.