In the abscense of politics
A new world order might be a positive step forward; it depends on who is dictating it. Of course, America although in supposed decline, still holds the reigns as far as World Leader, No. Uno Imperialist regime and despot. While it is a “democracy”, it is not most people’s idea of an ideal government or moral authority, not any longer. Several years, I think after 911 the blinders came off for most thinking people and most thinking Americans, who are at least outwardly not afraid to admit it, or take a publicly moral stand. Not everyone is cut from the same cloth, and no one believes exactly the same as another. We are like our fingerprints, that way. But think about this, what would be likely to fill the vacuum, in America? If not a democratic government, or at least not a republican or democrat’s government, no left or right, or even centre, what will be the New Order (this could be as far off as you like; kind of an Orwellian future, but without North and South as the steady constellations we see now) in world politics, or without politics (I mean no political debate)? If they could have a menu, what would most Americans choose in a new world order? Buddhism? Unlike countries with monarchies, I’ve noticed this, Americans can’t agree on anything. They never choose a President who can remain popular with anybody for very long, or that’s the impression we are always left with, as outsiders. After the Kennedys did Americans decide that there was no person to fill the shoes of JFK, or Robert? Is that why no woman has yet been President? To be fair to some of the past Presidents, maybe they were fighting an uphill battle, think Bill after Monica, you might know what I mean.
On the other hand, with some pride, I say that monarchies seem to do better and always remain popular with the majority of the people. Being from Canada, I recall a portrait of the British Queen in every grade school, usually in a corridor, in an angle where it would be visible even on school’s closed days. I can say that it never bothered me when I was young. In high schools we also had a portrait, at least in the principal’s office, an imposing reminder of our own dilemma as students. Sure, as we got older and more free thinking, we questioned why Canada still had a Queen; we were told by our Grade 11 History teacher one of the special benefits of being an independent (British appendage) is that if Hitler, or someone of his ilk, ever tried to override the authority of the legal government and put in place a dictatorship, that Queen Elizabeth would write a letter (probably a decree) or merely command the army, “We…” to capture and kill the audacious madman. It was a good enough reason in my view, and I never bothered about the seemingly under-democratic or lack-of-modernity facet again. While most democracies, Western states, and much of the rest of the free world, seem to loathe the oil producing nations’ royal families, (with the exception of George Bush, George Bush senior, the Bush family, in general, and probably countless of their friends who have benefitted from the Georges’ tight relationship with the Al Saud family), most of the Muslim citizenry in those countries, the original inhabitants, and especially the Sunni majority populations, respect and encourage the monarchy. Even about an issue as benign as women driving, many Saudis, and Saudi women still believe it is their duty to support and adhere to the decision of the Islamic Government, the legitimate ruler in their view, be it represented by the King, the royal court or the legitimate heads of government, whether local or national. Thus, even when it comes to a debate about elections, whether or not women should be voting in local elections, or any elections, it is the government which decides, and the decision being final, most Saudis willingly submit. Being mostly Sunni Muslims in Saudi Arabia, it is natural, that a patriarchal system still exists and dominates. While many women might complain about fewer freedoms compared to other women in other parts of the world, including the most dictatorial and extremist theocracy, Iran, at the same time, they must realize that their nation has been blessed with great wealth, some of which they are the recipients as well. I think anyone would be hard-pressed to find homeless or penniless Saudi women with no one to support them. It is really unimaginable. While there are drug addicts, and alcoholics aplenty these days, which is likely to erode family structure and close family ties, these are symptoms of the decay in society, which resulted from the misuse of wealth and openness to and easy acceptance of outside cultural influences, not from the desperation or dissatisfaction which lack of means, or materialism, respectively, that often leads to addictions in other societies, like in the West are the mitigating reasons.
Other Muslims might be heard to complain on occasion, with some jealousy, that they wish they were rich, or could share some of that wealth, which belongs to ALL the Muslims. Even in Bahrain, there are very many poor local people - not (only) among the Shias, but also in the Sunni population. However, on the bright side, the government has often stepped in and even, individual members of the Al-Khalifah have offered their personal wealth, or in the case of the government, made provisions for low-cost housing, or temporary low rents, (supplementing incomes by paying a remarkable 80% of the cost of rent) for poor families. Some modest, or above average income families are victim to the corruption of officials who will try to help their own relations, or close personal friends, even if it means infringing on the rights of others. For example, there are building codes - how high, or how much - and one of the sticky problems is a stipulation that a building owner (upon receipt of his permit) must allow some of his land, bought with his money, for the placement of one of those electrical stores (with a warning attached to call in case the red light is on/off?). If he doesn’t like this, he will usually go to one of his well-connected friends and try to get out of the stipulation, so someone else in the neighborhood, in effect another person in this situation, will have to accept the electricity box on his property, and lose some space which he would prefer to use for something else, like a garage, or another small store. If however, he is unsuccessful and continues to refuse, he will be hard-pressed to get electricity in his building, or any of his shops. He won’t be able to rent his apartments, or shops, and will be forced, eventually, to submit or leave his property empty and of no present or future benefit. So, even then we see that it wouldn’t be easy to try to get around the law.
Despite the drawbacks, many would agree that the benefits out way those. There are ne’er any homeless, even in Bahrain, among the desperately poor. Most children are in school, which is mandatory. There are many places, societies, and charities to offer assistance. There are training, and retraining programs, supported or maintained by the government, even programs for women who have not had the opportunity, or for some other reason not studied formally in any institution before. Of course, failing even these, there are caring neighbours who will gladly provide for hungry or needy people if they are aware of the situation. More visible, are the poor residents from other countries trying to improve their situation back home by working for often meager wages. For these unfortunates there is some aid and support, again from societies or charities, but fewer opportunities, perhaps than what Bahrainis can receive. Often some of the guest workers are here on illegal visas. These problems and more are quite well known, and generally understood by the population to be “a fact of life”, however sad.
How horrific it was then, in March and April, following the demonstrations in the Pearl roundabout and in Manama, as well as in other-lying districts, that a Bangladeshi man was brutally beaten, and killed. That some others of different nationalities were likewise attacked for being non citizens, or most likely, because their attackers also took them for Sunni Muslims, (whether or not they were), frightening the rest of the populations in those areas, and generally causing mayhem and an unsettled environment; perpetrating the most heinous of crimes (five actual murders) and causing an unacceptable situation which cannot stand.
The fact that Bahrain requested, or permitted some of the Saudi armed forces to enter, not “storm” the Kingdom, and help her deal with this inside threat, terrorism really, to protect not only its own citizens, but these very weak and easily targeted citizens of other countries who in fact had nothing to do with any of the Shias complaints against the government. They were beaten, or killed merely to frighten everyone else, and served as easy targets on which to vent the Shias’ misplaced anger and frustration. Most if not all Sunnis will agree with the governments’ stand, and if not, they have been friends with the Shias long before the recent demonstrations, and because of this, were persuaded to lend support to the protests, but NEVER can I believe, that any of them would deliberately provoke the police, or attack others, or even wield weapons in the faces of Bahrain’s police force. I don’t believe any Sunnis did anything violent above an unarmed scuffle at the protest, or maybe a middle finger at the authorities, which in my view is bad enough. It shows, obviously a waning national pride, or some other perhaps psychological or social illness, and misdirected self respect; an imitation of the Western way of protest, which usually ends by unarmed demonstrators being dragged away in handcuffs, or else dispersing quietly before that happens.
In this instance, a few arrests of Sunnis were also made, because they were protesting along with other more violent members in the same crowd. I suppose we should say, let this be a lesson to them (leave it at that), but somehow with the killings, it would be trivializing what happened, in those first few hours, days and the past week’s events.
What happens in the next while could be pivotal for the Kingdom, if the monarchy is able to control the population (of extremists), contain outbursts of violence, and remains in control in the long-term despite the difficulties. It is the will of half the population that the King remains the official state leader, and that the monarch stands as the respected head of the royal family until such time as he is unable, or dies. It is not unusual and is the way in other monarchies; even many Christian countries have a successful monarch at the helm. It can be a great source of pride for the people to have a reigning King or Queen, and princes and princesses.
Let even the American people recall Grace Kelly, who herself held the title of Princess Grace given to her at the time of her marriage to the Prince of Monaco, closest resembled by Princess Di in her Cinderella story transformation and life, as well as death. I remember the Hollywood production of Princess Grace to be quite moving and a truly enchanted tale. I also saw the documentary which explained the details of her life before and during her marriage. Her sister spoke of how proud they were of her; her family and friends envied Grace Kelly, and admired the jewel studded crown she received as one of many impressive gifts from the Prince which was displayed for the camera.
Despite what say the voices of opposition, Bahrain also has elected officials and government ministers (MPs) in addition to the Shura council. It is not only a monarchy, but has a constitution and working government. Because of the distorted world view that monarchies are outdated, some people seek to use that as their main platform to disrupt the present (democratic) government and the ruling family, when what they really want is for the Shias to be able to challenge the status quo in Bahrain and eventually split the government or replace it and the ruling family with a Shia autocracy. Who would be the real head of such an imposed government in Bahrain? Iran or the Khomeini (Ayatollah Ali Khameini at present) is a likely guess. Would it seem far-fetched to suggest that maybe, Bahrain being an oil producing country, wealthy and with a small population, only 400,000 citizens, the rest of the residents being foreigners with visas, and a small percentage of illegal migrants, perhaps the civil strife is an excuse for someone’s plan of initiating a takeover? Should this be one of those theories that is called in banter a “conspiracy theory” to make its likelihood unlikelier, and its proponents or supporters lunatics, but I believe it is now the ‘talk of the town’. Not to mention the HRW and its role in all the mayhem which you can read plenty about in the GDN pages.
When David and Solomon reigned, the Jews were quite at peace and happy, or one would think. I guess it is only when others are enjoying the benefits that the Jews or Christians, as world leaders and (in)famously respected (or despised) as a result of their Imperialism, shout “down with the King!”, or “out with you (insert name)!” Of course, they don’t do it that obviously when it comes to Bahrain, or Saudi Arabia, or the Arab Emirates, etc but they convince the people through propaganda and enlist professionals to teach the local ‘disenfranchised’, or challenging sect(s), journalism, public speaking and “talking to the camera”. If all goes well in stage one, they might even provide them with weapons, later on.
I was on a website a few days ago, I wanted to add some links – you will find them on the left of my blog, and noticed the warning that comments should be done carefully or not have unnecessary personal details because that could be a bad move on the part of the owner of the comment, maybe putting him/herself in a dangerous position. The situation here calls for some care, yet people speak out on the internet more freely than they can at this time anywhere else (Happily I noticed many letters to the editor published in the GDN, Wednesday, May 25th in support of the government, etc.). The impression one is left with is that some Sunni Muslims at least are refusing to let the Shias impose their corrupted version of history, more especially recent events. While 250 years of Sunni rule might seem harsh to them, it is the present reality, and not one that could easily, or should hastily be replaced with something else, probably undesirable to the other half. If you drive around Bahrain, you won’t see poor children living off the streets; you might see a Hindu delivery man taking a siesta under a company truck, which seems like a listless activity in this heat. The Shia sect has clearly exaggerated the desperation of their lives. There are no destitute (Shia); look at their buildings and neighborhoods. Recently an entire compound was told to evacuate, having built on government land, their homes, horses’ stables, and farms. It was only by permission of their locally elected official, a Shia, that they were able to develop the land, quite illegally, in the first place. Will these people now moan and groan about how the government has forced them out of their homes and properties (probably a purely retaliatory move)? They could bring the BBC to record on film, while putting on a desperate show, and explain how they used to live here, and had a farm here, and a horses stable here…wait, you have built, owned, and developed all this, on your own? But you are destitute, have nothing, are the disenfranchised, are you not? Something smells fishy, maybe this is not such a good idea after all… cancel the BBC. Many of the Shia must have come to Bahrain only recently from Iran or bordering Bahrain, from Saudi Arabia, that’s obvious. Not all are born in Bahrain, yet they complain and demand their constitutional or human rights. I’ve lived in Bahrain for a decade, yet demand no right (above or beyond basic rights) whatsoever, how could I? Many of them are in the same situation; we are not Bahraini, but working, studying and living in Bahrain only. (I’m not suggesting we don’t enjoy the basic rights which are guaranteed in the United Nations Charter of Rights and Freedoms here in Bahrain, we do)
Propaganda is the reason, and the victims are the real citizens of Bahrain, the law-abiding honest people, who only want to let the status quo remain, not to take what others claim is their right, but to continue to enjoy life in the Kingdom as their families have done for two centuries, peacefully minding their own business, if only they will be allowed. If these two groups can learn to live and let live, if some people will forget their sectarian predisposition to violence and hate, then there is hope that even with the status quo, everyone can build a better future for all the country’s citizens, and permitted residents.
