Bahraini Revolution

[Borakk]

@Partha Main subject of discussion was not Iran between Prince and Pakistani officials. It was about strengthening relations between Pak and Saudi + getting nuclear capable missile from China via Pakistan (Apparently, Saudi no more trusts the US on defence matters). And hence the intensified drone attacks while he was on visit and the attack on Saudi consulate in Pakistan by CIA backed TTP terrorists afterwards (killing a driver) to try to sabotage the strengthening relations between Pakistan and KSA.

[Aston-Martin]

pakistani troops must avoid direct conflict, or anything that displeases the behrainians, but attack on pakistanis in behrain by bhrainians was a very unpleasant situation

anything which pakistani officers do against the behrainians can produce hate aganist pakistan and pakistanis and harm its image

pakistan should rather convince iranis and saudis not to play politics in behrain and let behrainis decide for themselves, i have also come to know iran is also using politics in syria, this is bad for middle east, wars must be avoided

[Aban]

BEIRUT, Lebanon, May 31 (UPI) -- The disclosure that the United Kingdom trained Saudi Arabian forces used to crush protests in Bahrain and has sold to 15 Middle Eastern states military equipment that could be used against civilians is raising questions about the morality of providing arms to repressive regimes.

Since pro-democracy uprisings erupted across the Middle East and North Africa in January, several thousand people have been killed, mainly by the security forces of regimes under attack.

The British government has withdrawn 160 export licenses -- mainly involving Egypt, Bahrain, Tunisia and Libya -- since January, according to a report by a parliamentary panel drawn from four House of Commons committees on defense, business, foreign affairs and international development.

It described London's action as "vigorous back-pedaling" and declared the withdrawals reflected the extent "of policy misjudgment that has occurred."

The report, issued in April, "will be uncomfortable reading for the (British) government, which put trade at the heart of its diplomatic mission," the Financial Times observed.

The newspaper reported that British export license approvals since January 2009 have covered "components for military helicopters in Algeria, submachine guns and tear gas to Bahrain, machine guns to Egypt and hand grenades to Jordan."

British defense contractors have also sold "small arms ammunition to Syria, hand grenades, sniper rifles and tear gas to Saudi Arabia and shotguns to Morocco."

John Stanley, chairman of the investigating committee, suggested that Bahrain may have used British-made equipment, including sniper rifles sold to the tiny Persian Gulf monarchy and armored personnel carriers sold to Saudi Arabia.

The APCs were Tactica vehicles sold to the Saudi Arabian national guard, a tribal-based force loyal to the ruling family, and used in the March 14 intervention in Bahrain by a Saudi-led column from the Gulf Cooperation Council, an alliance of six Arab monarchies in the Persian Gulf.

BAE Systems, Britain's largest defense conglomerate and which builds the Tacticas, insisted that it only exports military equipment when the government issues a license.

Arguably the most controversial of the U.K. arms sales were those to the Libyan regime of Moammar Gadhafi, for decades accused by the West of supporting terrorism.

However, when Libya's outlaw status was lifted in 2004 after Gadhafi abandoned his nuclear program and renounced terrorism, Western arms companies, as well as East bloc suppliers led by Russia, fell over themselves to sell him weapons systems.

Gadhafi is now fighting for the survival of his regime against a rebellion triggered by the political upheaval that is sweeping the Arab world. U.S. and NATO forces are aiding the rebels seeking to topple the regime.

The British reports covers arms sales in 2009 and early 2010, when Britain's Labor Party was in power.

But the committee also accuses the successor Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition for failing to anticipate how the weapons sold to authoritarian Arab regimes with dismal human rights records might be used.

Gadhafi, President Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen and President Bashar al-Assad of Syria have unleashed the might of their armed forces, including tanks, against largely unarmed domestic opponents.

Britain isn't the only Western state to fall under scrutiny since the Middle East bloodletting began as authoritarian regimes, long tolerated by the West, came under threat from their own people.

Human rights campaigners and others have long assailed Western governments for arming unsavory rulers in the region and elsewhere in a global trade that was worth an estimated $1.6 trillion in 2010.

But the increasing violence by regimes in Syria, Yemen and Libya has intensified international efforts to curtail such arms sales.

Under an Arms Trade Treaty, a multilateral agreement being developed under a 2006 mandate by the U.N. General Assembly, questionable arms sales would be considerably curbed.

But, observed Laicie Olson, senior analyst with the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington, there would still be problems if the ATT is adopted.

"Under the ATT, the U.S. and UK would be able to arm Moammar Gadhafi but not Libya's rebels since Gadhafi is still the head of an internationally recognized government and rebels … are not," Olson said.

The irony of the fighting in Libya is that the NATO members that are bombarding Gadhafi's forces under a U.N.-mandated no-fly zone, are using the conflict to showcase their combat jets and weapons systems to potential buyers.

Read more: Arms sales to Arabs states under fire - UPI.com

[Aban]

Iran: Military Intervention Complicates Situation in Persian Gulf

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi rejected military solutions to the regional problems, and blasted certain regional countries for deploying their military troops in Bahrain, cautioning that the move would further complicate the situation.


Addressing an international conference on Islamic awakening here in Tehran on Tuesday, Salehi said that military intervention by a number of foreign states in Bahrain has turned a domestic issue into a regional and international crisis.

"Such a behavior is not justifiable," Salehi stated, adding, "(Launching) Military intervention to encounter the peaceful demands of a majority of the people in a country runs counter to the establishment of peace, stability and security in the critical region of the Persian Gulf."

As regards Iran's stance, Salehi said, "We are against any kind of foreign interference and meddling with the nations' demands and occupation of other countries under any excuse both in Bahrain and Libya."

He further called such military interventions a serious threat to global peace and security.

Anti-government protesters have been holding peaceful demonstrations across Bahrain since mid-February, calling for an end to the Al Khalifa dynasty's over-40-year rule.

Violence against the defenseless people escalated after a Saudi-led conglomerate of police, security and military forces from the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (PGCC) member states - Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Qatar - were dispatched to the tiny Persian Gulf kingdom on March 13 to help Manama crack down on peaceful protestors.

So far, tens of people have been killed, hundreds have gone missing and about 1,000 others have been injured.

Yet, protests and rallies continued throughout the country in defiance of the martial law put in place by Manama since last month.

During the recent days, Bahrainis have repeatedly underlined that they will continue protests until the regime collapses and condemned Riyadh's involvement in the suppression of the revolution.
Fars News Agency :: Iran: Military Intervention Complicates Situation in Persian Gulf

[Tayr]

The Imam governs the relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia. So, for now, the west would be wise to take a holiday until these issues settle.

[Aban]

What is the opinion of Imam on these issues?

[mujib43]

1. Post 1947, UK and USA relied on Pakistan's military to be the protector of its interests in the W Asian oil zone. Initially a Brigade, then raised to a Division and lastly a Corps based in Karachi was given this additional role. Pakistan also has been having troops on ground in the area beside instructors and officers on deputation. In Bahrain Pakistanis are training or commanding Police elements.

2. All that is changing - fast. Firstly the internal conditions within these states are changing. The govts themselves are innovating indigenous ways of security, an example of which is Saudi troops in Bahrain on behalf of GCC. Pakistan itself has changed and will change further - and very fast.

3. Muslim political leaders allow themselves to be exploited on sectarian issues which they sell to their people to keep themselves in power. This is something which the Great Ayatullah Khomeini had sought to remove. In locations where large Shia populations live the message of sectarian unity of the Ayatullah must be taught to both communities from childhood so that Muslims do not fall easy prey to the enemies.

[partha]

2. All that is changing - fast. Firstly the internal conditions within these states are changing. The govts themselves are innovating indigenous ways of security, an example of which is Saudi troops in Bahrain on behalf of GCC.

Mujib da, good observations. IMHO, the changing alliances in West Asia go along with those in North Africa and the Horn of Africa (Somalia). Also, the more insistent wooing of India by Saudi Arabia is interesting.

Saudi Arabia woos India

On June 6, Saudi Arabia agreed to double its crude oil exports to India, meaning Indian crude imports from the kingdom would amount to more than 800,000 barrels per day. This is the first big step towards a strategic energy partnership between New Delhi and Riyadh, something that the two sides have been working on since the beginning of last year.

This strategic energy partnership could culminate in a 30-year oil supply contract that Saudi Arabia is expected to sign with India. It would also mark a further step along the path of improved ties since India-Saudi Arabia relations were transformed following the 2006 state visit to India by King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud.

Clearly, Saudi wants to woo India away from its more natural ally, Iran. It remains to be seen whether that will work. Its unlikely that India will play an either-or game.

Another significant part is the apparent Saudi distancing from a duplicitous Pakistan, including its meretricious armed forces. Pakistan has also been developing links with Somali pirate networks, whose ransoms are a source of revenue, as well as strategic value by offering ISI mediation (as they do with land terrorist groups). So add Indian Ocean Rim piracy to the list of narcotics, terrorism and mafia as instruments of its foreign policy. Its an unsustainable policy for a sovereign state, and bound to repel even supporters in the long run.

[Tayr]

Not my place to know... or say if I did. :)

[NEWUSER]

It's good to see Aljazeera's objectivity falter when it comes to Bahrain or Qatar.

Reporting revolutions, one agenda at a time.