Things are going horribly pear-shaped in Bahrain
Why does political and social unrest in such a tiny country matter?
First off: Some history and so on
Bahrain has been strategically important since the Bronze age. Its name means "two seas" and refers to the salt waters of the Arabian Gulf that surround it and the massive fresh water aquifer that runs under the country. There are several fresh water springs creating oases on the island and many more under the Gulf -- places where you can fill a container with fresh water under the sea. This made it a vital link between the Middle East and India. As first Dilmun -- at the time of Gilgamesh, then Tylos under Alexander the Great, it has been a major trading and transhipment port for centuries. The Portuguese established a couple of forts there to protect their trade routes to the Far East in the 16th and 17th centuries. Most recently it was a British Protectorate, only achieving independence in 1971.
The current ruling family, the Al-Khalifa, have run the country for over 200 years and run it pretty much as a family business. The main players right now are King Hamad bin Isa, his uncle Sh. Khalifa bin Sulman -- the prime minister, and Sh. Salman bin Hamad the crown prince and head of the Bahraini Defence force. Hamad became Emir in 1999 on the death of his father, Sh. Isa bin Sulman, and became king a couple of years later when the country transitioned from an Emirate ruled by decree to a constitutional monarchy.
The current strategic importance of Bahrain is 3-fold. Bahrain was one of the first countries to benefit from the oil money, but its oilfields were very small -- there's a lot of gas, but not much oil. The Al-Khalifa strategy was to develop the country's infrastructure and educate the workforce so as to present the rest of the world with a good place to do business. Bahrain had the first major international airport in the region. It's a very convenient place to stop and refuel flights from Europe to India, and the Far East. There was a massive investment in communications infrastructure in the early 1970s, which made it a good place for international banks to set up their regional offices -- especially as Bahrain has been socially quite liberal which made it a much more pleasant assignment than most of the other countries in the region.
To a great extent, Bahrain has been eclipsed by Dubai over the past few years. Dubai has far nore money than Bahrain ever had. Bahrain has one thing though that Dubai hasn't replicated yet: Bahrain is the base for the US 5th Fleet and has huge shipbuilding and repair facilities -- including a massive dry dock. The British navy also uses facilities in Bahrain. The whole of the southern half of the country is off-limits to the general population. I'm not sure what's down there now, though I know they were building a large military airbase there for the US during the early 1980s.
So what's at stake here is not only a large regional communications and transort hub and financial services center, but also a military base which is essential to US operations in the Middle East. A stable Bahrain is of vital strategic importance to the US because they simply can't set up facilities for the 5th Fleet anywhere else in the region at the drop of a hat.
Next: The social structure
The Al-Khalifa are Sunni Muslims. The majority of the indigenous population are Shi'ite Muslims, somewhere around 70% of the indigenous population. I'm saying "indigenous population" here because the policy over the past 30+ years has been to hire foreign Sunni Muslims into the Bahrain Defence Force (BDF). As a result the BDF has few ties to the country and is distinctly loyal to the Al-Khalifa. Traditionally the crown prince is head of the BDF. Most of the senior officers of the BDF and almost all senior government officials are Sunni. Very few Shi'ite Bahrainis get hired for high-level government jobs, very often non-Bahrainis are hired over equally well qualified Bahraini Shi'ites. Needless to say this policy is very unpopular. Another policy that's angered the Shi'ites has been to fast-track foreign BDF personnel for Bahraini citizenship.
The Shi'ite majority are not all oppressed or impoverished -- a lot of the very successful trading companies are Shi'ite-owned -- and there are some poor Sunni families. What rankles most is lack of political representation. The recently established parliament is the standard 2-house system. The lower house is elected and the upper house appointed by the crown. It also has veto powers over any legislation the lower house proposes. Now you can see where this is going can't you? The upper house aren't going to do anything that will upset the king and they can overrule anything the lower house can do. Might as well have stuck with rule by decree.
Now all this in the face of a population with 91% literacy, a median age of about 30, and almost 20% unemployment among the young.
Political and social unrest are not new to Bahrain. There was a failed coup d'etat in 1981 and there have been ongoing intermittent protests since Sh. Isa bin Sulman dissolved the first parliament in 1978 or 1979 (can't remember offhand). Some progress has been made -- there is a parliament and reasonably free and fair elections now. But there's a long way to go before the situation becomes truly equitable. It is worth noticing though, that women's rights in Bahrain are better than in many other Middle Eastern countries, they have equal access to education, are enfranchised and are beginning to be much more included in the political process.
So where's it all going to go?
There are both secular and religious opposition parties in Bahrain and while there is a tendency for the media to paint this as yet another Sunni vs. Shi'ite death match, it's not that straightforward. Even the Sunni minority don't like the foreign presence in the military and the violence of the past few days doesn't sit well with many Sunnis -- to the point where they are joining the protests.
It's liable to get very messy if the Al-Khalifa aren't very careful, unfortunately I don't think they're going to be willing to make some of the necessary hard decisions. I don't think King Hamad or Sh. Sulman are either of them bad rulers and I believe they have the country's best interests at heart. I do have my doubts about Sh. Khalifa, the prime minister. He's the longest serving non-elected prime minister in the world having been in office for over 40 years, it's more than time he retired. If he was to retire and someone acceptable to the majority appointed as interim prime minister till the next election, that might do a lot to defuse the situation.
Keeping the military out of things would be wise. Left to their own devices, the protesters probably wouldn't have done much more than mill around and shout a lot. The king could have made a few concessions and things would have calmed down again. Shooting the protesters has upped the ante. King Hamad might still be able take control of the situation, but it's beginning to look doubtful.
Then there's the complication of the US 5th Fleet. You can't move a major naval base with all its facilities overnight. Things like dry docks aren't very portable. Nor are private military airbases. The US believes it needs a naval base in the region to protect its empire and the flow of oil. It needs that base to be in a stable country because a base of that size requires a huge infrastructure which would collapse if the country descended into chaos. It's going to be hugely tempting for the US to intervene, either to support King Hamad or replace him. Supporting him militarily would be bad for a number of reasons. It would make him appear weak. It would piss off the opposition even more -- there's plenty of anti-US sentiment in the region already and this would add fuel to the fire. It could precipitate a full-blown civil war. Replacing Hamad would be equally bad. It would scare the Saudi royal family shitless, for one thing. Whoever they supported would be seen as a US puppet, which would lose him support, and perpetuate the chaos.
Like I said, horribly pear-shaped. It's going to be hard for the King Hamad to recover from the major mistake of shooting and killing protesters. I hope he can hold it together and make the reforms that are both needed and long overdue. He is, as they say, his country's "last best hope".
Edit: After posting this I realised that I've actually got more to say. There will be another post, probably not till late Sunday though as I'm going to be stepping away from teh intarwebz for a bit.
This entry was originally posted at http://hugh-mannity.dreamwidth.org/938970.html. That post currently has
comments.
You may comment here or there via OpenID even if you do not have a Dreamwidth account.
First off: Some history and so on
Bahrain has been strategically important since the Bronze age. Its name means "two seas" and refers to the salt waters of the Arabian Gulf that surround it and the massive fresh water aquifer that runs under the country. There are several fresh water springs creating oases on the island and many more under the Gulf -- places where you can fill a container with fresh water under the sea. This made it a vital link between the Middle East and India. As first Dilmun -- at the time of Gilgamesh, then Tylos under Alexander the Great, it has been a major trading and transhipment port for centuries. The Portuguese established a couple of forts there to protect their trade routes to the Far East in the 16th and 17th centuries. Most recently it was a British Protectorate, only achieving independence in 1971.
The current ruling family, the Al-Khalifa, have run the country for over 200 years and run it pretty much as a family business. The main players right now are King Hamad bin Isa, his uncle Sh. Khalifa bin Sulman -- the prime minister, and Sh. Salman bin Hamad the crown prince and head of the Bahraini Defence force. Hamad became Emir in 1999 on the death of his father, Sh. Isa bin Sulman, and became king a couple of years later when the country transitioned from an Emirate ruled by decree to a constitutional monarchy.
The current strategic importance of Bahrain is 3-fold. Bahrain was one of the first countries to benefit from the oil money, but its oilfields were very small -- there's a lot of gas, but not much oil. The Al-Khalifa strategy was to develop the country's infrastructure and educate the workforce so as to present the rest of the world with a good place to do business. Bahrain had the first major international airport in the region. It's a very convenient place to stop and refuel flights from Europe to India, and the Far East. There was a massive investment in communications infrastructure in the early 1970s, which made it a good place for international banks to set up their regional offices -- especially as Bahrain has been socially quite liberal which made it a much more pleasant assignment than most of the other countries in the region.
To a great extent, Bahrain has been eclipsed by Dubai over the past few years. Dubai has far nore money than Bahrain ever had. Bahrain has one thing though that Dubai hasn't replicated yet: Bahrain is the base for the US 5th Fleet and has huge shipbuilding and repair facilities -- including a massive dry dock. The British navy also uses facilities in Bahrain. The whole of the southern half of the country is off-limits to the general population. I'm not sure what's down there now, though I know they were building a large military airbase there for the US during the early 1980s.
So what's at stake here is not only a large regional communications and transort hub and financial services center, but also a military base which is essential to US operations in the Middle East. A stable Bahrain is of vital strategic importance to the US because they simply can't set up facilities for the 5th Fleet anywhere else in the region at the drop of a hat.
Next: The social structure
The Al-Khalifa are Sunni Muslims. The majority of the indigenous population are Shi'ite Muslims, somewhere around 70% of the indigenous population. I'm saying "indigenous population" here because the policy over the past 30+ years has been to hire foreign Sunni Muslims into the Bahrain Defence Force (BDF). As a result the BDF has few ties to the country and is distinctly loyal to the Al-Khalifa. Traditionally the crown prince is head of the BDF. Most of the senior officers of the BDF and almost all senior government officials are Sunni. Very few Shi'ite Bahrainis get hired for high-level government jobs, very often non-Bahrainis are hired over equally well qualified Bahraini Shi'ites. Needless to say this policy is very unpopular. Another policy that's angered the Shi'ites has been to fast-track foreign BDF personnel for Bahraini citizenship.
The Shi'ite majority are not all oppressed or impoverished -- a lot of the very successful trading companies are Shi'ite-owned -- and there are some poor Sunni families. What rankles most is lack of political representation. The recently established parliament is the standard 2-house system. The lower house is elected and the upper house appointed by the crown. It also has veto powers over any legislation the lower house proposes. Now you can see where this is going can't you? The upper house aren't going to do anything that will upset the king and they can overrule anything the lower house can do. Might as well have stuck with rule by decree.
Now all this in the face of a population with 91% literacy, a median age of about 30, and almost 20% unemployment among the young.
Political and social unrest are not new to Bahrain. There was a failed coup d'etat in 1981 and there have been ongoing intermittent protests since Sh. Isa bin Sulman dissolved the first parliament in 1978 or 1979 (can't remember offhand). Some progress has been made -- there is a parliament and reasonably free and fair elections now. But there's a long way to go before the situation becomes truly equitable. It is worth noticing though, that women's rights in Bahrain are better than in many other Middle Eastern countries, they have equal access to education, are enfranchised and are beginning to be much more included in the political process.
So where's it all going to go?
There are both secular and religious opposition parties in Bahrain and while there is a tendency for the media to paint this as yet another Sunni vs. Shi'ite death match, it's not that straightforward. Even the Sunni minority don't like the foreign presence in the military and the violence of the past few days doesn't sit well with many Sunnis -- to the point where they are joining the protests.
It's liable to get very messy if the Al-Khalifa aren't very careful, unfortunately I don't think they're going to be willing to make some of the necessary hard decisions. I don't think King Hamad or Sh. Sulman are either of them bad rulers and I believe they have the country's best interests at heart. I do have my doubts about Sh. Khalifa, the prime minister. He's the longest serving non-elected prime minister in the world having been in office for over 40 years, it's more than time he retired. If he was to retire and someone acceptable to the majority appointed as interim prime minister till the next election, that might do a lot to defuse the situation.
Keeping the military out of things would be wise. Left to their own devices, the protesters probably wouldn't have done much more than mill around and shout a lot. The king could have made a few concessions and things would have calmed down again. Shooting the protesters has upped the ante. King Hamad might still be able take control of the situation, but it's beginning to look doubtful.
Then there's the complication of the US 5th Fleet. You can't move a major naval base with all its facilities overnight. Things like dry docks aren't very portable. Nor are private military airbases. The US believes it needs a naval base in the region to protect its empire and the flow of oil. It needs that base to be in a stable country because a base of that size requires a huge infrastructure which would collapse if the country descended into chaos. It's going to be hugely tempting for the US to intervene, either to support King Hamad or replace him. Supporting him militarily would be bad for a number of reasons. It would make him appear weak. It would piss off the opposition even more -- there's plenty of anti-US sentiment in the region already and this would add fuel to the fire. It could precipitate a full-blown civil war. Replacing Hamad would be equally bad. It would scare the Saudi royal family shitless, for one thing. Whoever they supported would be seen as a US puppet, which would lose him support, and perpetuate the chaos.
Like I said, horribly pear-shaped. It's going to be hard for the King Hamad to recover from the major mistake of shooting and killing protesters. I hope he can hold it together and make the reforms that are both needed and long overdue. He is, as they say, his country's "last best hope".
Edit: After posting this I realised that I've actually got more to say. There will be another post, probably not till late Sunday though as I'm going to be stepping away from teh intarwebz for a bit.
This entry was originally posted at http://hugh-mannity.dreamwidth.org/938970.html. That post currently has
comments.
You may comment here or there via OpenID even if you do not have a Dreamwidth account.