Showing posts with label King al-Khalifa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label King al-Khalifa. Show all posts

Friday, April 22, 2011

The Arab uprising is a rebellion against Washington’s Empire: William Norman Grigg

Kourosh Ziabari
Aid Netherlands

William Norman Grigg
William Norman Grigg is an author and journalist of Mexican and Irish descent. He was born on February 4, 1963 in Idaho. He was a senior editor of “The New American” magazine and has authored several books from a Constitutionalist perspective. Grigg graduated from Utah State University in political science. He was a “Provo Daily Herald” columnist for a while and also covered the United Nations summits and conferences from 1994 to 2001 for the John Birch Society’s official biweekly magazine.

Grigg is also a studio musician and served as lead guitarist in the Wisconsin band “Slick Willie and the Calzones” until his 2005 move to Idaho.

Grigg has interviewed prominent world leaders, including former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and former Costa Rican President Oscar Arias. His investigations of terrorism and international organized crime included interviews with high-ranking officials of the Chinese Communist Party, former operatives of the Soviet KGB, and – long before the group was thrust into the spotlight during the 2008 presidential election – leaders of the New Black Panther Party.

Will writes and publishes the Pro Libertate blog, and is a frequent contributor to LewRockwell.com, the most widely read freedom-oriented website in the world. He also produces the “Liberty Minute,” a one-minute syndicated radio commentary archived at www.prolibertate.us.

Grigg has published several books of which we can name ” The Gospel of Revolt: Feminism Vs. the Family” by Northwest Publishing Inc. and “Liberty In Eclipse: The Rise of the Homeland Security State” by Welch Foundation.

William Norman Grigg joined me in an exclusive interview to discuss with me the latest developments in the Middle East, the prospect of Egyptian revolution, the massacre of peace activists and pro-democracy demonstrators in Egypt and the blurred destiny of Libyan civil war.

Kourosh Ziabari: Let’s start with a question which has been occupying my mind for a number of days. What do you think about Bahrain’s suicidal act of destructing the Pearl Roundabout? It was a childish act; wasn’t it? They thought that they can quench the revolution of their angry people by destroying the symbol which their movement was associated with. At the same time, it was a fabulous act, like the TV cartoons! What’s your idea?

William Grigg: Every ruling elite attracts a disproportionate share of a human type inclined toward the “rule or ruin” mindset. Bahrain’s al-Khalifa clique is a pampered imperial pet who can rely on Washington to service every whim, so their eruption of authoritarian petulance doesn’t surprise me at all. The idea here seems to be that by destroying a symbol, the rulers have repealed the relevant history. I’m gratified to see that so many of the protesters – people who are insanely courageous – have simply shrugged off that little tantrum.

KZ: Let’s get a little bit more serious. Why did the Arab world rise in rebellion so suddenly and unexpectedly? Today, some ten Arab countries are entangled with the waves of popular uprising by their people who don’t want to tolerate them anymore. What did pull the trigger of these consecutive and chained revolutions in the Arab world? Was it all about a street vendor who committed an act of self-immolation before the municipality office?

WG: I suspect that the Arab uprising, which I perceive as a rebellion against Washington’s Empire, and may it succeed and prosper, is a magnified aftershock of our October Revolution of 2008, in which the Federal Reserve emitted an unprecedented gusher of “liquidity”, that is, inflation, to bail out Wall Street’s politically protected oligarchs. The resulting debasement of the dollar has to be a contributing factor in the price shocks – particularly for food and other necessities – that have driven people into the streets in many countries, both in the Middle East and elsewhere. Egypt has been particularly vulnerable, since that country imports all of its wheat.

For decades, Washington’s power apparatus – the Federal Reserve and the military-industrial complex (MIC) have been able to export inflation, which was a great deal for the investor class but a huge burden on the rest of us. That game is probably going to come to a very end very soon, and what we’re seeing in the Arab world is something of a foretaste of what we’re likely to see here, as well.

In U.S.-sponsored police states like Egypt and Tunisia, people were willing to countenance a great deal of abuse as long as there was some reasonable expectation that they would be able to feed themselves. It’s not surprising to see their forbearance evaporate in the heat of the ongoing economic meltdown. It’s interesting to see that the triggering incidents in both Tunisia and Egypt were episodes of casual, arrogant abuse by police officers who consider themselves to be imperviously clothed in official privilege. We have more than a little of that kind of thing here in the U.S., as well, and I suspect that at some point someone somewhere is going to be pushed too far by an officious prick in uniform – and then all hell will break loose.

KZ: We are told that Bahrain has a black human rights record. Essentially, all of the Arab countries of the Middle East have black human rights records. They flagrantly censor, arrest, incarcerate, punish, torture and then release. How much significant was the role of humanitarian demands in the formation of Bahrain’s revolution? Are the Bahraini people after obtaining social dignity, self-esteem and basic human rights in their protests at the 30-year dictatorship of Al Khalifa?

WG: The deadliest foe of the Bahraini people isn’t the vicious little clique ruling them directly; it’s the imperial sponsor of that clique in Washington, who supplied the military and “security” hardware being used to murder them. If Washington were to butt out of Bahrain – as our Constitution and soundest political principles require – the Bahrainis would be able to work things out for themselves. Pending that day, however, I’m not optimistic regarding their chances.

KZ: It was on the news that during the past decade, the Bahraini government gave citizenship to scores of Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Indians to distort the demographic structure of its population and put in shade its huge Shiite majority. Political commentators believe that the Shiite majority of Bahrain has been long entangled in the discriminatory scaffolding of the kingdom and deprived of their most essential political and social rights. What’s your evaluation of the situation of Shiites in Bahrain? Why has the government adopted such a hostile stance with regards to them?

WG: I don’t know most of the details of the demographic re-engineering of Bahrain’s population, but assuming you’re describing it correctly this appears to be an example of Brecht’s cynical aphorism that in a dictatorship, it is the people who lose the confidence of the ruler – and the ruler responds by dissolving them and “electing a new people.” This kind of thing happens quite frequently in history, we’ve seen similar experiences in North America – just ask a descendant of the Cherokees or the Nez Perce. Bahrain’s situation, in which a Sunni elite is ruling a Shiite majority, offers an ideal setting for this kind of forced-draft population manipulation, which will eventually end very badly. To describe it in terms of applied physics: There’s a great deal of stored energy here in the form of officially cultivated resentments, and when the incumbent regime is removed, as it will be, eventually, the result is likely to be explosive.

KZ: Bahrain hosts the United States Fifth Fleet and is one of the main partners of White House in the Persian Gulf region. UAE is also another major friend of the Untied States in the region. Does the United States consider Bahrain and United Arab Emirates proxies to eliminate Iran’s supremacy as a regional superpower? Do the anti-Iranian movements of the Bahraini and Emirati governments emanate from the provocations of the United States?

WG: The desire to contain Iran figures prominently in most of Washington’s military ventures in the region, and this is an outgrowth of Washington’s utterly indefensible meddling in Iranian politics from 1953 until 1979. For decades, Washington built the Shah into both a domestic despot and an international power; this was particularly true under Nixon, who strove to turn Pahlavi’s regime into a nuclear-capable superpower. There was a splendid opportunity back in 2003 for a rapprochement between Washington and Tehran, but the Bush administration wasn’t interested, and the Obama administration is, if anything, even more inhospitable. I’m convinced that there is a huge constituency in Washington for war with Iran, which would be a calamity for everybody. My own prejudices in this matter are Jeffersonian: I support free trade with everybody, and non-interference in the domestic affairs of other countries. My own experiences with Iranians, including my old Judo instructor and most of the members of our Judo/Jiu-Jitsu Club, have been uniformly pleasant. I’ve long been interested in attending a training session at a Zour Khaneh. I don’t see any reason why America and Iran are fated to be enemies. Then again, one of the chief purposes of government, I’ve become convinced, is to save us from the scourge of peaceful commerce.

KZ: Let’s move to Libya, where the 42-year tyranny of the delirious dictator – if I may – has exhausted the oppressed people. Gaddafi has so far refused to sign any willingness for leaving the from power and his family members still hold crucial positions in the government and have immediate access to the public wealth. What’s your idea regarding NATO’s military intervention in Libya? Has it been successful in its proclaimed goals? Basically, do you support a foreign military intervention option on Libya? What’s your proposal for the termination of bloodshed and violence in Libya?

WG: The Libyan war isn’t going to “succeed,” because nobody responsible for it can define “success.” The Obama administration insists that “regime change” isn’t necessary,” while backing a CIA/SAS-funded group that wants to be treated as a shadow government. Up until practically the week before the war began, Gaddafi was receiving military and economic assistance from Washington. It honestly looks as if someone decided to attack Libya simply because … well, because the Arab revolution was marginalizing Washington, so the U.S. military simply had to be bombing somebody, somewhere. It’s possible that Gaddafi, who is a genuinely despicable thug, will end up being allowed to remain, or to leave on favorable terms, after thousands have been killed pointlessly. The whole thing reminds me of the “Flower Wars” waged by my Aztec ancestors — staged affairs in which huge armies were led to battle and then betrayed into captivity by tribal leaders who had been bought off by the Aztecs.

KZ: And for my final question, what’s your prediction for the prospect of Egyptian revolution? Will the freedom fighters in Cairo finally find their dream of having a democratic government realized? Does Mohammed Elbaradei have the sufficient potentials to become the symbol of Egypt’s revolutionary movement? What will be the fate of Hosni Mubarak? Does the international community have enough backbone to put Mubarak on trial for the crimes he has committed during his three decades of government?

WG: Back in 2009, Foreign Policy magazine noted that the Egyptian military was positioning itself to stage an auto-coup for the purpose of replacing Mubarak with Suleiman, the secret police chief — who, unlike his predecessors, had become a public figure. It seems to me that the military establishment accomplished most of what it set out to do, and now that the “revolutionary moment” has passed they’re consolidating power. May God grant the Egyptians the strength and wisdom to persist until they’ve actually uprooted the police state Washington planted and cultivated in that country for a generation. As for Mubarak, if I remember correctly, Herodotus reported that Cheops, the ruler who built the Great Pyramid at the cost of 100,000 lives and the entire public treasury, fell into such well-earned disrepute after his death that for centuries it was a crime even to speak his name. I think Mubarak richly deserves a similar fate.

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

'US will lose Bahrainis for good'

PressTV

Coexistence between the US' Fifth Fleet and the Bahraini people will never be the same following the United States' green light for the invasion of Bahrain by Saudi and other foreign forces. 
King al-Khalifa (L) of Bahrain
and Saudi king Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud
who together have isolated 70% of bahrain's
population through brutal force
 Security has tightened even more since the people of Bahrain were forced off the streets by the foreign military contingents and Bahraini army. Some Bahrainis have started a mass hunger strike in protest at the recent brutalities in the tiny Persian Gulf kingdom.

Press TV has interviewed Husain Abdulla, a human rights activist in Alabama, to discuss the latest developments. The following is a transcript of the interview.

Press TV: The situation in Bahrain seems to be getting worse by the day. Intimidation has driven people away from the street protests; however, for funerals people are still trying to turn out and they are paying for that by losing their jobs and risking injury and arrest. Can you comment on the situation and what has to happen to change the status quo there?

Husain Abdulla: As you indicated the situation in Bahrain is deteriorating further. The number of arrests is increasing by the day. Virtually there is no human rights defender left in the country bar a small handful. Political opposition leaders are either in prison or missing or have been killed.

The brutality is unheard of including attacks on women; even pregnant students have been ejected from their Universities. So many have lost jobs, students have lost scholarships - the situation in Bahrain shows the real face of American foreign policy. It shows the brutality and disregard of human life.

We always see the bias of American foreign policy when it comes to the Israeli and Palestinian issue, but we never expected it to reach a similar level for Bahrain. 


Obama's administration has clearly indicated that when it comes to human rights in Bahrain they could care less; they haven't raised a voice or raised an issue.

And the plan is to suppress the movement in Bahrain. The plan is to crackdown so hard that people must give up and stop protesting and then maybe there is a plan 'B', which is probably why senior diplomats from the US are visiting Bahrain.

However, the message from the people is, “Yes, you don't see the protest as big as it was a month or two ago; you don't see the massive number of people on the streets, but it is not over”. The government has made it so difficult now for it to coexist with the people. So many families in Bahrain have lost so much; I can't imagine how they will live under a country ruled by the al-Khalifa regime from this point on.

Press TV: You said that the US over Bahrain has shown its true face with this continued suppression thinking that this would break the back of the opposition. But how likely is that - as time goes on and the techniques become more violent and more difficult while the resolve of the people is getting greater and greater?

Husain Abdulla: The Obama administration has miscalculated the situation in Bahrain. They have lost the people of Bahrain for good. I don't think the people of Bahrain have any warm feeling toward the US, not a shred of amicable feeling is left. They have miscalculated greatly thinking that by supporting the Saudi/Bahraini crackdown on the opposition they would eventually make the people silent or push them into a corner where they will accept any kind of political solution thrown at them.

Whatever the Bahraini people had gained in the last ten years has evaporated. So probably the next step we will see is the Bahraini government through the US offer some kind of political solution to get out of this quagmire that will not be even close to the rights the people had ten years ago.

So the message will be that if you the people had not risen up you would have been in much better shape, but because of your actions now you have less rights and less freedom than what you started with.

They want to make Bahrain an example for the region. What they are miscalculating is the resiliency of the people of Bahrain. They might be silent for the time being, but this is a ticking bomb for a much bigger revolution that could come at any time. I can assure that my people will never give up.

Press TV: How do you see the situation from the beginning - if the government had not come down so hard on the protesters initially when they were merely asking for some reform or even a constitutional monarchy?

It seems that because of the way the government has cracked down on the protesters the people now want a total regime change. In the miscalculation you talk about do you think they have radicalized the demands of the people?

Husain Abdulla: You are absolutely right. Right now those who did not even participate in the political uprising don't want to even hear the name al-Khalifa anymore. They have isolated 70% of the population who cannot see themselves living under the roof of al-Khalifa.
They attacked mosques and other worship places; they attacked hospitals and patients; they basically left not a shred of hope that there would be coexistence between the ruling family and majority of the people in Bahrain.

Press TV: In mainstream Western media we hear of the role of Iran in the Bahrain situation. The latest news now is that Persian Gulf troops will stay indefinitely in Bahrain as a counter to perceived threats from Iran. What's your take on that?

Husain Abdulla: Basically, they are saying that Bahrain will be occupied forever. There is a great fear, an unfounded fear without a shred of evidence, that somehow Iran is the reason behind the uprising in Bahrain. The people of Bahrain have made it clear that they don't need the intervention of Iran or the intervention of Saudi Arabia or the GCC countries. The uprising is local, it's indigenous, it has had its grievances for some time, it's historic, and the people have certain demands that were not addressed through the proper channels so they sought to street protest to bring them up.

For the troops to stay in Bahrain it is a way to intimidate and to threaten those who would even think about going back onto the streets and protesting because basically what will happen is they will be killed, arrested, tortured, or they will go missing.

Press TV: The interest of the US with their fifth fleet in Bahrain have officially not condemned the violence in Bahrain. Do you see this situation backfiring on them or hurting their interests in respect of the hypocrisy of their decisions? That is, inconsistent foreign policy decisions throughout the region; Libya, Yemen, and in Bahrain.

Husain Abdulla: There is a fear among the US and other Western countries that somehow democracy is going to threaten their interests. Somehow if the people chose their leaders it would not be good for the US fifth fleet. Somehow if Bahrain had a real legislative parliament that has the power to legislate and rule that this is against US and British interests in Bahrain. These claims are unfounded. There is no way that a democratic Bahrain could be a threat to US interests - it is a shortsighted view from the US and other Western countries that somehow democracy would threaten their interests.

Democracy is the only way to preserve Western interests in the region whether in Bahrain or Yemen or other countries. Because when you have a democracy you have a political process, which is based on transparency; where people don't wish to revolt; where there is real stability, not fake stability.

Right now Bahrain is in fake stability because you have a gun to the head of the people. This is providing the ground for greater revolution that will bring radicalization.