Saudi Arabia sends troops to Bahrain

Started by inimalist2 pages

Originally posted by truejedi
problem is, with that comic, they lump every arab into a single entity. That's kinda racist.

But at the same time: I wouldn't say our 9.11 hijackers were patriots. Would you?

patriots? no, not at all, they were from different nationalities and saw their devotion to islam as more important than the nation they were from

in terms of, did they have an ideology that united them that they took pride and courage in, of course. lol, its not ridiculous to say that it takes some balls to fly a plane into a tower for your religion. Is it crazy and evil, sure. Did they believe in something greater than themselve? the evidence is still smoldering in downtown new york.

Its interesting, i'm sure Britain still considers washington, jefferson and adams to be terrorists rather than patriots. Perspective.

Originally posted by truejedi
Its interesting, i'm sure Britain still considers washington, jefferson and adams to be terrorists rather than patriots. Perspective.
You're only a terrorist until you win. Then you're a patriot.

Originally posted by truejedi
problem is, with that comic, they lump every arab into a single entity. That's kinda racist.

But at the same time: I wouldn't say our 9.11 hijackers were patriots. Would you?

You're right, they weren't patriots; they didn't do it for a country. It was basically a rag-tag team of 19 guys from several different countries, who disowned their own govt's and commited a crime in the name of a common religion they all held.

It wasn't even in the name of Pan-Arabism; they were plain-clothed gangsters with a Koran as their 'gang colors'.

Originally posted by truejedi
Its interesting, i'm sure Britain still considers washington, jefferson and adams to be terrorists rather than patriots. Perspective.

Maybe some people privately.

But I think most British people by now recognize that the American colonists had legitimate grievances.

Besides we saved their asses. 😛

Pakistani troops aide Bahrain's crackdown

Foundation linked to the Pakistani army has been providing Bahrain thousands of soldiers for its crackdown on protests.

Mujib Mashal
Al Jazeera English
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/07/2011725145048574888.html

In March, as a government crackdown on pro-democracy protestors intensified in Bahrain, curious advertisements started appearing in Pakistani media.

"Urgent requirement - manpower for Bahrain National Guard," said one.

"For service in Bahrain National Guard, the following categories of people with previous army and police experience are urgently needed," said another, with "previous experience" and "urgent need" underscored.

The categories included: former army drill instructors, anti-riot instructors, retired military police, and former army cooks.

In the following two months, on the back of visits to Islamabad by senior Saudi and Bahraini officials, sources say at least 2,500 former servicemen were recruited by Bahrainis and brought to Manama, increasing the size of their national guard and riot police by as much as 50 per cent.

"We know that continued airplanes are coming to Bahrain and bringing soldiers from Pakistan," Nabeel Rajab, president of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights, told Al Jazeera.

"We do not know the exact number, but we know that it is much more than 1,500 or 2,000 people."

Recruited into the special forces, the national guard, and the riot police, the Pakistani citizens are tasked with suppressing Shia protesters that are reportedly demanding equal rights after years of alleged oppression at the hands of the royal family, part of Bahrain's Sunni minority.

"Our own Shia cannot join the security forces, but the government recruits from abroad," said Rajab.

On the ground in Pakistan, the recruitments were handled by the Fauji Foundation, one of the largest conglomerates in the country with close ties to the Pakistani military. In addition to the Overseas Employment Services, which is tasked with providing job opportunities for retired military personnel, the foundation owns large cereal and gas companies, sugar mills, security firms, as well as hospitals and universities.

The Fauji Foundation did not respond to Al Jazeera's request for comment.

"Pakistanis, particularly Baluchs, make up a large part of the Bahraini force," said Fahad Desmukh, a former resident of Bahrain who now lives in Pakistan.

"They are extremely visible on the streets - so visible that the protestors were recently responding to the police in Urdu, knowing they did not speak Arabic." [Watch the video of protesters chanting 'police are crazy' in Urdu here.]

A small country of roughly 800,000 people (including about 235,000 non-nationals), Bahrain has a Defence Force of about 12,000 and a National Guard of 1,200, according to the US State Department.

The National Guard, which is in the foreront of the crackdown, seems to have been more than doubled by the recent recruitments of mostly Baluch servicemen.

"What it shows is that the Bahraini government has little trust in its own citizens to conduct security operations," Michael Stephens, a Qatar-based Bahrain specialist at the Royal United Services Institute, told Al Jazeera.

"So they rely on foreign recruits to unquestioningly carry out orders of violently suppressing protests."

While Arab nations have a long history of leaning on Pakistan for military expertise as well as foot soldiers, the recent increase in recruitments come at a tricky time. Pakistan has struggled to quell widespread ethnic violence and a robust insurgency on its own streets.

In the region, too, the country faces tremendous challenges.

"It has certainly put Pakistan in a very awkward position, where it has to balance its relationship with Iran on the one side and Saudi Arabia and Bahrain on the other," Stephens said.

Iran, a leading Shia country, has repeatedly denounced the Bahraini government's crackdown on the Shia - while Saudi Arabia has remained Bahrain's closest ally.

Inside Bahrain, the recruitments have brought dangers to the South Asian diaspora, where ill-feeling towards Pakistanis has increased, reportedly because they are seen as the main vehicle in the crackdown.

The influx of Sunni mercenaries has also increased fears that the government might be naturalising the new recruits in its efforts to change the country's Shia-majority demographic.

Importing expertise

"In the 1970s and 80s, many Arab countries flushed with oil money bought state of the art equipment, but [the] local population lacked technical skills," said Hamid Hussain, a long time analyst and historian of the Pakistani military.

"A number of Pakistan army and air force personnel were deputed to several countries including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, Syria and Iraq. "

The recruitments varied from a dozen advisors to thousands of trainers and operators of complicated equipment.

The most prominent cases of such partnership was in 1970, when then Brigadier Zia ul Haq helped the Jordanian forces suppress Palestinians in what became known as "Black September".

Zia ul Haq, in one of the interesting paradoxes of the Pakistani military, later became a feared dictator who introduced a swift process of "Islamisation".

Pakistan's security relationship with Saudi Arabia, in particular, has put it at odds with Iran, its neighbour to the west. The two nations have been stuck in a Shia-Sunni rivalry for decades and have battled proxy wars across the region.

During the 1991 Gulf war, much to Saudi Arabia's apparent dismay, Pakistan turned down their request for preemptive help, in case Saddam Hussain launched attacks.

Reviving the relationship since has taken a long time, but when the uprising in Bahrain brought fears of unrest knocking on Saudi doors, the chairman of the Saudi National Security Council, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, made two quiet trips to Pakistan to seek their support in case protests erupted at home.

"Potential need for foreign troops in case protests spiral out of control has forced Saudis to work with current Pakistani civilian government for whom they have nothing but utter contempt," said Hussain.

Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Reza Gilani told Prince Bandar that his country supported the Saudi stance in the Gulf and the Middle East and would stand by Riyadh for regional peace, according to Pakistani media.

"The president and prime minister of Pakistan, faced with grim economic situation of the country and army brass uncertain about continued US funding, are delighted at the potential of a cash windfall from Saudi patrons," said Hussain.

Also on Prince Bandar's agenda was gaining Pakistan's support for the Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)force that deployed to Bahrain for helping the Kingdom.

The trip was followed by visits from the Bahraini foreign minister and the commander of their national guard.

Then, recruitment adverts appeared in Pakistani media.

Baluchistan, where most of the recruits come from, is a province of six million in Pakistan's southwest. For decades, an armed movement for self-determination there has been met with a severe government crackdown.

Baluch nationalist fighters expressed their dismay at the recruitment long before the recent escalation.

"We call upon the Baluch nation not to become part of any tyrant or oppressive army, at a time when the Baluch nation is living in a state of war … and are struggling against the tyrants ourselves," Basham Baluch, a spokesman for Baluch Liberation Front said in a 2009 statement.

"Instead of turning the young Baluch into hired killers, they should join the national armies [Baluch Liberation Front, Baluchistan Liberation Army] to make the independence of their homeland a reality.

"We do not want the Baluch people to be used and turned into mercenaries."

continued

The backlash

Bahrain is home to a large population of foreign labourers._ The majority of the work forces there comprises South Asian migrants, particularly Pakistanis.

"Our country has a history of appreciation for the help Pakistanis have provided in development. But more recently we have seen crimes directed at Pakistanis, and that is worrying," said Rajab, the human rights activist.

He points to the fact that thousands of people have been arrested and hundreds of houses have been looted by government forces. Since Pakistanis make up at least 30 per cent of the security forces, he says, when people think of the crackdown they think of Pakistanis.

"The poor Pakistani labourer who has nothing do with security forces suffers from all this."

Human rights activists and analysts also fear that the government is swiftly increasing the rate of naturalisation for Sunni immigrants in recent months in order to tip the ethnic balance of the country.

With a clear Shia majority, the country has been ruled by a royal family from the Sunni minority.

"What needs to be closely watched is the number of these recruits who will be naturalised in the coming months and years ahead," said RUSI's Stephens.

"Many will not return home to Pakistan, and recent statistics show that South Asians make up a big majority of the foreign citizens naturalised in Bahrain."

While many believe Pakistan is providing workers and soldiers to Bahrain in return for much needed economic aid, activists such as Rajab remain perplexed by the decision.

"What I wonder is how the Pakistani government allows this many people to be brought here and used as mercenaries," said Rajab.

"We know that many of these recruits are poor, uneducated, and are just looking for a job. They don't know what they are signing up for. But the Pakistan government certainly knows, so why are they allowing this?"

Originally posted by inimalist
nope, they will just back out of the security resolutions, rather than vetoing them and standing up to American power. They don't want to challenge American military operations, because they want the freedom to do the same, re: Georgia.
And America does what Israel wants....taking care of Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Excellent thread... Pretty weird that it's here...

I don't ever remember reading the OP. Odd...cause i posted in this thread.

But, I think it's quite obvious that the monarchy is trying quite unapologetically to create a more favorable environment for themselves. (Obvious point is obvious.)

Additionally, they are leveraging their situation, strategically, with other nations: intelligent decision making in the self-preservation process. Sure, it is almost clear that their actions are morally wrong, but that's just one perspective of many. Pakistan has a role to play as long as they can offer a resource. Even if that resource is "security" forces.

Unfortunately, I do not see this playing out in favor of human rights. I see this playing out in favor of status quo and even improving status quo for a very few select individuals.

Originally posted by dadudemon
But, I think it's quite obvious that the monarchy is trying quite unapologetically to create a more favorable environment for themselves. (Obvious point is obvious.)

Additionally, they are leveraging their situation, strategically, with other nations: intelligent decision making in the self-preservation process. Sure, it is almost clear that their actions are morally wrong, but that's just one perspective of many. Pakistan has a role to play as long as they can offer a resource. Even if that resource is "security" forces.

I suppose that is true, certainly SA wants to dominate the region in as many ways as possible, and establishing an international framework that puts them in the drivers seat is good for them.

I'm more interested in pointing out, this cabal of nations that SA leads are often the very same ones that the West touts as our allies in the region. So like, until it became impossible to ignore their sponsorship of terrorism and extreme religion, SA was the go to ally in the region for America. Pakistan, until the OBL incident, had that same position. Further, when justifying the legitimacy of the Libya campaign, American, European and Canadian officials pointed out that Qutar and UAE were also sending forces to assist in "helping the rebels". Both of those nations are members of the GCC, and in fact, at the very same time as they were sending troops to protect civilians in Libya, they were also sending troops to Bahrain to violently crack down on the exact same type of civilian.

The broader geopolitical message is that, well, maybe we shouldn't take such clear sides in regional politics, because there is likely no way not to come face to face with such problems. obviously we can't or shouldn't shut our doors on SA, Pakistan and the whole GCC, but using these nations as the "go to" example of why we have support in the region is nonsense, and frankly is an asset to both SA and Iran.

Originally posted by inimalist
I suppose that is true, certainly SA wants to dominate the region in as many ways as possible, and establishing an international framework that puts them in the drivers seat is good for them.

I'm more interested in pointing out, this cabal of nations that SA leads are often the very same ones that the West touts as our allies in the region. So like, until it became impossible to ignore their sponsorship of terrorism and extreme religion, SA was [b]the go to ally in the region for America. Pakistan, until the OBL incident, had that same position. Further, when justifying the legitimacy of the Libya campaign, American, European and Canadian officials pointed out that Qutar and UAE were also sending forces to assist in "helping the rebels". Both of those nations are members of the GCC, and in fact, at the very same time as they were sending troops to protect civilians in Libya, they were also sending troops to Bahrain to violently crack down on the exact same type of civilian.

The broader geopolitical message is that, well, maybe we shouldn't take such clear sides in regional politics, because there is likely no way not to come face to face with such problems. obviously we can't or shouldn't shut our doors on SA, Pakistan and the whole GCC, but using these nations as the "go to" example of why we have support in the region is nonsense, and frankly is an asset to both SA and Iran. [/B]

To be honest, I did not know that UAE was doing such hypocritical things. Why was this not covered very well, if at all, in mainstream Western news?

That's a bit irritating, to me. I've always thought highly of the UAE as I felt they were a more progressive nation by middle eastern standards. I planned to, one day, visit the UAE (because they have one of the world's best gyms...odd, I know...it's a hobby of mine.) but I'm not too sure about that trip, anymore.

I can clearly see why Pakistan is involved: they need not only to improve their relations and "power" position, they also need the money! 😄

Also, I have come to acknowledge the hypocritical nature of the West a long time ago. We decree that we need to free the Iraqi people from a murderous dictator (to throw off the detractors demanding evidence of these weapons of mass destruction) but where were we during the incidents in Dafur?

However, that's not to say that all hope is lost. Some senators and House Reps in the US outright admitted fault INSTEAD of dodging the point.

I'd also like to point out the Ron Paul got to hide behind the US constitution because of some sort of provision that prohibited to the US from warring without the UN's approval. I thought that was a nice way of actually dodging the point and taking a stance. hmm

Saudi Arabia has moved decisively to bolster Bahrain’s embattled royal family, sending military forces across the causeway linking the two kingdoms after violent weekend pro-democracy protests by Shia demonstrators all but overwhelmed police.

Saudi Arabia sent troops into Bahrain on Monday to help put down weeks of protests by the Shi'ite Muslim majority, a move opponents of the Sunni ruling family on the island called a declaration of war.

Analysts saw the troop movement into Bahrain, home to the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, as a mark of concern in Saudi Arabia that concessions by the country's monarchy could inspire the conservative Sunni kingdom's own Shi'ite minority.

About 1,000 Saudi soldiers entered Bahrain to protect government facilities, a Saudi official source said, a day after mainly Shi'ite protesters overran police and blocked roads.

"They are part of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) force that would guard the government installations," the source said, referring to the six-member bloc that coordinates military and economic policy in the world's top oil-exporting region.

Bahrain said on Monday it had asked the Gulf troops for support in line with a GCC defense pact. The United Arab Emirates has said it would also respond to the call.

Witnesses saw some 150 armored troop carriers, ambulances, water tankers and jeeps cross into Bahrain via the 25-km (16-mile) causeway and head toward Riffa, a Sunni area that is home to the royal family and military hospital.

Bahrain TV later showed footage it said was of advance units of the joint regional Peninsula Shield forces that had arrived in Bahrain "due to the unfortunate events that are shaking the security of the kingdom and terrorizing citizens and residents."

saudi arabia needs to be destroyed already. honestly a coup, assasinations and absorbing of foreign accounts. along with israel.

I think it will be very interesting to see what becomes of Saudi Arabia when/if oil runs out/effective alternative fuel sources are developed.

They're trying to diversify, but who knows how that will pan out, especially when some important Saudis are probably of the mindset that oil will always be there.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I think it will be very interesting to see what becomes of Saudi Arabia when/if oil runs out/effective alternative fuel sources are developed.

They're trying to diversify, but who knows how that will pan out, especially when some important Saudis are probably of the mindset that oil will always be there.

there certainly are many who try to make it appear that they wont run out

all things considered, I am afraid to see what happens in the kingdom when they feel like they are backed into a corner, given how important oil revenues are to the royal family

Originally posted by inimalist
there certainly are many who try to make it appear that they wont run out

all things considered, I am afraid to see what happens in the kingdom when they feel like they are backed into a corner, given how important oil revenues are to the royal family


Oh its gonna be a disaster.

Without western support you have to wonder how long Saudi Arabia could go on with what they're doing.

Do you think that a Saudi-Iranian war is likely in the near future? I've read a few reports that suggest that there's already a Saudi-Iranian Cold War of sorts that's getting more and more serious.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Oh its gonna be a disaster.

Without western support you have to wonder how long Saudi Arabia could go on with what they're doing.

Do you think that a Saudi-Iranian war is likely in the near future? I've read a few reports that suggest that there's already a Saudi-Iranian Cold War of sorts that's getting more and more serious.

cold war, sure

most experts on the region look at Iran's nuclear plan as being more aimed at local superiority over the Saudis rather than as any major threat to the Israelis or American interests (which makes sense, as such an attack would ensure the destruction of the Mullahs) [though, given the apocalyptic nature of their belief system, I suppose anything is possible], whereas Saudi Arabia has already received enriched uranium from America as part of deals to keep the oil flowing/keep Iran down. Surely more maneuvering on both the part of the Iranians and the Saudis is going on.

there is the issue of whether they are engaged in proxy conflict, with one nation or the other fostering dissent in the other nation through extremist groups, or questions like, was Iran a major part of the Bahrain protests. To the former I would not be surprised at all, especially given the ethnic nature of the Sunni/Shia splits in those nations, however, I've seen nothing to suggest Iran played a major role in the incident in Bahrain (especially considering how peaceful the protests were in the first place).

Ironically, and I know this is old news now, but because America destabilized Iraq, they have extended the sphere of influence of Iran into a nation that was formally not aligned to either state, which really emphasizes how little the Americans understood about the region when they went in, this is even more apparent when you look at the Saudi and Pakistani support for extremists and the charity frauds they have set up throughout the world to collect funds for extremists and push the ultra-orthodox Wahhabi/Salafi interpretations of Islam. I'm not saying regime change in any of these nations was a good idea, but damn, of the 4 mentioned, they picked the one that was a paper tiger and no longer a major threat to the region or the world.

EDIT: without western support I think the Saudis could actually stay in power for a long time. If we just took a hands off approach, there would be nothing stopping the royals from completely dominating their population in even more terrible ways. There have been extremely modest improvements in SA over the years, largely from Western pressure. If we took the money and arms we gave the nation and put strings on them, and forced the Saudis to comply with various human rights accords, we would be much more successful at fostering some change there, imho. Certainly, oil money is very important for the nation, but America is only one of many buyers on the world market, and given the power of OPEC, trying to starve off the Royals would probably have negative repercussions for the entire planet (as oil is priced on international, rather than local markets). American influence isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the ignorant way they have tried to divide the region into "good guys" and "bad guys" leaves a lot to be desired, and entirely sells out most of Americas values and principles. [for example, look at Syria, no Western involvement and they are just killing their civilians without a second thought]