Turkey is acting as a rear base for the insurgency and a forward command post for US/NATO forces. Through its much-touted ‘zero problems with neighbors’ doctrine, the Turkish government had set out with a realistic chance of being everyone’s friend. It has now made itself everyone’s enemy, including its own, by embracing policies that have put it on a collision course with disaster. By being duped into burning its bridges with Syria – Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya explains – Ankara has laid the foundations for the destabilization of the Turkish republic at the hands of the very same powers whose deleterious strategy she is currently serving.

The Push to ignite a Turkish civil war through a Syrian quagmire
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya – Voltaire Network – 15 August, 2012

Turkey itself is a major target for destabilization, upheaval, and finally balkanization through its participation in the US-led siege against Syria. Ankara has burned its bridges in Syria for the sake of its failing neo-Ottoman regional policy. The Turkish government has actively pursued regime change, spied on Syria for NATO and Israel, violated Syrian sovereignty, supported acts of terrorism and lawlessness, and provided logistical support for the insurgency inside Syria.

Any chances of seeing some form of Turkish regional leadership under neo-Ottomanism have faded. Turkey’s southern borders have been transformed into intelligence and logistical hubs for the CIA and the Mossad in the process, complete with an intelligence “nerve centre” in the Turkish city of Adana. [1] Despite Turkey’s denials, reports about Adana are undeniable and Turkish officers have also been apprehended in covert military operations against the Syrian Arab Republic. The Turkish Labour Party has even demanded that the US General Consul in Adana be deported for “masterminding and leading the activities of Syrian terrorists.” [2] Mehmet Ali Ediboglu and Mevlut Dudu, two Turkish MPs, have also testified that foreign fighters have been renting homes [3] on Turkey’s border with Syria and that Turkish ambulances have been helping smuggle weapons for the insurgents inside Syria. [4]
Turkish Regional Isolation

If the Syrian state collapses, neighbouring Turkey will be the biggest loser. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his government are foolishly aligning Turkey for disaster. Aside from Ankara’s historically bad relations with Armenia, Erdogan has managed to singlehandedly alienate Russia and three of Turkey’s most important neighbours. This has damaged the Turkish economy and disrupted the flow of Turkish goods. There have been clamp downs on activists too in connection with Turkey’s policy against Damascus. The freedom of the Turkish media has been affected as well; Erdogan has moved forward with legislation to restrict media freedoms. Prime Minister Erdogan and Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu have even both attacked “reporters who quoted President Assad’s statements in Cumhuriyet, accusing them of treason, because they had questioned the official Turkish account of the Turkish jet shot down by in [sic.] Syria [for spying].” [5]

On Turkey’s eastern flank tensions are building between it and both Iraq and Iran. Baghdad is reviewing its diplomatic ties with the Turkish government, because Ankara is encouraging the Kurdistan Regional Government in Northern Iraq to act independently of Iraq’s federal government. Erdogan’s government has done this partially as a result of Baghdad’s steadfast opposition to regime change in Syria and in part because of Iraq’s strengthening alliance with Iran. Tehran on the other hand has halted the visa-free entry of Turkish citizens into Iran and warned the Turkish government that it is stoking the flames of a regional fire in Syria that will eventually burn Turkey too.
Growing Internal Divisions in Turkey

Despite all the patriotic speeches being made by the Turkish government to rally the Turkish people against Syria, Turkey is a much divided nation over Erdogan’s hostilities with Damascus. A significant portion of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey or Turkish Meclis and Turkey’s opposition parties have all condemned Erdogan for misleading the Turkish people and stirring their country towards disaster. There is also growing resentment amongst the citizens of Turkey about Erdogan’s cooperation with the US, NATO, Israel, and the Arab dictatorships – like Qatar and Saudi Arabia – against the Syrians and others. The majority of Turkish citizens oppose Turkish ties to Israel, the hosting of NATO facilities in Turkey, the missile shield project, and cooperation with the US in the Middle East. …more

West hampering Syria crisis resolution: China paper
15 August, 2012 – By Kelly Olsen -Agence France Presse

Beijing: China’s top state newspaper accused Western powers Wednesday of hampering international efforts to end the bloody conflict in Syria, as a senior Damascus envoy visited Beijing for talks with leaders.

The People’s Daily, mouthpiece of the governing Communist party, said in a commentary that China would press for a political solution to the crisis during this week’s visit by a special advisor to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

China and Russia have repeatedly used their vetoes to scuttle UN Security Council resolutions aimed at tackling the conflict, putting them at loggerheads with fellow permanent members the United States, Britain and France.

“Some Western countries have never given up the goal of ‘regime change’ in Syria and constantly reinforced their support for the anti-government forces,” said a commentary in the paper.

That stance had “undermined the unity within the UN Security Council and prevented the international community from reaching a consensus and (outgoing peace envoy Kofi) Annan’s mediation efforts from taking effect,” it said.

The United States has urged Beijing to use its influence on the embattled regime in Damascus to press for an end to the bloodshed during the visit, with the 17-month conflict showing no signs of abating.

But China’s communist leaders are deeply uncomfortable with what they see as Western intervention in other countries’ internal affairs.

In a brief statement Monday, China said that Bouthaina Shaaban, special adviser to Assad, would be in Beijing this week for talks, and that it was considering inviting members of the Syrian opposition to visit.

Since then, no details of her visit have emerged and the foreign ministry did not respond to AFP requests for information on her meetings.

On Tuesday Syria’s former prime minister, the highest profile government figure to defect, said the regime was “collapsed militarily, economically and morally” and now controlled only 30 percent of Syria’s territory.

The conflict has killed more than 23,000 people since March last year, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The UN says more than a million people have been displaced and another 140,000 have fled to Syria’s neighbours.
…more

How Washington’s Determination to Dominate Iran Corrodes U.S. Standing in the Middle East: Lessons from Bahrain
15 August, 2012 – The Race for IRan

As the United States pushes for regime change in Syria and American allies flock to suspend Syria from the Organization for Islamic Cooperation, it is illuminating to examine the strategic bankruptcy of U.S. policy toward Bahrain. For the deep flaws in Washington’s approach to Bahrain grow out of the same considerations that warp its policy toward Syria. And at the root of all these dangerously deficient policies is a dogged determination to contain and undermine the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Against this backdrop, Hillary appeared on Al Jazeera’s Inside Story Americas last week to discuss the political situation in Bahrain and Washington’s ongoing support for the Khalifa monarchy there; click here to view the segment or on the video above. The program opens with an interview with Maryam al-Khawaja, a Bahraini human rights activist. The panel discussion in which Hillary appears begins at 7:05 in the video.

Bahrain is arguably the most flagrant manifestation of American hypocrisy regarding the Arab spring. As the Islamic Republic’s foreign minister, Dr. Ali Akbar Salehi, noted in his Washington Post op ed on Syria last week, see here, “there have been conflicting responses to the civic movements sweeping the Arab world. A glaring example of these contradictions lies in Bahrain and the way some states have responded to the crackdown on the uprising there.” In his set up for the Inside Story episode, Al Jazeera’s moderator, Shihab Rattansi, notes that “for almost every single Arab country that has seen uprisings over the past two years, the U.S. has called for regime change—except for the Gulf kingdom of Bahrain, one of its closest allies in the region.” Bahrain is, of course, the home of the U.S. Fifth Fleet. Three months ago, the United States resumed selling weapons to the Bahraini government, notwithstanding its extensive, ongoing, and well-documented violations of human rights and its failure to make any discernible progress toward meaningful political reform, much less a negotiated political settlement between the government and the opposition.

As Hillary points out, Washington cannot recalibrate its policy toward Bahrain without a fundamental reevaluation of its larger strategy in the Middle East. As a result of that strategy, she says, the United States is

“stuck with an ally like Bahrain, we’re stuck with some of the allies that we have in the Middle East. That’s because our strategic interest, as U.S. officials have framed it now for decades, is essentially oil and Israel. And oil is personified in the state of Saudi Arabia. So any country that is willing to align itself, to collude with Israel and Saudi Arabia, to give up their own sovereignty, to do whatever they do to their own citizens in order to work with Israel and Saudi Arabia in U.S. interests—those are our allies…Sometimes they’re better, sometimes they’re worse, sometimes they behave better, sometimes they don’t. But we’re stuck with them.”

Hillary notes that, with the “advent of the information revolution” in the Middle East, “it’s harder to be stuck with bad allies. It’s harder to justify having an alliance with a country, with a government that abuses its own citizens, and carries out policies that are against its own interests…You can’t stand there, like when I worked in the Bush administration with President Bush, on the eve of the invasion of Iraq with the King of Bahrain, smiling and saying ‘Everything is great.’ You can’t do that anymore. Even though it was wrong probably for the King of Bahrain to support the U.S. invasion of Iraq, we could get away with it then; we can’t get away with it now.”

Nevertheless, Hillary underscores that the United States, as its Middle East strategy is currently structured, “cannot support the opposition in Bahrain, because if the opposition had any real say in the government, they would never allow Bahrain to cede its territory to the United States for the Fifth Fleet, to be used as a platform to attack a much stronger neighbor [Iran]. That makes no sense strategically.” …more

Human Rights First is running a series of profiles on human rights defenders we work with in various countries. These profiles help to explain their work, motivations, and challenges.

A Conversation with Bahraini Human Rights Defender Saidyousif al-Mahafdha
15 August, 2012 – By Diana Sayed – Human Rights First

Saidyousif al-Mahafdha, the head of monitoring cases and documentation at the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, (BCHR), works closely with Human Rights First to report on the daily violence and crackdown on the peaceful protesters in Bahrain. Yousif works closely with detained human rights defender, Nabeel Rajab, and has been very active in documenting, tweeting, blogging and raising awareness behind the government abuses in Bahrain.

How did you become an activist?

I don’t belong to a family with any interest in politics. I live with a middle class family in an area far from the daily protest. In 2007 I attended a conference organized by “Waad” a Bahraini liberal political society and there were recent released political prisoners speaking up about the brutal torture they have endured in prison. This conference was a wake-up call for me, it almost felt if I was hearing stories from Abu Ghraib Prison. Later that night I was not able to sleep very well, I was haunted by the stories I’ve heard and I was thinking on how to help my people. The next day I sent an email to Nabeel Rajab and since I have no interest in politics, I asked to work with him at the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR).

Do you see yourself as a Human Rights Defender?

Yes, I am a human rights defender and I attend and monitor the peaceful protests and I try my best to be in the heart of the main events where most human right violations occur. I try to defend the rights of the people and I bridge what I see on the ground by communicating with international Human Rights organizations like Front Line Defenders and Human Rights First.

How do you perceive the current situation in Bahrain?

The situation is escalating and the violations are increasing. It seems like the regime in Bahrain doesn’t have any intentions on stopping the violations any time soon and without pressure internationally, especially from the US and UK, it will continue the same.

What do you want – outcome based?

I intend to continue my path as a Human Rights Activists to defend the rights of my people, I have no interest in joining a parliament, a ministry or any similar institutions. Working in the Human Rights field brings me a comfort and satisfies my conscience.

What risks do you see are posed on your everyday life?

Many risks and dangers. I have been sacked from my work, received death threats from a security officer on twitter and received anonymous threats of being arrested or killed. I have been arrested twice and once I was beaten. I may be targeted or shot at and be injured like what recently happened to Zainab Al-Khawaja while she was participating in a peaceful protest. I may also be arrested again at any time. Yet in spite of all the risks and threats I am fully aware that it is the price I have to pay to continue my path to defend human rights and I am willing to endure whatever may come.

What is a normal day in the life of…Said Yousif?

I start my day by responding to emails sent from organizations, reporters, activists and others, I don’t go to work since I have been expelled. Later, being the Head of Monitoring & Follow Up at Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), I visit and document violations that happened the night before for example arrests, police vandalizing, thefts, injuries and torture caused by the regime’s mercenaries.

At night I go to a coffee shop to write the statement based on what I documented and then I meet fellow members of the BCHR or attend meetings with civil society organizations. I also attend and monitor peaceful protests happening in the villages. I rarely see my wife and daughters in spite the fact that we live in the same flat. I usually dedicate Fridays to be with them. …source

…more Latuff HERE

Bahrain’s still stuck
By Jane Kinninmont – 15 August, 2012 – Foreign Policy

Yesterday, Bahrain postponed verdicts in the controversial trial of 13 high-profile opposition leaders until September 4. Their legal battle may be receiving little media attention, but it reveals much about the uncertain political scene in the strategically important country. Bahrain’s government has not managed to use last year’s famous inquiry by M. Cherif Bassiouni’s commission to draw a line under the events of 2011. As a result, the public remains polarized, though more on political than on sectarian grounds, while the protest movement has survived the detention of key leaders. Meanwhile, the root causes of the uprising remain unaddressed, in the absence of a process of political dialogue and negotiation.

Bahrain’s royally commissioned inquiry into last year’s unrest, commonly known as the Bassiouni report, was intended to be the basis for a national consensus on the causes of and the events during the uprising, as well as making recommendations for human rights reforms. Optimists — in the government, the opposition, and among Bahrain’s Western allies — hoped it could help kick start a much-needed process of dialogue and negotiation between the government and political factions. The report was praised internationally as groundbreaking and progressive, and far more forward leaning than expected.

But despite public relations efforts by the Bahraini government, its recommendations have not been fully implemented. Various practices criticized in the report — from nighttime house raids to imprisonment for offenses involving political expression — are recurring. Promises to hold torturers accountable have resulted in just three policemen being convicted. Opposition groups estimate there are around 1,400 political prisoners while the government says there are none. According to estimates from al-Wefaq, the main opposition group, in July alone 240 people were arrested and 100 injured with birdshot and rubber bullets. The group’s secretary-general, Sheikh Ali Salman, was wounded with birdshot when taking part in a small demonstration outside his house in June.

Meanwhile, the frustrated opposition shows signs of further radicalization. A small but increasing minority of protesters lob Molotov cocktails and iron rods at security forces and police stations and are looking for new ways to improvise weapons. While the mainstream opposition leaders routinely condemn violence, a rising number of voices online are seeking to justify violence as “self-defense” or “resistance.” This in turn encourages a vocal pro-government constituency to applaud the arrests of activists, seeing them all as complicit, even when they are arrested for tweets or for protesting without a permit.

The Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) report remains a vital reference point, and is a rare source of leverage for those within Bahrain’s bureaucracy who are trying to push reforms. But there is little traction for such efforts given that almost all of the senior decision makers who oversaw last year’s crackdown have retained their posts. There remain differences within the royal family, the Al Khalifa, over whether to make concessions to the opposition and how to handle any process of dialogue. Such divides manifest in mixed messages, as was seen earlier this year in the case of one of the 13 imprisoned opposition leaders, Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, a dual Danish-Bahraini national, who was then on hunger strike. Danish officials at Bahrain’s Universal Periodic Review at the U.N. Human Rights Council said that they had reached an agreement in mid-March for al-Khawaja to leave Bahrain for medical treatment in Denmark, but this was never implemented.

The 13 men in court this week had been convicted in a military court last year of crimes that included plotting to overthrow the government by force, as well as inciting hatred of the regime, insulting the army, and fomenting sectarianism. Several, including al-Khawaja, received life sentences. All the defendants assert their innocence and have described extensive torture in custody. The Bassiouni inquiry was highly critical of the behavior of security forces, including both “systemic” and “systematic” use of torture. It recommended that civilian courts review all convictions by military courts that had not respected basic fair-trial principles, such as the inadmissibility of “confessions” extracted through torture. Six months after the inquiry report, after international attention increasingly focused on al-Khawaja’s hunger strike, it was eventually announced that the opposition leaders would have this right. However, their lawyers say the court is still using tortured “confessions” as evidence. …more

Q&A: What about Bahrain’s uprising?
By Nicole Dow – CNN – 15 August, 2012

(CNN) — For more than a year, rights groups have criticized Bahrain for its crackdown on anti-government protests.

The protests, which began in February 2011, were spurred by the popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt but have failed to gain the traction of the other Arab Spring uprisings.

Lamees Dhaif, a journalist and activist, shares her thoughts on what is happening in her home country and its future in this conversation, edited for length and clarity.

CNN: What do you think about what happened to Ali Hasan, the 11-year-old boy who was arrested in May for participating in an “illegal gathering” and released months later from jail?

Dhaif: I think what happened to Ali Hasan is very tragic. Keeping a minor behind bars for a month is unexplainable. No judiciary system in the world keeps infants jailed for this long without a trial. …

I think that children are being detained frequently now in order to silence protesters. The regime wants to warn protesters that it can do whatever it wants to anyone regardless of his/her age or type of activity the person performs at the time of arrest. … Ali is not the first minor nor the last. There are still others in jail.

CNN: How is this story illustrative of what is happening in Bahrain? Where do you see the situation in Bahrain going?

Dhaif: The situation in Bahrain is unpredictable and chaotic just like all the arbitrary arrests and fabricated charges. The judiciary system is not independent. The charges are a reflection of what the regime wants to take place on the ground. The charges are politically biased, and in most cases, no solid evidence is present. …

The situation is becoming more and more complicated especially now that activists and human rights defenders who were not arrested earlier are targeted now by the regime. An example is Nabeel Rajab, who is detained for bogus charges. The regime is escalating its revenge from its people amidst the silence of the international community. …more

Human Right activists locked up in Bahrain
15 August, 2012 – By Colin S. Cavell – PressTV

Bahrain’s geopolitical status as an island nation allows it to easily incarcerate oppositional leadership, torture them, and-if recalcitrant and unrepentant-kill them. Unfortunately for the House of Khalifa, a majority of the citizenry of Bahrain refuse to be enslaved under a despotic monarchical form of government.”
Bahrain courts have put off until Thursday, August 16th, their decision on several charges against Nabeel Rajab, President of Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR).

The court’s ruling, initially scheduled for Sunday, August 12th, is to decide on Mr. Rajab’s guilt for tweeting statements which the regime of King Hamad Al-Khalifa deems insurrectionary. Until the court rules, Mr. Rajab remains behind bars as a prisoner of the state.

Yes, you read that correctly, Rajab was imprisoned for utilizing the social medium of tweeting where comments are restricted to 140 characters! In Bahrain today, articulating any opinion which the Khalifas deem subversive will land you in jail. The 48-year-old Nabeel Rajab is only one of the most notable democratic activists to find himself behind prison bars in the kingdom’s dungeons.

Joining Rajab in custody at the present time is 30-year-old activist Zainab Al-Khawaja, a courageous pro-democracy activist who was arrested and sent to jail for peacefully, yet publicly, protesting against the 229-year-old Al-Khalifa monarchy. Zainab, a graduate of the American Studies Center at the University of Bahrain, had previously been injured by Bahraini police who shot her with a tear gas canister in her right thigh in June during another peaceful protest.

Also locked up for voicing his opposition to the family dynasty of the Al-Khalifa is 51-year-old Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, father of Zainab and past president of the BCHR and former director of the Middle East-North Africa region for the International Foundation for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders’ Front Line. Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja drew international attention to the Arab Spring uprising in Bahrain with a 110-day hunger strike which he ended at the end of May 2012 when the regime had doctors in the military hospital force-feed him against his will.

Languishing also in prison, since March of 2011, is 53-year-old Ibrahim Sharif al-Sayed who is General Secretary of the secular liberal National Democratic Action Society (Wa’ad) and one of the most knowledgeable and astute leaders of the pro-democracy opposition. Sharif’s main crime is that he understands the nature of the Khalifa monarchy too well and knows how to dislodge it and is unafraid in organizing to do so. It was inevitable that Sharif would be one of the first to be sent to jail. Moreover, Sharif is a Sunni, which undercuts the regime’s claim that oppositional forces in Bahrain are only comprised of Shia co-religionists acting as an Iranian-directed fifth column.

In addition to the above pro-democracy activists, Bahrain’s prisons are hosting, as well, the following opposition leaders: 64-year-old Haq Movement for Liberties and Democracy Secretary-General Hassan Mushaima, 47-year-old University of Bahrain academic Dr. Abdul-Jalil Al-Sangace who is head of the Human Rights Office as well as Director of the Media and International Relations for the Haq Movement for Liberties and Democracy, Sheikh Mohammed Ali Al-Mahfoodh, Chairman of Amal Society and a prolific writer of letters to President Barack Obama explaining the Bahraini Revolution to him, Board Member of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights (BYSHR) Naji Fateel, and countless others who have dared to exercise their rights guaranteed under the Universal Convention on Human Rights.

Bahrain’s geopolitical status as an island nation allows it to easily incarcerate oppositional leadership, torture them, and-if recalcitrant and unrepentant-kill them. Unfortunately for the House of Khalifa, a majority of the citizenry of Bahrain refuse to be enslaved under a despotic monarchical form of government.

Since the February 14th revolution started in 2011, over three quarters of the population regularly march en masse in the streets of Bahrain calling for the removal of the Al-Khalifa and the establishment of a democracy with genuine republican representative government. In addition, police nightly contend with democratic activists in every village and town in Bahrain. The police respond with poison tear gas, arrests, torture, and killings.

Confident-some say perhaps overconfident-are the Khalifa who grant the US Navy port access to its Fifth Fleet as well as tarmac rights at the Sheik Isa Airbase in Bahrain allowing the US to forward project its military into the Middle East in order to maintain hegemonic control over the region and thus ensuring American theft of Middle Eastern oil through its string of despotic monarchs from Saudi Arabia to the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, and on into Kuwait. These puppet states are all US & UK proxy-run regimes led by the most corrupt autocratic regimes on Earth, a group of despotic absolute monarchs possessing none of the virtues described in fairy tales and all of the vices humans attribute to the dregs of society.

Keeping the lid on journalistic reporting from the Kingdom is a full-time activity of the Al-Khalifa regime. Seattle-based documentary filmmaker, Jen Marlowe, was deported from the Kingdom in July of this year for attempting to report on the ongoing democracy protests. In May of 2012, Freelance journalist Ahmed Radhi was arrested and disappeared into the Kingdom’s labyrinthian system of torture chambers because he dared to criticize Saudi Arabia’s proposed union with Bahrain.

Three Channel 4 television journalists from the UK were arrested and then deported from Bahrain while attempting to cover a pro-democracy protest march during the controversial Grand Prix car races which took place in Bahrain in mid-April of this year. Ahmed Ismail Hassan, a Bahraini videographer was killed in April of this year while filming a pro-democracy protest in Salmabad, a village southwest of Manama. Global Research’s Middle East and East Africa Correspondent Finian Cunningham was ordered out of Bahrain on June 18, 2011 due to his uncompromising and critical reporting of the democratic uprising in the country as well as the concomitant brutal oppression, mass arrests, torture, and murder of pro-democracy activists. And this is merely a partial list of the hundreds of bloggers, journalists, and human rights defenders who have been arrested, jailed, tortured, and/or deported from the country since the pro-democracy uprising commenced in February of 2011.

In addition to silencing protesters and journalists, the Bahraini government has enlisted the assistance of at least five American and three UK-based public relations firms to spin the news abroad that Bahrain is once again “open for business” to gullible Brits and Yanks. As well, it appears that academics are now being enlisted to validate the regime’s narrative that all is well in Bahrain. Just recently, a bizarre report was issued by a Dr. Mitchell A. Belfer claiming that “Bahrain is back on track following the unrest and majority of the people have become tired of political bickering and street violence.”

The Bahrain regime’s new “expert” is reportedly the editor of the Central European Journal of International and Security Studies (CEJISS) and is associated with the Prague-based Metropolitan University Department of International Relations and the founder of its European Studies program. If, as this Dr. Belfer concludes, that the “‘coast is clear and tensions have subsided’,” then his findings are in direct contradiction to that of numerous human rights organizations and most international observers of Bahrain.

Whether he is merely a shill for the Khalifa regime or simply delusional as regards the objective situation in Bahrain, we at least know his political allegiance, as he is reported to have asserted that the pro-democracy protesters in Bahrain are waging a “‘losing’ battle as the country slowly gears towards dialogue and reconciliation.” Such wishful thinking on the part of the regime and its lackeys is entirely fanciful and completely ignores the massive and determined opposition to the monarchy in Bahrain. But given that the Al-Khalifa have long been living a fairy-land existence with little connection to the lives of everyday citizens in Bahrain, it follows that they may indeed believe that there is no such thing as objective reality. ‘Simply say it isn’t so, and the protesters instantly vanish,’ appears to be their strategy. If only life were so simple… …source

Track Record of postponements raises question of political show trials.

Verdicts to be Issued Thursday for Bahraini Human Rights Defender Nabeel Rajab
(Witness Bahrain) – 14 August, 2012 – BCHR

On Thursday August 16, a court in Manama, Bahrain is expected to issue a verdict/hear briefs in four cases pending against Human Rights Defender Nabeel Rajab, including Rajab’s appeal over the three-month sentence he is currently serving for being found guilty of libel due to posting six statements on Twitter that are critical of the Bahraini Prime Minister. The other cases that the court will hear include allegedly inciting gatherings and unauthorized marches.

This is not the first time the court has set a date for a verdict, and in other prominent cases – notably that of Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja – the court has met only to announce a delay. These postponements raise the question as to the legitimacy of Bahrain’s judicial process. Media reports have cited the delays as an indication of the government’s commitment to reform, yet the track record to justify such conclusions is lacking.

“I believe strongly in peaceful means of struggle. It could take longer time, but has better results,” Nabeel Rajab told Witness Bahrain in a videotaped interview just days before his arrest. “I will continue all my life struggling for democracy and human rights.”

Rajab is currently being held in Jaw Central Prison and, according to reports from his family, in an insect-ridden cell without air conditioning or proper ventilation, and without needed medical attention for his eczema, high blood pressure and an irregular heartbeat. …more

Said Yousif Almuhafa (right) with Nabeel Rajab current illegally detained for “insulting tweet”

Feminism as Counterterrorism?
By Vasuki Nesiah – 14 August, 2012

The most prominent and unequivocal public articulation of an alliance between feminism and counterterrorism came at the dawn of the U.S. war in Afghanistan, when Laura Bush argued that “the fight against terrorism is a fight for the rights and dignity of women.” This approach was criticized by many as “just a few opportunistic references to women.” However, today, what we may term ”security feminism” is becoming embedded in American foreign policy — a trend that has been emphatically empowered by Hillary Clinton’s State Department.

This “securitizing” of women’s issues means that feminist interests have been “muscled up” and framed to have traction as a mode of counterterrorism. For instance, Isaac Kfir argues that rather than advocating for gender equity “as a basic right,” we should be “changing the discourse and using national security” language “to advance gender equality.” In other words, it is not just counterterrorism advocates opportunistically playing the gender card. Feminists also play the security card. Over the long term, their goal is to heighten the visibility and significance of gender issues. More immediately, some also hope they can secure greater funding for women’s groups as “an important countermovement to terrorism.”

The security paradigm is, crucially, not just a framework to advance nationalism and militarization. For many in the counterterrorism field, it is also about highlighting vulnerability. It is the focus on vulnerability and victimization that converges with those invested in mainstreaming feminism within foreign policy agendas. For instance, feminists and counterterrorism advocates have found common cause in anti-immigrant policies through issues such as human trafficking. Laura Sjoberg’s language of “empathetic war-fighting” draws from feminist security theory to capture this convergence. “Empathetic war-fighting,” she writes, brings a “focus on individual human security [that] will strengthen just war [theory]’s effectiveness, increase its relevance to modern warfare, and decrease its insidious abstraction and gender bias.” …more

Bleeding Syria
By Adil E. Shamoo – 9 August, 2012 – FPIP

Syrian rebels have been fighting Bashar al-Assad’s forces for nearly a year and a half in a conflict that has caused 20,000 deaths. As the world watches in horror, much confusion remains about the nature of the rebel troops, the identity of the regime’s supporters, and what actions — if any — should be taken by the rest of the world.

The Syrian rebels represent a range of interests. Most are Sunni Muslims that have been shut out of power by the current Shia Alawite regime. Among others, they include Muslim Brotherhood members and — more recently — a mix of al-Qaeda supporters. The Syrian regime is supported by middle-class and wealthy Syrians, Alawites, and Christians, who together constitute nearly half of the population.

Syria has become a battleground for disparate forces with vastly differing goals. It is likely that the Syrian regime will be toppled soon, but no one really knows what will happen afterwards. The best guess is that the killings will continue as these groups continue to fight for power.

Although these internal forces are deadly, even graver complications have arisen as a result of external meddling. A host of self-serving sharks have exploited the legitimate struggle against the dictatorial Assad regime to serve their own regional interests. This outside interference has only worsened the catastrophe for the Syrian people.

The Sectarian Divide

While the United States and its allies were quick to declare that Assad must go, they have largely turned a blind eye as the rebels have committed extreme atrocities against regime forces and their supporters. They have overlooked the concerns of Syria’s minorities, who have enjoyed the protection of the regime and perceive the conflict as a fight for their lives.

The United States and its allies are providing covert support to the rebels through ground operations at the Turkish border with Syria. Turkey’s primary interest is to ensure that the Kurds living in Syria and Iraq do not foment more discontent among the 14 millions Kurds in Turkey. For its part, the United States is seeking to ensure a pro-Western regime in Syria that will be friendly to U.S. interests and its allies in the region.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states are supporting the Sunni Syrian rebels with tens of millions of dollars for weapons gladly funneled by intermediaries of the Western powers such as Turkey. These conservative Sunni regimes are fomenting a sectarian war against the Shia. The simplistic narrative of brave Syrian rebels fighting for their freedom against a cruel and vicious Syrian regime obscures the more complex story of sectarian strife, which has been stoked by internal and external forces alike.

In public there is little to no discussion about the role our allies have played in fueling a sectarian war in the Middle East. Instead, the sectarian bloodbaths occurring all over Syria are portrayed almost exclusively as regime atrocities, leading to more Western calls for regime change.

Our Iraq policy created sectarian divisions resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands of people. Continuing our false posturing in Syria only underscores regional impressions of U.S. foreign policy as deadly and devious, and reminds the inhabitants of the region that we are not to be trusted. …more

Ecuador’s president Rafael Correa has agreed to give the WikiLeaks founder asylum, according to an official in Quito

Julian Assange will be granted asylum, says official
Irene Caselli – guardian.co.uk – 14 August, 2012

Ecuador’s president Rafael Correa has agreed to give Julian Assange asylum, officials within Ecuador’s government have said.

The WikiLeaks founder has been holed up at Ecuador’s London embassy since 19 June, when he officially requested political asylum.

“Ecuador will grant asylum to Julian Assange,” said an official in the Ecuadorean capital Quito, who is familiar with the government discussions.

On Monday, Correa told state-run ECTV that he would decide this week whether to grant asylum to Assange. Correa said a large amount of material about international law had to be examined to make a responsible informed decision.

Ecuador’s foreign minister Ricardo Patiño indicated that the president would reveal his answer once the Olympic Games were over. But it remains unclear if giving Assange asylum will allow him to leave Britain and fly to Ecuador, or amounts to little more than a symbolic gesture. At the moment he faces the prospect of arrest as soon as he leaves the embassy for breaching his bail conditions.

“For Mr Assange to leave England, he should have a safe pass from the British [government]. Will that be possible? That’s an issue we have to take into account,” Patino told Reuters on Tuesday.

Government sources in Quito confirmed that despite the outstanding legal issues Correa would grant Assange asylum – a move which would annoy Britain, the US and Sweden. They added that the offer was made to Assange several months ago, well before he sought refuge in the embassy, and following confidential negotiations with senior London embassy staff.

The official with knowledge of the discussions said the embassy had discussed Assange’s asylum request. The British government, however, “discouraged the idea,” the offical said. The Swedish government was also “not very collaborative”, the official said.

The official added: “We see Assange’s request as a humanitarian issue. The contact between the Ecuadorean government and WikiLeaks goes back to May 2011, when we became the first country to see the leaked US embassy cables completely declassified … It is clear that when Julian entered the embassy there was already some sort of deal. We see in his work a parallel with our struggle for national sovereignty and the democratisation of international relations.”

Assange took refuge in Ecuador’s embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning over allegations of sexual misconduct. He is said to be living in one room of the diplomatic building, where he has a high-speed internet connection.

Ecuadorean diplomats believe Assange is at risk of being extradited from Sweden to the US, where he could face the death penalty. Assange’s supporters claim the US has already secretly indicted him following WikiLeaks’ release in 2010 of US diplomatic cables, as well as classified Afghan and Iraq war logs.

Correa and Patiño have both said that Ecuador will take a sovereign decision regarding Assange. They say they view his case as a humanitarian act, and are seeking to protect Assange’s right to life and freedom. On Monday the state-run newspaper El Telégrafo confirmed a decision had been made, although the paper did not specify what that decision was. It said that senior officials had been meeting in the past few days to iron out the last legal details.

Two weeks ago Assange’s mother Christine Assange paid Ecuador an official visit, following an invitation by Ecuador’s foreign affairs ministry. She met with Correa and Patiño, as well as with other top politicians, including Fernando Cordero, head of Ecuador’s legislature. Both Patiño and Ms Assange appeared visibly touched during a press conference, which had to be briefly suspended when Ms Assange started crying.

Ms Assange also held several public meetings in government buildings, and in one case she was accompanied by the head of Assange’s defence team, Baltasar Garzón, the former Spanish judge who ordered the London arrest of Chile’s General Pinochet. …more

Egypt’s president considering amending Camp David Accords
14 August, 2012 – War in Context

Al-Masry Al-Youm reports: President Mohamed Morsy is studying whether to amend the Camp David Accords to ensure Egypt’s full sovereignty and control over every inch of Sinai, said Mohamed Gadallah, legal adviser to the president.

Calls for amending the peace treaty with Israel, which also governs the security presence in the Sinai Peninsula, have been on the rise since last week’s attack on a military checkpoint at the border left 16 Egyptian security officers dead.

Former presidential candidate Hamdeen Sabbahi called for the amendments Saturday. The Revolutionary Youth Union has filed a lawsuit before an administrative court demanding that the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel be amended.

Morsy has vowed several times since he took office to preserve international treaties that Egypt has signed.

Gadallah didn’t give more details on the issue while speaking to Al-Masry Al-Youm Monday. He added that Morsy would soon order the release of another batch of military detainees. …source

Washington Puts Its Money on Proxy War
The Election Year Outsourcing that No One’s Talking About
By Nick Turse – The TomDispatch

In the 1980s, the U.S. government began funneling aid to mujahedeen rebels in Afghanistan as part of an American proxy war against the Soviet Union. It was, in the minds of America’s Cold War leaders, a rare chance to bloody the Soviets, to give them a taste of the sort of defeat the Vietnamese, with Soviet help, had inflicted on Washington the decade before. In 1989, after years of bloody combat, the Red Army did indeed limp out of Afghanistan in defeat. Since late 2001, the United States has been fighting its former Afghan proxies and their progeny. Now, after years of bloody combat, it’s the U.S. that’s looking to withdraw the bulk of its forces and once again employ proxies to secure its interests there.

From Asia and Africa to the Middle East and the Americas, the Obama administration is increasingly embracing a multifaceted, light-footprint brand of warfare. Gone, for the moment at least, are the days of full-scale invasions of the Eurasian mainland. Instead, Washington is now planning to rely ever more heavily on drones and special operations forces to fight scattered global enemies on the cheap. A centerpiece of this new American way of war is the outsourcing of fighting duties to local proxies around the world.

While the United States is currently engaged in just one outright proxy war, backing a multi-nation African force to battle Islamist militants in Somalia, it’s laying the groundwork for the extensive use of surrogate forces in the future, training “native” troops to carry out missions — up to and including outright warfare. With this in mind and under the auspices of the Pentagon and the State Department, U.S. military personnel now take part in near-constant joint exercises and training missions around the world aimed at fostering alliances, building coalitions, and whipping surrogate forces into shape to support U.S. national security objectives.

While using slightly different methods in different regions, the basic strategy is a global one in which the U.S. will train, equip, and advise indigenous forces — generally from poor, underdeveloped nations — to do the fighting (and dying) it doesn’t want to do. In the process, as small an American force as possible, including special forces operatives and air support, will be brought to bear to aid those surrogates. Like drones, proxy warfare appears to offer an easy solution to complex problems. But as Washington’s 30-year debacle in Afghanistan indicates, the ultimate costs may prove both unimaginable and unimaginably high.

Start with Afghanistan itself. For more than a decade, the U.S. and its coalition partners have been training Afghan security forces in the hopes that they would take over the war there, defending U.S. and allied interests as the American-led international force draws down. Yet despite an expenditure of almost $50 billion on bringing it up to speed, the Afghan National Army and other security forces have drastically underperformed any and all expectations, year after year.

One track of the U.S. plan has been a little-talked-about proxy army run by the CIA. For years, the Agency has trained and employed six clandestine militias that operate near the cities of Kandahar, Kabul, and Jalalabad as well as in Khost, Kunar, and Paktika provinces. Working with U.S. Special Forces and controlled by Americans, these “Counterterror Pursuit Teams” evidently operate free of any Afghan governmental supervision and have reportedly carried out cross-border raids into Pakistan, offering their American patrons a classic benefit of proxy warfare: plausible deniability.

This clandestine effort has also been supplemented by the creation of a massive, conventional indigenous security force. While officially under Afghan government control, these military and police forces are almost entirely dependent on the financial support of the U.S. and allied governments for their continued existence.

Today, the Afghan National Security Forces officially number more than 343,000, but only 7% of its army units and 9% of its police units are rated at the highest level of effectiveness. By contrast, even after more than a decade of large-scale Western aid, 95% of its recruits are still functionally illiterate.

Not surprisingly, this massive force, trained by high-priced private contractors, Western European militaries, and the United States, and backed by U.S. and coalition forces and their advanced weapons systems, has been unable to stamp out a lightly-armed, modest-sized, less-than-popular, rag-tag insurgency. One of the few tasks this proxy force seems skilled at is shooting American and allied forces, quite often their own trainers, in increasingly common “green-on-blue” attacks.

Adding insult to injury, this poor-performing, coalition-killing force is expensive. Bought and paid for by the United States and its coalition partners, it costs between $10 billion and $12 billion each year to sustain in a country whose gross domestic product is just $18 billion. Over the long term, such a situation is untenable.

Back to the Future

Utilizing foreign surrogates is nothing new. Since ancient times, empires and nation-states have employed foreign troops and indigenous forces to wage war or have backed them when it suited their policy aims. By the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the tactic had become de rigueur for colonial powers like the French who employed Senegalese, Moroccans, and other African forces in Indochina and elsewhere, and the British who regularly used Nepalese Gurkhas to wage counterinsurgencies in places ranging from Iraq and Malaya to Borneo. …more

Saudi court in Riyadh brought ten charges against senior Shia cleric ‘Sheikh Tawfiq al-Amer’
Shia Post – 14 August, 2012

Saudi Shia cleric Sheikh Tawfiq al-Amer who has been held for one year without trial had been presented to Central Criminal Court in Riyadh 9 August 2012.

Central Criminal Court filed ten charges against Sheikh al-Amer, as in an charge sheet.

Sheikh Tawfiq al-Amer, the Shia leader prayer of the Imam Baqi mosque in the town of al-Hofouf in al-Ahsa district of the Eastern Province, was arrested on 3 August 2011 by the General Intelligence (Al-Mabahith Al-’Aamma) of Al-Ahsa.

Sheikh Tawfiq al-Amer called for a constitutional monarchy in Saudi Arabia which is an absolute monarchy.

His charges range from tarnishing the reputation of the state, calling for the conservative Islamic kingdom to become a constitutional monarchy, equal rights for the oppressed Shia minority and put an end to sectarian discrimination in the country.

It is worth to mention that Shaikh Tawfiq al-’Amer was arrested on 27 February 2011 by the Saudi General Intelligence.

On June 22, 2008 Shaikh Tawfiq al-’Amer was arrested, after he spoke out in a sermon he gave in Hofuf on June 11 against a May 30 statement signed by 22 prominent Saudi Wahhabi clerics, including Abdullah bin Jibrin, Abd al-Rahman al-Barrak, and Nasir al-‘Umar, in which they called the “Shia sect an evil among the sects of the Islamic nation, and the greatest enemy and deceivers of the Sunni people.”

In September 2008 , Shaikh al-’Amer was arrested for the second time according a direct order from the Interior Minister (Nayef bin Abdulaziz).

In April 2005 Shaikh al-’Amer was arrested over his supporting religious and societal activities in his town.

Sheikh Amer is one of the prominent advocates of civil rights and freedoms in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Also, he is well knows for his bold views of reforms at high levels. …source

Russia denies move to put Bahrain in UN focus
By Habib Toumi – 13 August, 2012 – Gulf News

Manama: Russia’s ambassador to Bahrain has denied a report that his country had suggested putting Bahrain’s political situation on the agenda of the Security Council.

“The report is groundless and lacks credibility,” Victor Smirnov told Bahraini officials as well as MPs Ahmad Al Saati, the head of the Bahrain Parliamentary Bloc, and Sawsan Al Taqawi, the head of the Foreign, Defence and National Security Commission, in separate meetings.

The media report surfaced over the weekend and the suggestion to discuss the situation in Bahrain was attributed to the Russian permanent representative at the United Nations.

According to the report that cited ‘diplomatic sources’ it did not name, the US, France and the UK were shocked by the Russian suggestion to debate developments in Bahrain. It did not mention the reaction of China, the fifth member of the Security Council, to the alleged suggestion.

However, Smirnov told the two Bahraini lawmakers that Moscow did not issue any new formal statement on Bahrain, saying that Russia’s positions are “clear” and “posted on the foreign ministry website”.

Official statements on Russia’s policy are made by the president, the foreign minister or his deputy only and other statements, even if they are issued by officials, do not reflect Russia’s position, the diplomat was quoted as telling the Bahraini MPs. …more

Bahrain Uprising: Police Fire Tear Gas, Rubber Bullets On Protesters
RT – 14 August, 2012

Dozens of people have reportedly been injured after the army fired rubber bullets at protesters during a recent escalation of violence in Bahrain. Several Bahraini towns have witnessed heavy clashes between protesters and regime forces.

Activists posted on Twitter scores of photos showing fresh injuries from rubber bullets as well as clouds of teargas in the streets of Bahrain.

Most of the reports of violence were coming from one of Bahrain’s largest cities A’ali. Clashes have also been reported in Saar, Sitra, Karanah and several other cities.
Bahrain

Bahrain

Activists say at least two people were detained during the latest night of clashes. Authorities have deployed additional troops and, reportedly, tanks to patrol the streets.

The ongoing uprising by the country’s Shiite majority, which claims systematic discrimination on the part of Bahrain’s Sunni monarchy, has weakened after multiple mass arrests. At least 50 people have been killed and many more detained since protests began 18 months ago.

The Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society, a leading Bahraini opposition party, accuses the regime of keeping around 1,400 prisoners as political hostages to put pressure on the opposition. One of its leading figures, Khalil Al-Marzooq, told RT that the authorities are violently suppressing protests and arresting citizens on a daily basis to prevent the people from expressing their lawful demands.

“They do not want anyone to protest, especially in the last few months, and they crash any movement by the youth now, when they fire excessive tear-gas and shotguns at these demonstrators,” Al-Marzooq said. “And some of the youth unfortunately retaliate with Molotov cocktails because of the anger,” he added.

Several dozens of opposition leaders and prominent human rights activists have been detained since protests began and the court is due to decide their fate. This is one of the reasons why the protests intensified recently, Al-Marzooq says.

“Today and especially tonight lots of youths went to the street to demonstrate calling for the release of these people,” Al-Marzooq said. These prominent detainees have become “symbols” for activists, inspiring them to demonstrate peacefully without fear of repressions from the authorities, he explained.

“All of these are not going back home,” he said. “Even if they are detained ten times and released, they will continue to be in the streets until we reach our dignity, freedom, and reach a political system that we desire.”

Al-Marzooq believes that the international community will eventually change its “biased” stance on the Bahraini regime’s violations of human rights and that will speed up the “Bahraini revolution.”

“What is happening in Bahrain is absolute monarchy. There is no real representation for the people in the cabinet, the legislative authority and the judicial authority and security,” he said. “The Bahraini people are able to make it and we will make it. We will see what happened in Egypt and Tunisia happen in Bahrain.” …source

Israeli official warns Hezbollah against aiding Iran
14 August, 2012 – Al Akhbar

A senior Israeli military official warned Hezbollah on Tuesday it will suffer a “harsh and painful” blow if it assists Iran in the event of an Israeli strike against the Islamic republic, Israeli media reported.

Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth cited an anonymous official who said Israel will target all of Lebanon, and not just Hezbollah strongholds, in any future war.

“Hezbollah will not be the only one to pay the price; the entire nation of Lebanon will,” he said.

“I suggest Hezbollah not test us.”

The Israeli official conceded Hezbollah’s rocket arsenal has increased since the last war in July 2006, and that its capabilities can reach the entire Jewish state.

“Since the Second Lebanon War there have been six years of calm. After the next war there will be 10 years of calm,” he said.

Hezbollah and Israel have engaged in a war of words in recent months, issuing threats and counter-threats as speculation mounts of a possible Israeli strike on Iran.

The Lebanese Shia group is an important ally of Iran, and successfully thwarted an Israeli invasion attempt in 2006.

The official’s remarks come a day after former Israeli Mossad chief Danny Yatom said Israel would have to destroy parts of Lebanon and Gaza as part of any strike on Iran, to offset threats on its borders.

“We will have to stop the firing of missiles, both from the north and the south, as quickly as possible.”

To do this, he said, Israel would have to “act with great force against infrastructure in Lebanon and Gaza, and it is possible that the price that Lebanon and Gaza will pay will be horrible,” he told Israel Radio on Monday.

“We are liable to destroy, or likely to destroy, parts of Lebanon, and parts of Gaza, so that our citizens will not suffer and be killed,” he said.

Hezbollah denies member kidnapped in Syria

Meanwhile, Hezbollah denied on Tuesday a media report that a member had been kidnapped by Syrian rebels in Syria.

Saudi channel Al-Arabiya reported that Hassan Salim al-Miqdad had been detained by the Free Syrian Army in Damascus, a claim denied by Hezbollah’s media office.

In a statement, Hezbollah said that Miqdad was not a member of the party.

Hezbollah is still working to secure the release of 11 kidnapped Lebanese Shia pilgrims being held near Aleppo by rebels.

The pilgrims were detained while returning from a trip in Iran by bus in May. The rebels released the women on the bus, but kept the men, charging them with being members of Hezbollah.

Hezbollah denied the charges, insisting the men were pilgrims, while the released female relatives, now in Beirut, continue to claim that the Free Syrian Army was responsible for the kidnapping.

The Free Syrian Army denied at the time it was involved.

Hezbollah has stood by President Bashar al-Assad during the uprising, angering Syria’s opposition groups who had hoped Lebanon’s powerful Shia movement would back their revolt.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has previously stated he was willing to play a mediation role between opposition groups and the regime. …source

Saudi Arabia a dictatorship: Swedish defence minister Sweden
14 August, 2012 – PressTV

“Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian regime and an absolute monarchy, where serious human rights crimes are committed.”

Sweden’s Defense Minister Karin Enstrom Sweden’s defense minister has criticized the violation of human rights in Saudi Arabia, describing the kingdom as a “dictatorship.”

“Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian regime and an absolute monarchy, where serious human rights crimes are committed,” Karin Enstrom told the Swedish news agency TT.

“The (Swedish) government does not qualify countries as democracies or dictatorships, but if the only choices to describe Saudi Arabia are as a democracy or dictatorship, then Saudi Arabia has to be described as a dictatorship,” said Enstrom, who is also a member of Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt’s conservative Moderate Party.

According to Human Rights Watch, the Saudi regime ”routinely represses expression critical of the government”.

Since February 2011, protesters have held demonstrations on an almost regular basis in Saudi Arabia, mainly in Qatif and Awamiyah in Eastern Province, primarily calling for the release of all political prisoners, freedom of expression and assembly, as well as an end to widespread discrimination.

However, the demonstrations have turned into protests against the repressive Al Saud regime, especially since November 2011 when Saudi security forces killed five protesters and injured many others in the province.

Similar demonstrations have also been held in Riyadh and the holy city of Medina over the past few weeks. …more