Tag Archives: Bahrain

We Live in Small Times

20 Sun Jan 2013

Posted by in United States

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

As President Barack Obama swears his oath of office for his second term, one of the most prominent names who served under him during his first four years shall not be joining him – Hillary Rodham Clinton. Bested in the Democratic primaries by the President, Clinton served Obama in one of the most powerful positions in the US government, the Secretary of State. Yet as she leaves office, what is the legacy Clinton leaves behind?

It is not an easy task to make such evaluations, particularly in the era of the imperial presidency. Furthermore, the public at large has an inflated image of the SecState owing to the preponderance of American military and economic power. Yet international leaders are also focused nationalists, brazen manipulators, and opportunists willing to use world crises for their own ends. Clinton also enjoys tremendous popularity, voted by Americans as the most admired woman in the world 12 years in a row and 17 times since she became First Lady in 1993. In many eyes, her achievements are magnified and her failures diminished. Another factor is that some policies bear fruit only in the long run, and it is too soon to be speaking of Clinton’s legacy. Thus, any judgement must be taken with a grain of salt.

Clinton’s term has been beset with many challenges – some inherited from the previous administration such as Iraq and Afghanistan, and a few new ones such as the Arab Spring, Iran, and Pakistan. In an era of receding US influence, Clinton has had to rely more on persuasion than economic or military inducement than her predecessors did. The results have been somewhat lacklustre. To be fair to the SecState, however, social media, terrorism, and cyber attacks have dispersed threats and created a far more complex world for the simple exercise of 20th century state power.

Clinton is largely credited with persuading the President to intervene militarily in Libya in support of the rebels against Muammar Qaddafi. Yet much of her efforts were tarnished when Islamists attacked the US consulate in Benghazi and killed the US ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, among three other US citizens. As revolution swept across the Middle East, it was evident that the Department of State had no strategy to handle the situation. On the one hand, many observers saw it as yet another sign of US hypocrisy when Foggy Bottom chose to ignore the unrest in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Iraq; Syria and Yemen only saw a delayed and mild response. On the other hand, Washington incurred the suspicion of its traditional allies too, who perceived the US reaction to the Egyptian conflagration as an abandonment of a long-time ally, Hosni Mubarak. “We were perceived to have thrown Mubarak under the bus,” said Strobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of State under Bill Clinton.

Moving across the region, Clinton has not been able to report any positive movement in the nuclear negotiations with Iran. The ayatollahs remain intractable as ever and have brought more centrifuges online as they maintain 19.5% uranium enrichment. The Taliban remains a potent force in Afghanistan and the US hopes to abandon the country for the second time in 25 years; Pakistan has seen a spike in anti-Americanism and extremism, while the state of its nuclear arsenal gives many officials sleepless nights.

In perennially problematic zones, Clinton has seen no more success than her predecessors. North Korea conducted yet another nuclear test in 2009 as well as several missile tests, and successfully launched a rocket in 2012. The peace process between Israel and Palestine is not stagnant but has actually taken a step backwards with increased Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel and Israel’s launching of Mivtza Amud Anan in response. Clinton has not been able to make any headway in either of these areas.

Clinton admirers argue, however, that the State Department has broken new ground in engaging with civil society. Clinton’s department has close to 200 Twitter accounts and almost 300 Facebook pages with over 15 million subscribers and many millions more visitors. The SecState created a new position, Ambassador for Women, to pursue women’s issues across the globe. Clinton embraced the notion of soft power and used her embassies and consulates to promote US exports, sports ties, educational and other exchanges. She has also encouraged working directly with non-governmental organisations in the distribution of aid for development. The core theme of the Clinton State Department was developing dialogue and relationships with the US’ international partners that would last much after she had left the office.

It is not clear how much of this will truly survive Clinton’s term. Engagement with social media has amorphous benefits, and the constant re-invention of the medium requires a serious commitment to it. More tangibly, the progress on women’s issues that Clinton pursued has already begun to unravel – in Afghanistan, women have yet again been subjected to barbarous practices in areas controlled by the Taliban, and the situation is expected to get worse as the US plans its exit next year. The  reversal illustrates strikingly for any in doubt that soft power not supported by hard power is meaningless. Lastly, the relationships Clinton forged with foreign leaders will evapourate with her departure. Diplomacy is a human activity, and it will be influenced by its practitioners – it would be foolish to believe that John Kerry will not create his own relationships, none of which need be the same as his predecessor’s.

Clinton has certainly not affected the fate of a continent as George Marshall did with his eponymous plan; nor has she defined an era as Dean Acheson did the early Cold War. Clinton’s term does not even boast of major events, such as Nixinger’s opening of China in 1972, or for that matter, Condoleezza Rice’s nuclear overtures to India. While these standards seem stratospherically high, so were these events unimaginable until they occurred. Clinton’s term could certainly have been better, but to be fair, it could also have been much worse. Her failures have befuddled many before her and will likely do so her successors too; after all, it is not everyday that a Bismarck is born.

This post appeared on Tehelka on January 21, 2013.

Staying in Power: A How-To Guide for Would-be Dictators

15 Wed Feb 2012

Posted by in Middle East

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

By many accounts, the Arab Spring all started with a fruit vendor in Tunisia (December 17, 2010). Mohamed Bouazizi, an unemployed youth who had taken to selling fruits to make ends meet, set himself on fire in public when he was harassed by state officials for conducting commerce without a license. Within a month of the daring protest, Tunisian leader Zine el Abidine Ben Ali was ousted, ending his 23-year rule. To the chagrin of dictators all over the Middle East, the revolt – or rather, the idea of it – spread like wildfire, first to Egypt (January 1, 2011), then to Algeria (January 7), Libya (January 14), Yemen (January 23), Lebanon (January 25), Palestine (January 28), Jordan (January 28), Iran (February 14), Bahrain (February 14), Morocco (February 21), Iraq (February 25), Saudi Arabia (March 6), and Kuwait (November 17). Relatively minor protests were seen in Mauritania, Oman, Sudan, and the Western Sahara as well. Within a year, four of these leaders (Ben Ali, Hosni Mubarak, Muammar Qaddafi, Ali Abdullah Saleh) were replaced while those that managed to stay in power were forced to make serious concessions in the face of public pressure.

The astute Middle East observer may notice that while the West (some permutation of the United States, the European Union, and NATO) strongly supported the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and Iran, intervened militarily in Libya, and are contemplating doing so in Syria, other countries have managed to stay below their radar. This may have had partly to do with the size and length of protests as well as casualties. Or not. Bahrain, for example, despite conceding to reforms, suppressed the revolt with Saudi and Pakistani troops. Protests lasted for approximately five months until late June/early July and 72 people were killed although the situation is still far from resolved (The Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry also found that almost 2,000 people had been tortured, 3,000 wounded, and another 3,000 arrested). Similarly, in Saudi Arabia, the situation remains tense although most of the violence has stopped. Official figures put the casualties at 10 dead with 200 arrests, but news reports have risen that Saudi security agencies have removed bodies to ‘hide evidence of the crime.’

Despite revolutions in over 20 countries in the Greater Middle East and Africa, so far, only five leaders (Ivory Coast’s Laurent Gbagbo) have been deposed. If you are in the dictatorship business, it should relieve you that the rebels so far enjoy merely a less than 25% success rate. Nonetheless, here are a few things that one can do to bolster the prospect of maintaining one’s grip on one’s state:

1. The Resource Card: Ideally, your state should have some precious or critical resource that everyone wants. However, this is not enough on its own – ask Saddam Hussein. It is vital to maintain close relations with at least one of the UNSC Five – historically, the US has been uncomfortably fickle and should not be the only option. Similarly, the UK and France may succumb to US pressure. Although Russia and China are far more reliable UNSC-wise, they may exact a heavier price than you are willing to pay. Role model – Saudi Arabia

2. The Geography Card: It may be too much to hope that Americans ever learn geography, but do not underestimate their military – whether a senator can find Bushehr or not, a Tomahawk cruise missile certainly could! These men in uniform are perfectly capable of reporting to their leaders the implications of geography on policy. For example, if you were a tiny island nation close to a state the US has designated as one of the “axis of evil,” and your state has a large minority of people with a similar demographic category as the neighbouring AoE state, let’s say Shi’a, the political consequences of their rise in power and your demise would be too high to bear. Bonus points if you can also buy American (F-16s, oil machinery, etc.), and lots of it. Role model – Bahrain

3. The Opportunities Card: This card is in some ways a combination of the first two cards. Sometimes, your state may not possess any resources of its own in abundance, nor will it have the fortune of being placed right next to an AoE state (a list which, after all, is constantly changing). However, you may be blessed with being in a strategic location that makes your state the easiest conduit to such fields of wealth. Pipelines for oil and gas, water, etc. must all cross your land before they can be shipped to their far off destinations. Entering into multi-billion dollar contracts will force states (of the UNSC Five) to put their commitment to you in writing. After all, it would take a very brave politician to abandon a billion-dollar pipeline, causing job loss in his country and a loss of resource…especially after he’s paid for it. Such opportunity can also come through influence – some non-state entities might agree to talks with state actors only if you are at the table. As a facilitator, your role could be indispensable. Role model – Syria

4. The Discrimination Card: Don’t play this card – it only makes you look stupid. Although there is ample ground to accuse other state leaders of xenophobia, racism, and now Islamophobia, most of them are smart enough not to allow it to get in the way of common sense politics. The US certainly didn’t hesitate to withdraw support from Ian Smith (white dude) or Manuel Noriega (Christian brother). Chances are, people just don’t like you. Besides, if your own people are against you, it would be difficult to convince the world press that the infidel is out to get you. Role model – Iran…seriously Tehran, WTF?

5. The Timeliness Card: If it comes down to the use of force, it is best to act quickly and quietly. The Venetian Republic, for example, would visit opposition leaders quietly and late at night lest their busy day schedule be disturbed. If that is not possible (social media and the internet have made censorship and surveillance so much harder), it is best to act when everyone is distracted by something else – turmoil in the Middle East, nuclear proliferation, sectarian violence, missile defence, the Superbowl, Lindsay Lohan…there are many options. Act quickly and brutally but leave as little mark as possible. Once they get a whiff, human rights groups can be quite persistent and annoying. It is best to portray your actions as defending law and order – that gives you much room to squeeze through all kinds of repression under the guise of cultural norms. Role model – Saudi Arabia

6. The Nuclear Card: This is the most difficult card to play in the Successful Dictator’s set. For one, acquiring nuclear capability has become much harder unless you get China to give you blueprints under the table. Secondly, even if you acquired such weaponry, it cannot be used indiscriminately – the first time you use it will most definitely be your last, so bluff very cautiously. There is a reason Stalin and Mao stopped spouting drivel after their nuclear tests. Role model – North Korea

7. If-you-shoot-us-we-will-die Card: This is an exceptionally potent card that works best with the US (Russia and China seem too bloody-minded). Always project yourself as the only sane and stable ally in the region, particularly in your own country. Quietly dispose of the opposition to make sure that is at least partly true. Portray a scenario of doom and gloom if you were replaced. Bonus points if you have weapons of mass destruction. Role model – Pakistan…wow, pure genius!

8. The Where-the-hell-are-you Card: If your country is poor and does not have enough resources of any kind to make it worthwhile to learn your name and location, rest assured, you will not be deposed. But then, why would you yourself want to stay in such a place? Role model – a lot of inner African states

Hopefully, this brief guide will keep you and yours in power for years to come. Don’t worry, international affairs has never been about morality, human rights, or, in the updated 21st century jargon, R2P (right to protect). For those of you trying to figure out why the world wanted to sanction Syria and not Bahrain, why they invaded Libya but not Saudi Arabia, or why the Arab Spring turned into an Islamic Winter, I hope you learned something too…arrivederci.