Tag Archives: Corruption

Buried Headline: Protests in Bahrain

Posted on by
Reply

Greeting internets, you may have noticed my absence due to an intense bout of Primary Income Condition (PIC), which many of you may be more familiar with by its non-medical term: a day job. But now I’m happy to introduce my first feature: Buried Headlines, where I’ll be taking a look at important stories that have been completely ignored, or received some coverage but have since been pushed off the news agenda. First up, the protests in Bahrain . . .

Scene of a Protest from this past month - Manama, Bahrain (Photographer Unknown)

The Situation

Protestors have been met with brutal violence from security forces since the first day they held rallies on February 14th. In addition to beatings, rubber bullets and teargas, police have used live ammunition numerous times against unarmed protestors. Martial law has been imposed, and troops from neighbouring countries have been called in to assist Bahraini security forces. I’ve compiled some video clips below that I believe best demonstrate what protestors were up against, and how peacefully they handled themselves amidst all the violence. Just a heads up, the footage can be hard to watch at times . . .

In the above video you should note the security forces were not under any threat as the protestors were still quite far away from their line. They didn’t fire any warning shots, and used fully automatic weapons. Amazingly, protestors tended to their wounded and resumed marching and chanting only to be shot at again.

A recap of one day of protest that saw protestors shut down a main road into the financial district of the city of Manama.

 

Security forces went after doctors who were treating wounded protestors at clinics set up at the rallies. They surrounded hospitals and plainclothes police went inside to intimidate doctors and activists receiving treatment. Some medical workers were even pulled out of the hospital, beaten, and arrested. One was even interrupted while in the middle of surgery.

So why all of this violent repression from the state? Why are protestors so determined? And why on earth did Saudi Arabia send it’s troops into Bahrain? Read on . . .

The Set-up

The Kingdom of Bahrain, a small island nation in the Persian Gulf has been the site of regular protests since February 14th. Inspired by the Egyptian Revolution that ousted Hosini Mubarak, Bahrainis have been demanding political reform in non-violent rallies. In the beginning they wanted the current King, Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, to push through democratic reforms, but due to recent events the tone has changed to the point where some are even calling for the end of the royal family’s rule altogether.

There are many reasons for this anger, reasons that should be familiar to anyone following the news in other Arab countries in the last two months . . .

Bahrainis are young, urban, educated, and tech-savvy. Far too many are also unemployed (especially those under 30 years old) and starved for housing (many generations of family often live in the same small apartment). They have been expressing these concerns for years, but until recently these expressions didn’t take the form of street protests. The monarchy has so far been unable or unwilling to listen and act on their concerns.

So far this story sounds a lot like the ones that played out in Tunisia and Egypt, but there’s an added layer here . . .

Some observers believe as many as 70% of Bahrainis are Shia Muslims, while Sunni Bahrainis clock in at just over 10%. No one knows for sure, because the government refuses to record those statistics. That’s because Bahrain is ruled by a Sunni minority that includes most government officials, high-ranking employees of many state-run companies, and the entire royal family. The same goes for the military and police force (the two biggest employers in the country) who have a strictly no-Shia policy. In fact, up to half of police officers aren’t even Bahraini, but foreign citizens recruited in countries like Syria and Pakistan – as a result many critics contend they are more loyal to the ruling family than to Bahraini citizens.

Shia Bahrainis say they have been experiencing discrimination since the Al Khalifa came to power over two hundred years ago. These protests for many Bahrainis are as much about religious equality and human rights as they are about unemployment and corruption. However, there has not been any real anti-Sunni rhetoric present at any of the protests. In fact, Sunnis have formed a minority of the people on the streets, and one of the more popular slogans calls for Shia-Sunni unity.

An excellent look into the economic and political divide between Shia and Sunni Bahrainis: from the gleaming new Formula One track to the decrepit housing of Shia villages from CNN International.

Who Buried The Story

Virtually all Western TV news outlets have spent little to no resources to cover the events in Bahrain. Reuters and the Associated Press have kept a few people in the country, and some major networks spared some personel for a few days. Print media a did better job, some newspapers sent correspondents, including Nicolas Kristof who has been doing some fantastic work. In a recent column he offers some insight into the Shia-Sunni divide in the country:

My New York Times colleague Michael Slackman was caught by Bahrain security forces a few weeks ago. He said that they pointed shotguns at him and that he was afraid they were about to shoot when he pulled out his passport and shouted that he was an American journalist. Then, he says, the mood changed abruptly and the leader of the group came over and took Mr. Slackman’s hand, saying warmly: ”Don’t worry! We love Americans!””We’re not after you. We’re after Shia,” the policeman added. Mr. Slackman recalls: ”It sounded like they were hunting rats.”

. . . Yet you can parachute blindfolded into almost any neighborhood in Bahrain and tell immediately whether it is Sunni or Shiite. The former enjoy better roads and public services. And it’s almost impossible for Shiites to be hired by the army or police. Doesn’t that sound like an echo of apartheid?

. . . I wrote a few weeks ago about a distinguished plastic surgeon, Sadiq al-Ekri, who had been bludgeoned by security forces. At the time, I couldn’t interview Dr. Ekri because he was unconscious. But I later returned and was able to talk to him, and his story offers a glimpse into Bahrain’s tragedy.Dr. Ekri is a moderate Shiite who said his best friend is a Sunni. Indeed, Dr. Ekri recently took several weeks off work to escort this friend to Houston for medical treatment. When Bahrain’s security forces attacked protesters, Dr. Ekri tried to help the injured. He said he was trying to rescue a baby abandoned in the melee when police handcuffed him. Even after they knew his identity, he said they clubbed him so hard that they broke his nose. Then, he said, they pulled down his pants and threatened to rape him — all while cursing Shiites.

Kristoff’s work is vital, but he really is the only real heavyweight journalist who’s reported from Bahrain for more than a week. The only network with a sustained presence in the country is Al Jazeera, continuing their groundbreaking coverage of the events of the past few months in the Arab world and beyond. Admittedly, it helps that their headquarters is a short ferry ride away in neighbouring Qatar.

A scene from this past month at Pearl Roundabout in Manama, Bahrain. The landmark had become a symbol of the protest movement. (Photographer Unknown).

Why They Buried It

There are several reasons why the protests in Bahrain didn’t get a lot of sustained coverage in many media outlets. Some reasons are practical: with so many stories of uprisings across the region, many networks’ resources are stretched thin. When editors sit down to choose which stories to cover, they are more likely to spend their resources on a country that their viewers or readers are somewhat familiar with, like Egypt or Libya, instead of tiny Bahrain.

However, unfamiliarity of a place is no excuse to not cover a story, especially one that involves a popular, peaceful uprising against a regime that has shown an increasing penchant for violent repression, and a security force with members that hate a large chunk of the population for their religious affiliation.

There are also geopolitical reasons why this story is not being covered. Bahrain is home to the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet, whose area of responsibility includes important oil shipping lanes such as the Persian Gulf, part of the Arabian Sea, and the Red Sea. As such, the US has been reluctant to criticize the Bahraini government as harshly as it did the Mubarak regime in Egypt, even though both have employed brutal violence against protestors.

There’s Saudi Arabia, which along with the United Arab Emirates sent troops into Bahrain with the approval of the Gulf Cooperation Council. The last time the Saudis sent troops outside their borders was during the Gulf War in 1991, but they felt this deployment was necessary for three reasons.

There is a Shia minority in Saudi Arabia, that has faced discrimination and also happens to reside where most of the Saudis’ oil is located. They did not want them to get inspired by events in Bahrain and start their own uprising, thus threatening oil production and by extension, the economy of the whole country. The Saudi ruling elite also wants to avoid their larger population from starting to push to hard for more democratization, as it would threaten their dominance of Saudi society.

Pearl Roundabout in Manama, Bahrain. Activists had set up camp in the area, following the example of Egyptian activists in Tahrir Square in Cairo. (Photographer Unknown)

Finally, the Gulf Cooperation Council members view Bahrain as a potential proxy that (Shia-majority) Iran will use to gain influence in the region. While it’s true the Iranian regime has attempted to use the situation in Bahrain to its advantage, and seek to make connections to Shia political groups, so far the efforts have been one-sided. The Bahraini royal family have claimed that there are “conspiracies” between Shia political groups in Bahrain and Iran, but these appear to be inventions that mirror claims made by Hosni Mubarak that “Al Qaeda” was behind the Egyptian Revolution. In both cases, these seem to be desperate attempts to discount the valid concerns of protestors, and also justify the use of brutal force against them.

It appears that some sort of compromise has been reached between the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council and the US. In exchange for the GCC’s full backing of military action against Libya, the US has appeared to have silenced any hard criticism of the situation in Bahrain. Thus, the Saudis are supporting a NATO-led air assault against an Arab country, in exchange for Western nations looking the other way while it engages in the brutal suppression of an oppressed people.

Pearl Roundabout, demolished by Bahraini armed forces after a pre-dawn raid on activists. 19/03/11 - Manama, Bahrain (AFP/Getty Images)

The Future

A major development today is that that Kuwait will mediate an effort to end the political crisis and violence in talks between the main opposition groups and the Bahraini government. One can only hope that many of the reasonable and democratic demands of the protestors will be met, and that this marks a move towards a more equal, just, and prosperous future for all Bahrainis.

We will have to wait and see, and hopefully, the news media will be there to observe any new developments.

Revolution Next? Azerbaijan – Part II: The Reform Movement

Posted on by
Reply

Opposition Rally - Baku, Azerbaijan - June 5th, 2005 (Photo by Shakh Aivazov/AP Photo)

Azerbaijan has had a history of popular protest as far back as 1918 when it declared independence from the Russian Empire. More recently in 1990 citizens rallied for independence from the USSR, Soviet troops moved into the capital Baku and opened fire on civilians in what would become known as Black January.

After independence protests against then-president Heydar Aliyev were regular but muted. Many Azerbaijanis were willing to tolerate rampant corruption because they believed that after the country had stabilized and grown economically, Aliyev would be able to bring reform. As time wore on, this belief came to be held by fewer and fewer people as Aliyev made moves to secure more wealth and power for himself and his associates.

Before his death in 2003, Aliyev set in motion a transfer of power to his son, Ilham who remains in office to this day. This culminated in the 2003 presidential elections that saw Ilham Aliyev win by a large margin. The process was widely condemned as being a fraud, with various international organizations citing examples of corruption from before campaigning had even begun, right up until the final results were announced.

This widespread fraud served as a catalyst that saw the ranks of reform-minded groups and political parties swell, their aim was democratic reform and the moment that they chose for this were the 2005 parliamentary elections.

The run-up to and aftermath of this election is detailed in the excellent BBC Documentary How to Plan a Revolution, which was broadcast on CBC several years ago.

You can find the other five parts here: part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5, and part 6.

The film follows the efforts of young activists Emin Hüseynov and Murad Gassanly as they try to organize popular support for democratic reforms. The film has an incredible amount of access to the reform movement, camera crews follow the pair at night as they spray graffiti, drop leaflets into public spaces, and organize protests – all acts which could land them treason charges and life imprisonment.

It’s also an excellent document on the various kinds of corruption an autocratic regime engages in order to suppress popular will during an election and de-rail reformists. Some methods used include using government-sponsored volunteer clubs to provoke protestors into shoving matches, thus justifying use of force by riot police, seizing ballot boxes, arresting election officials who witness fraud, and refusing to register opposition candidates without reason.

In one of the film’s most absurd moments, a bag of hand grenades and explosives is found out in the open in the building that houses the offices for various youth movements. Murat speculates that Azerbaijani security forces employed an old KGB tactic: planting weapons to try and link the movement to violence, discrediting them and giving police grounds for mass arrests. Activists immediately phone journalists to the scene and proceed to call the police to report the explosives. A few officers arrive, take a quick look at the weapons, and leave without making any statements. This prompts the group to turn in the explosives to the police themselves, accompanied by journalists.

Protestors from the "Azadliq" (Freedom) youth group, including Emin Hüseynov, during a protest against election fraud. Baku, Azerbaijan - November 10th, 2005 (photo: Joseph Sywenkyj/New York Times)

The protests against the Aliyev regime culminated with a rally following the announcement of the election results (which saw Aliyev’s NAP and his “independent candidate” supporters win a large majority), and soon after that a day of protest on November 27th. This rally was attended by a cross section of Azerbaijani society: women, men, young, old, elites, the poor and working class. It was brutally crushed by riot police who used tear gas, water canons and beat protestors indiscriminately.

It was difficult enough to watch the final minutes of the film and seeing the hopes of many Azerbaijanis dashed by brute force. What makes it worse in my opinion is that it happened within the context of a deeply hypocritical US foreign policy in the region.

When the neighbouring state of Georgia had it’s Rose Revolution in 2003, and Ukraine had it’s Orange Revolution in 2004, then US president George W. Bush not only supported the reform movement with words, but also with diplomatic initiatives, and cash for activist groups. Perhaps most importantly for the reform movement: Bush pressured both governments to allow peaceful protest and the security forces largely stood aside. This allowed protests to build quickly into a critical mass over the course of only a few days, much like what happened in Egypt during the early days of its recent revolution.

The Bush administration gave the appearance that it was supportive of democratic reform throughout the region. In May of 2005, six months before the Azerbaijani elections, Bush visited Georgia’s capital of Tblisi to give a speech. He congratulated that nation’s reformers and reaffirmed the United State’s commitment to spreading democracy, saying: “Now, across the Caucasus . . . we see the same desire for liberty burning in the hearts of young people. They are demanding their freedom – and they will have it.”

Many Azerbaijanis took this as a sign that the US, and even Bush himself, would back their efforts for democratic reform. They were to be profoundly disappointed.

A young protestor holding a poster of U.S. President George W. Bush. Baku, Azerbaijan - June 5th, 2005. (photo: Shakh Aivazov/AP Photo)

The Bush administration did not even acknowledge the reform movement’s existence, it did not comment on abuses of power by Ilham Aliyev’s regime, and it ignored a report by election observers and resolution by the European Council that condemned widespread election fraud. By turning a blind eye to the situation, the US showed that it was willing to let Aliyev crush the opposition, thus allowing him to send in the riot police during the November 27th protest of 2005.

To add insult to injury, just over a year later, Bush held talks with Ilham Aliyev at the White House. Bush looked on as Aliyev remarked at how he looks to the US as a model of a secular, democratic nation that he wished to emulate. Bush also remarked about Aliyev’s key role in energy security, which was telling.

As I pointed out in my last post, Azerbaijan is a major oil exporter. But more specifically, Aliyev was a key figure in the construction of several crucial oil pipelines that serve Western markets. It’s pretty clear to most observers that energy politics determined Bush’s foreign policy in the region, and not the spread of democratic reform, as he claimed in his Tblisi speech. He had a leader in Aliyev that was receptive to Western energy demands and an early ally in Bush’s War on Terror. Whatever leader emerged from an Azerbaijani revolution may not be as warm to the U.S. as Aliyev was. They may build the next pipeline to service southern Russia or Central Asia instead of Europe.

Much like elsewhere in the world, The U.S. was willing to overlook an autocratic leader’s corruption so long as they aligned themselves with Western interests.

Revolution Next? Azerbaijan – Part I

Posted on by
1

Election protests - Baku, Azerbaijan, 2003 (photo: Oleg Nikishin/Getty Images)

At first glance, you might think the above photo was a lead-in to another post, about another recent democratic uprising against an autocratic leader, in yet another Arab nation.

The people in the photograph are protesting a disputed election win by a corrupt autocratic leader, they are mostly Muslim, but they aren’t Arab and their country isn’t in the Middle East or North Africa. What’s more, they’ve been protesting this regime on and off for several years now. Welcome to Azerbaijan, the most important country you’ve never heard of.

Baku, Azerbaijan (photo: David Davidson)

Azerbaijan is a country located on the shores of the Caspian Sea in the Caucasus between Iran and Russia and has been fought over by both of those nations for centuries. When it declared independence following the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1918, it became the first secular, democratic, Muslim-majority country in the world (five years ahead of Turkey). When the Soviet Union was established, it immediately invaded and absorbed Azerbaijan because, according to Vladimir Lenin, it couldn’t survive without it.

So why was Azerbaijan so important, and why does it continue to be a vital country today, even if we don’t hear about it often? You may have guessed it – oil.

SOCAR Oil Fields #9 - Baku, Azerbaijan (photo: Edward Burtynsky)

One of the first oil wells in the world was built in the capital city of Baku in 1871, and the petroleum industry has been raking in money for the state ever since. Oil has been the biggest driving force of international interest in Azerbaijan and has shaped its own domestic and foreign policies.

Azerbaijan shares many demographic similarities with several North African states that have been or are currently undergoing popular uprisings. It has similar rates of internet usage, urbanization, and the average age of citizens is about the same as in Tunisia and Egypt. Most importantly, there is a large gap in living standards between the elite and the rest of the population.

The country also has a history of being ruled by autocratic strongmen.

Former Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev and former President George W. Bush at the White House. Washington, 2003 (photo: Eric Draper)

The former ruler of Azerbaijan when it was a Soviet Republica, and then again when it became independent after the collapse of the USSR, Heydar Aliyev is a polarizing figure. During his time as a Soviet leader He used his influence as a former deputy chairman of the Azerbaijani KGB to go after political opponents with corruption charges. Ironically enough, he was also known for showering lavish gifts paid for with state money on officials from Moscow, who then awarded him high-ranking positions within the Soviet government.

When former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev launched his anti-corruption initiative, Aliyev and his associates were a prime target. Interestingly, several mafia figures and government officials with ties to Aliyev died of mysterious circumstances or committed suicide while investigations were underway. After the Soviet Union fell there was turmoil within Azerbaijan for several years with no one figure solidly in charge of the country. Aliyez emerged from this unrest as an elected president  and presided over a period of great economic growth, and as such is remembered fondly by some of the population.

His later years in office were marked, again, by corruption and abuses of power, and his regime became increasingly autocratic. Before he died in 2003 his son, Ilham Aliyev, became president in an election widely condemned as a sham, sparking massive protests. In the years that followed, the opposition movement, spearheaded by many young activists organizing via the internet, would work to follow in the “colour revolutions” of many countries close to Azerbaijan.

In many ways, their aspirations and methods mirror what is currently underway in the Middle East and North Africa. Tomorrow I’ll be taking a closer look at the protest movement in Azerbaijan and reviewing an excellent documentary released several years ago that had an amazing amount of access to the activist community.

Egypt: A Million Indignities Now

Posted on by
2

After the events in Egypt of the last several weeks, most of us are familiar with the main criticisms of the former Mubarak regime: It snuffed out free speech and political representation, its interior ministry ran a police state rather than a police force, the services it provided were wretchedly ineffective and mismanaged, and Mubarak and his cronies siphoned off public money into their own pockets with impunity.

Ordinary citizens fought against this regime in a variety of ways, such as organizing protests, or exposing police corruption. They paid for these actions with jail time, torture, and in some cases, their very lives.

But you didn’t need to choose to become an activist in order to feel the weight of all that corruption bearing down on your shoulders. Mubarak’s kleptocracy ensured that ordinary Egyptians endured countless indignities that often existed out in the open, for everyone to see.

When I visited Cairo in April, 2010 it didn’t take me long to spot a blatant example of this corruption: hundreds, perhaps thousands of what appeared to be apartment buildings still under construction. Their concrete skeletons poured, walls patched up with rough brick, steel rebar jutting out of roofs and walls. Yet for all this construction, there was a mysterious absence of any construction workers, equipment, or scaffolding. In fact, many of these buildings appeared to have residents – as evidenced by laundry hanging in windows that lacked shutters.

I found out via a travel companion and several Egyptians I spoke to that these buildings are primarily a result of a loophole. So long as a building is still under construction, it’s not subjectable to property tax. And because the housing shortage in many cities like Cairo is so severe, owners have no trouble finding families willing to live in a shell of a building. For some it’s a better option than living on a roof, or in a cemetery, but that isn’t really saying much.

The photos in the gallery above were taken on an elevated highway in the western suburbs of Cairo that is one of the main routes to get from downtown to the pyramids. The fact that anyone visiting Egypt’s number one tourist attraction can see these structures says a lot about how comfortable Mubarak’s regime had become with their rampant corruption – they didn’t even attempt to hide its most visible representations. Nor did the officials responsible for the loophole make any attempt to distance themselves from the developers and landlords they were supposedly regulating.

We drove at highway speeds for over ten minutes, and the entire time almost all the buildings we could see were unfinished, they cover an enormous area, and that’s just in one suburb. In between photographs I took some video on my old Canon HV40 which you can see below. I didn’t bring my gorillapod with me on the trip (I hadn’t planned to do much filming in cars), so please excuse the handheld.

(Music: “Reach for the Door” by my friend Elevator Boy)

These construction sites don’t have electricity or water, and given their height I can’t imagine how difficult it must be to live in these structures. Residents either go to the washroom in buckets which they carry downstairs or share a communal toilet on the ground floor. When a sandstorm rolls in off the desert, their apartments and all their possessions are covered with sand due to a lack of windows or even properly sealed walls. And as with any construction site there are nails, steel, and rough concrete edges that are hazardous enough to workers, let alone the many children that live in these structures.

The indignity of life in these buildings must be bad enough, but what makes it much worse is how much money developers, landowners and government officials have been making by charging rent for buildings which cost literally nothing to operate, and almost nothing to build. Ahmed al-Maghraby, who was Mubarak’s Minister of Housing until the revolution, has a net worth estimated at $1.8 billion.

Now that Egypt’s state prosecutor is free from intimidation and threats, he’s preparing with investigations against several former ministers, including Maghraby. The cases need the approval of the military to proceed and the supreme council is reviewing the evidence. It remains to be seen if the new government can start to grapple with the indignities of the old, and provide Egyptians with a more promising future.