Just Foreign Policy News
October 5, 2011
Support the Work of Just Foreign Policy
Go Straight to the News Summary
I) Actions and Featured Articles
Call Congress Thursday: End the Wars and Cut the Military Budget
FCNL has established a toll-free number: 1-877-429-0678. Urge your Rep. and/or Senators to press the Supercommittee to end the wars and cut the military budget. In talking to your Rep., urge support for the Lee-Campbell bipartisan letter to the Super Committee on cutting military spending.
Lee-Campbell Bipartisan Letter to Super Committee on Military Spending:
Urges the Super Committee to consider cuts to military spending; notes that a trillion dollars can be cut from projected spending without harming national security.
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/node/1031
Markey: Freeze the Nukes, Fund the Future
FCNL is working with Markey’s office on a letter to the Super Committee urging a freeze in spending on military nukes.
http://fcnl.org/images/issues/nuclear/freeze_the_nukes_fund_the_future/
Assaf Oron: Israel Settlers Nearly Lynch-Mob Activists with Police Looking on
Israeli settlers carry out "pogrom" against Israeli peace activists and Palestinians while Israeli police do nothing.
http://theonlydemocracy.org/2011/10/israel-settlers-nearly-lynch-mob-activists-with-police-looking-on/
Help Support Our Advocacy for Peace and Diplomacy
The opponents of peace and diplomacy work every day. Help us be an effective counterweight.
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate
II) Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) Nearly two-thirds of Americans want troop levels in Afghanistan to be reduced, CBS reports. Sixty-two percent said troop levels should be decreased immediately. 38 percent want large numbers to return from Afghanistan within a year; 24 percent said they’d be willing to have troops there for one to two more years; ten percent said they’d accept two to five more years; 18 percent said they’d be willing to have troops there "as long as it takes." [Thus, 62% want US troops out in no less than two years – JFP.] 57 percent think the U.S. should not be involved in Afghanistan.
2) According to a Pew poll, one in three U.S. veterans of the post-Sept. 11 military believes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not worth fighting, CBS reports. A majority think America should be focusing less on foreign affairs and more on its own problems. Fifty percent of veterans said Afghanistan was worth it; 44 percent said Iraq was worth it.
3) Rep. Barney Frank sharply criticized President Obama for trying to keep U.S. troops in Iraq after December, calling the idea "totally unacceptable," The Hill reports. Frank said the money being spent on the wars would be better spent on domestic projects and job-creation efforts. Sen. Tester has also called for full withdrawal from Iraq, The Hill notes.
Frank argued the supercommittee should focus most intently on Pentagon cuts. "The biggest single chunk of deficit reduction must come from scaling back our enormous military expenditures from where they now are to where our legitimate needs are," Frank said. Frank also urged the elimination of substantial U.S. forces in Europe. Frank hammered Republicans for opposing government spending unless it’s on the military. "There’s a new economic doctrine: Military Keynesianism," Frank said. "According to [conservatives], public spending does not create jobs when we support state and local governments; it doesn’t create jobs when we build infrastructure; it only does it when we have bases in Germany and Japan, which have no earthly function other than to make some people in the Pentagon happy."
Iraq
4) – Iraq’s political leaders announced they had agreed on the need to keep US military trainers in Iraq, but declared any remaining troops should not be granted immunity from Iraqi law, a point the US has said would be a deal breaker, the New York Times reports. The Times notes that a plan to allow significant numbers of troops to stay in Iraq under diplomatic authority was shelved after a CIA operative in Pakistan who held a diplomatic passport was accused of murder, touching off an international controversy about the meaning of diplomatic immunity. That case prompted US government lawyers to insist that the Iraqi Parliament approve immunity for soldiers in Iraq.
Israel/Palestine
5) Palestinians cleared their first hurdle to full membership in UNESCO, AP reports. UNESCO’s executive board agreed to send the Palestinians’ request to a vote of the body’s members. The UNESCO request is being seen as a test case indicating the breadth of support for the Palestinian push, AP says. The vote will take place at UNESCO’s General Conference, which runs from Oct. 25 to Nov. 10. UNESCO membership could allow Palestinians to seek protected U.N. status for disputed cultural heritage sites, AP notes. House Foreign Affairs Chair Ros-Lehtinen has called for a cutoff of U.S. funds to UNESCO if the Palestinian effort succeeds.
Afghanistan
6) Bagram Airfield is one of the giant military bases in Afghanistan at the center of a fierce debate over the US presence in Afghanistan after 2014, AFP reports. While the US insists it does not want permanent bases in Afghanistan, some Afghans are suspicious of its motives and believe it is putting down long-term roots at bases like Bagram. US-Afghan talks over an agreement on what will happen post-2014 have bogged down, AFP says. President Karzai said the US was rejecting key Afghan demands, including that US troops operate within Afghanistan’s legal framework; the suspension of all unilateral foreign military operations; the suspension of foreign forces taking prisoners and the closure of all foreign-run prisons.
Bahrain
7) Bahrain appeared to buckle under international pressure by ordering a retrial for 20 medical personnel sentenced to prison who were accused of backing anti-government protests, AP reports. The decision moves the trial of the medical personnel to a civilian court and allows the doctors and nurses to remain free pending the new trial. It’s unclear whether the decision will bring retrials for other verdicts made by the security court or halt other cases that are pending, AP says.
Saudi Arabia
8) Saudi police clashed with protesters in the country’s Shiite-dominated eastern region, AP reports. Saudi officials claimed residents attacked security forces with guns and firebombs. But AP appears skeptical of the official claim, noting that residents said protesters threw stones and damaged vehicles in response to a police crackdown, making no mention of weapons carried by the crowd. Residents said protests started after authorities detained the fathers of two activists wanted for their part in earlier unrest.
Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) Poll: Nearly 2 in 3 want troops in Afghanistan decreased
Stephanie Condon, CBS News, October 3, 2011 6:30 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20115031-503544.html
After 10 years of war in Afghanistan, nearly two-thirds of Americans want troop levels in the country to be reduced, a new CBS News poll shows.
Sixty-two percent said troop levels should be decreased immediately, according to the poll, conducted Sept. 28 – Oct. 2. Twenty-four percent want troop levels kept the same for now, while 7 percent want them increased. In 2009, as discussions to deploy additional troops to Afghanistan were underway, about a third supported increasing the number of U.S. troops there.
Americans were also asked when they think large numbers of troops should come home. The percentage who want large numbers to return from Afghanistan within a year stands at 38 percent, up from 33 percent in July 2010. Another 24 percent said they’d be willing to have troops there for one to two more years. Ten percent said they’d accept two to five more years, while 18 percent said they’d be willing to have troops there "as long as it takes," down from 26 percent in summer 2010.
President Obama deployed a 30,000-troop "surge" in Afghanistan in 2009. This past summer, he committed to pulling out 10,000 troops by the end of this year and another 23,000 by September 2012. That would leave roughly 68,000 American troops in Afghanistan to continue the decade-long war.
[…] Just one in three Americans believe fighting there is the right thing for the U.S. to do, the poll shows, while 57 percent think the U.S. should not be involved in Afghanistan – similar to views last June. While Democrats and independents largely say the U.S. should not be involved there, a slim majority of Republicans, 51 percent, say it’s the right thing to do.
[…] Ten years later, Americans are mixed when it comes to the war’s impact on terrorism directed at the United States. As many as 47 percent think it has made the U.S. safer from terrorism. However, 40 percent think it has had no impact, and 10 percent say it has made the U.S. less safe.
[…] Looking back, there is no consensus about what the U.S. ought to have done about Afghanistan. Thirty-nine percent think the U.S. was right to remove the Taliban from power and remain in Afghanistan to help stabilize the country. Nearly as many, 32 percent, think the U.S. ought to have removed the Taliban from power and then left afterwards. One in four thinks the U.S. ought not to have gotten involved there at all.
[…]
2) Poll: 1 in 3 vets say Iraq, Afghan wars a waste
CBS News, October 5, 2011 3:08 AM
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/05/national/main20115767.shtml
Washington – One in three U.S. veterans of the post-Sept. 11 military believes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not worth fighting, and a majority think that after 10 years of combat America should be focusing less on foreign affairs and more on its own problems, according to an opinion survey released Wednesday.
The findings highlight a dilemma for the Obama administration and Congress as they struggle to shrink the government’s huge budget deficits and reconsider defense priorities while trying to keep public support for remaining involved in Iraq and Afghanistan for the longer term.
Nearly 4,500 U.S. troops have died in Iraq and nearly 1,700 in Afghanistan. Combined war costs since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks have topped $1 trillion.
The poll results presented by the Pew Research Center portray post-Sept. 11 veterans as proud of their work, scarred by warfare and convinced that the American public has little understanding of the problems that wartime service has created for military members and their families.
[…] The Pew survey found that veterans are ambivalent about the net value of the wars, although they generally were more positive about Afghanistan, which has been a more protracted but less deadly conflict for U.S. forces. One-third of post-Sept. 11 veterans said neither war was worth the sacrifices; that was the view of 45 percent in the separate poll of members of the general public.
Fifty percent of veterans said Afghanistan was worth it, whereas the poll of civilians put it at 41 percent.
Among veterans, 44 percent said Iraq was worth it. That compares with 36 percent in the poll of civilians.
Of the surveyed former service members who were seriously wounded or knew someone who was killed or seriously wounded, 48 percent said the war in Iraq was worth fighting, compared with 36 percent of those veterans who had no personal exposure to casualties.
Exposure to casualties had an even larger impact on attitudes toward the war in Afghanistan. Fifty-five percent of those exposed to casualties said Afghanistan has been worth the cost to the U.S., whereas 40 percent of those who were not exposed to casualties held that same view.
Pew said its survey results found "isolationist inclinations" among post-Sept. 11 war veterans. About 6-in-10 said the United States should pay less attention to problems overseas and instead concentrate on problems at home. In a Pew survey conducted earlier this year, a similar share of the general public agreed.
[…]
3) Rep. Frank: Keeping troops in Iraq past withdrawal date ‘totally unacceptable’
Mike Lillis, The Hill, 10/04/11 01:31 PM ET
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/185409-rep-frank-keeping-troops-in-iraq-past-withdrawal-date-totally-unacceptable
A leading House Democrat went after President Obama on Tuesday for signaling that some U.S. troops could remain in Iraq past the year-end withdrawal deadline. Rep. Barney Frank (Mass.) said the country cannot afford the continued intervention, which he suggested is not working in any event.
"We are now spending $120 billion a year in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And incredibly, President Obama – who I strongly support in general – is contemplating staying in Iraq even longer than George Bush wanted to," Frank told an animated crowd of liberal activists gathered in Washington for the Take Back the American Dream conference. "That is totally unacceptable, and we must make that very clear."
Frank, senior Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, said the money would be better spent on domestic projects and job-creation efforts. "If I thought our interventions did a lot of good, I would be conflicted. … But we often do more harm than good," he said. "I want to put more money into helping hungry children and fighting AIDS."
[…] Joining Frank, some Senate Democrats have also called recently for a full withdrawal from Iraq before 2012. "We should bring the last of them home on schedule," Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)" said last month.
Despite the criticism of the White House over Iraq, Frank on Tuesday directed his sharpest attacks at Republicans for prioritizing foreign military operations above domestic programs. As the budget supercommittee searches for trillions of dollars in federal savings, Frank argued, they should focus most intently on Pentagon cuts.
"The biggest single chunk of deficit reduction must come from scaling back our enormous military expenditures from where they now are to where our legitimate needs are," Frank said.
"There is no way at all to do a socially responsible deficit-reduction plan – no way to do a long-term deficit reduction [plan] which preserves our ability to protect the quality of life here in this country, and elsewhere in the world – without very substantial reductions in military spending."
Frank was quick to note the importance of maintaining a powerful military to protect U.S. interests, weaker allies and the homeland – but with limitations. "I do want the U.S. Air Force to be the largest air force in the world," he said. "But I don’t think the U.S. Navy has to be the second largest air force in the world for us to be safe. I’d be happy if … the Navy was tied for fourth."
The threat of terrorism, he argued, is nothing like that posed by Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union during the Cold War. "It is not an existential threat to the United States," he said. "You don’t defeat terrorism with nuclear submarines. I wish you did, because we have them and they don’t. It would be over."
The outspoken Massachusetts liberal also urged the elimination of substantial U.S. forces in Europe, arguing that the political climate requiring those troops is long gone.
"Harry Truman, I think, did a great thing in 1949 when he went to the aid of a beleaguered, poor, war-broken Western and Central Europe threatened by Stalin," Frank said. "Europe’s no longer weak and poor; Stalin is fortunately long dead and his successors crumbled; the only thing that hasn’t changed is America continues to subsidize heavily the defense of the wealthy nations of Western Europe against non-existent threats."
Those dynamics, Frank quipped, are reminiscent of the classic fence-painting scene in Tom Sawyer. "People have figured out how to get America to paint the fence and act like we’re being done a favor," he said.
The 12-member supercommittee is required to identify at least $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction by Nov. 23 or that amount in automatic cuts – split evenly between defense and non-defense spending – will kick in.
Frank said Congress could double those figures from Pentagon cuts alone, "and be a stronger, better and happier nation."
His comments arrive as Republican defense hawks are stepping up their opposition to steep Pentagon cuts as part of Congress’s deficit-reduction efforts. GOP staffers on the House Armed Services Committee floated a report this week warning that cuts deeper than the $350 billion agreed to as part of the August debt deal would reduce the military to pre-9/11 levels, putting some of the biggest weapons programs "at risk."
Frank, for one, isn’t convinced, hammering conservatives for opposing government spending unless it’s on the military.
"There’s a new economic doctrine: Military Keynesianism," Frank said. "According to [conservatives], public spending does not create jobs when we support state and local governments; it doesn’t create jobs when we build infrastructure; it only does it when we have bases in Germany and Japan, which have no earthly function other than to make some people in the Pentagon happy."
Iraq
4) Iraq Denies Legal Immunity to U.S. Troops After 2011
Tim Arango and Michael S. Schmidt, New York Times, October 4, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/world/middleeast/iraqis-say-no-to-immunity-for-remaining-american-troops.html
Baghdad – Iraq’s political leaders announced late Tuesday that they had agreed on the need to keep American military trainers in Iraq next year, but they declared that any remaining troops should not be granted immunity from Iraqi law, a point the United States has said would be a deal breaker.
The statement, issued as the political leaders emerged from a meeting in the presidential compound, sent mixed signals as United States officials and the Iraqi cabinet negotiate whether any troops will remain after the first of the year, when the forces are scheduled to depart. American officials were scrambling on Tuesday night to decipher the announcement.
Less than three months before the last troops are scheduled to leave – close to 40,000 members of the military are in the country – Americans are increasingly frustrated at the slow pace of the discussions. The United States has called for a prompt decision, noting the logistical hurdles of moving ahead on a withdrawal while making contingency plans to leave some troops behind.
The meeting of Iraq’s political leadership, which concluded around 10 p.m., was attended by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki; President Jalal Talabani; Mr. Maliki’s chief rival, Ayad Allawi; and several other high-ranking officials. Ali al-Dabbagh, the government spokesman, issued a statement saying the leaders had agreed that there was "no need to grant immunity to trainers," rather ambiguous phrasing for a deal-breaking demand.
[…] The issue is far from settled and will most likely be subject to further behind-the-scenes negotiations in the coming weeks, just as the troop withdrawal accelerates.
Immunity strikes a deep nerve among ordinary Iraqis because it would mean that American troops could not be prosecuted in Iraq. The issue evokes some of the worst horrors of the war here, from the Abu Ghraib prison scandal to the killing of civilians by Blackwater mercenaries. But it is also important to the United States to shield troops working in good faith under difficult and dangerous conditions.
Earlier this year, American officials considered a plan to allow significant numbers of troops to stay in Iraq under diplomatic authority, which was essentially an end run around the need for a new security agreement and parliamentary debate about immunity. For Iraqis, that idea evoked memories of mercenaries operating with impunity and sometimes killing civilians.
The idea was shelved after a Central Intelligence Agency operative in Pakistan who held a diplomatic passport was accused of murder, touching off an international controversy about the meaning of diplomatic immunity. That case prompted American government lawyers to insist that Parliament approve immunity for soldiers in Iraq.
American security contractors, thousands of whom are flooding into the country to support an expanded State Department mission, are technically subject to Iraqi law, but none have ever been held criminally liable in Iraq. Even now, the United States government occasionally, and secretly, removes contractors from the country when they are accused of crimes.
[…]
Israel/Palestine
5) Palestinians through 1st hurdle for full membership in UN cultural agency
Associated Press, Wednesday, October 5, 3:31 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/palestinians-to-request-upgrade-to-membership-status-at-unesco/2011/10/05/gIQAKJqpML_story.html
Paris – Palestinians cleared their first hurdle Wednesday to full membership in the U.N. cultural agency, an official said, as they expand and accelerate their push for international recognition, despite opposition from the United States and Israel.
With peace talks stalled and landmark efforts to get Palestine recognized at the United Nations inching along a labyrinthine path, Palestinian diplomats are pursuing other, potentially faster avenues toward getting the world to consider their territories a nation.
One is in Paris-based UNESCO, the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, where the executive board agreed Wednesday to send the Palestinians’ request to a vote of the body’s members.
The Palestinians are also seeking a foothold in the World Trade Organization and won partnership status this week in the Council of Europe, the continent’s leading human rights body.
The Palestinian leadership, after Morocco, became only the second recipient of that status, which comes with benchmarks for progress toward democracy and human rights like ending the death penalty.
None of this will solve the conflicts with Israel over security, violence and borders that for decades have prevented a Palestinian state from coming into existence. But it may up the pressure at U.N. headquarters and weigh on fresh efforts to resuscitate peace talks.
The UNESCO request is being seen as a test case indicating the breadth of support for the Palestinian push.
The Palestinian delegation, which has had observer status at UNESCO since 1974, presented a draft resolution to the agency’s executive board on Wednesday, according to diplomats there.
A UNESCO official later confirmed that the board voted overwhelmingly to send it to a vote of the body’s 193 members, two-thirds of whom must approve any request for full membership.
The vote has not been scheduled, but will take place at UNESCO’s General Conference, which runs from Oct. 25 to Nov. 10.
[…] The Palestinians have sought UNESCO membership before, to no avail. This year, UNESCO diplomats said, they are using a different method for the request, via a draft resolution. They may have more momentum now, after Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas took his people’s quest for independence to U.N. headquarters in a landmark move last month.
[…] Ismail Tilawi, the representative of UNESCO in the Palestinian territories, says that since the formation of the Palestinian Authority in the mid-1990s, a request for Palestinian membership has been on the agenda of every UNESCO General Conference, which convenes every two years.
The chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, called for a cutoff of U.S. funds to UNESCO if the Palestinian effort succeeds this time.
"Feeling that their efforts at the U.N. Security Council will fail, the Palestinian leadership is shopping around the U.N. system for recognition," Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican, said in a statement. "It is deeply disappointing to see UNESCO, which has reformed itself in recent years, poised to support this dangerous Palestinian scheme. The U.S. must strongly oppose this move."
[…] In addition to advancing the Palestinians’ push for recognition, UNESCO membership could offer the Palestinians a key bargaining chip by allowing them to seek protected U.N. status for disputed cultural heritage sites.
[…]
Afghanistan
6) US Thinking Post-2014 In Afghan Bases Talks
Katherine Haddon, AFP, October 4, 2011
http://news.yahoo.com/us-thinking-post-2014-afghan-bases-talks-024527659.html
Boasting everything from a Pizza Hut to a massage parlour, Bagram Airfield is one of the giant military bases in Afghanistan at the centre of a fierce debate over the US presence after troops withdraw.
A decade after the war started on October 7, 2001, Washington has vowed to pull all combat forces out by the end of 2014 but is locked in tricky negotiations with Kabul over a strategic partnership beyond this date.
While the US insists it does not want permanent bases in Afghanistan, some Afghans are suspicious of its motives and believe it is putting down long-term roots at bases like Bagram, home to 30,000 troops and contractors.
[…] "If they want to have military bases, it will do nothing for us," said Abdul Jamil Tanha, a 20-year-old student in Kabul. "Instead, attacks will increase in our country. As a result, innocent Afghans get killed and they will suffer, not the foreigners."
Negotiations between the United States and Afghanistan on the strategic partnership started in February but seem to have hit a hurdle.
Speaking to a private meeting in Kabul recently, President Hamid Karzai said the talks were now at a very sensitive stage. He said the US was currently rejecting five key Afghan demands — US troops operating within Afghanistan’s legal framework; the suspension of all unilateral foreign military operations; the suspension of foreign forces taking prisoners and the closure of all foreign-run prisons; what he deemed sufficient funding for the Afghan security forces and channelling all foreign funding through the Afghan government.
[…] A US defence official speaking to AFP on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue said arrangements post-2014 would probably involve "shared facilities."
[…]
Bahrain
7) Bahrain orders retrial for 20 medical personnel sentenced as protest backers
Associated Press, Wednesday, October 5, 1:39 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/bahrain-court-issues-more-prison-sentences-for-anti-government-unrest/2011/10/05/gIQAPJe3ML_story.html
Dubai, United Arab Emirates – Bahrain appeared to buckle under international pressure Wednesday by ordering a retrial for 20 medical personnel sentenced to prison who were accused of backing anti-government protests and attempting to overthrow the ruling system in the Gulf kingdom.
The decision also moves the trial of the medical personnel to a civilian court and allows the doctors and nurses to remain free pending the new trial.
Rights groups strongly criticized last week’s verdicts by a special security court, which sentenced the doctors and nurses to jail terms ranging from five to 15 years. The verdicts also provoked high-level questions about judicial fairness that included statements from the U.N. secretary general and the U.S. State Department.
Bahrain’s ruling Muslim Sunni monarchy has waged sweeping crackdowns against mostly Muslim Shiite protesters calling for greater rights on the strategic Gulf Arab nation, home to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet.
The country’s leaders have maintained support from the West because of the nation’s key military partnerships and close ties with powerful Gulf neighbors, foremost Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia, which sent troops to help Bahrain’s monarchy quell the protests earlier this year and blamed the unrest on Shiite-led Iran.
Bahraini authorities have come under increasing criticism for a series of rapid-fire verdicts against suspects accused of aiding protesters and causing violence. More than 80 convictions have been issued since Monday by a security court that was set up during martial law-style rule this spring.
The move to hold a retrial for the medical personnel appears to be a step to ease international complaints and could throw into question the other verdicts by the security court as well as upcoming trials.
A statement by Bahrain’s Information Affairs Authority said the 20 medical personnel will be retried in a civilian court, but gave no timetable. The group had filed an appeal that was scheduled to be heard by a civilian court later this month, but the new decision appeared to restart the judicial process.
Bahrain’s attorney general, Ali al-Boainain, said in the statement that "the retrial will be conducted before the highest civil court in Bahrain … By virtue of the retrials, the accused will have the benefit of full re-evaluation of evidence and full opportunity to present their defenses."
The medical group was convicted Thursday on charges that include attempting to topple the Gulf kingdom’s rulers and spreading "fabricated" stories.
[…] It’s unclear whether the decision by Bahrain’s attorney general will bring retrials for other verdicts made by the security court or halt other cases that are pending. Among them is another group of more than 25 doctors and nurses charged with protest-related offenses.
Earlier Wednesday, the security court sentenced 19 people, including a 16-year-old Iraqi football player, for causing violence during the protests.
The court sentenced 13 people to five years in prison, and six people to one year terms for alleged attacks during the unrest, including trying to set fire to a police station, the Information Affairs Authority said in a statement. The verdicts can be appealed.
The detention of the Iraqi teenager, Zulfiqar Naji, sparked angry demonstrations in Iraq and as far away as Canada by people calling for his release. It also prompted the Iraqi government to make a plea to Bahrain on his behalf. Naji played for a local football club in Bahrain until his arrest.
The player’s father, Abdulameer Naji, said in July that his son was taken into custody from their Bahrain home in April on suspicion of participating in protests. The father has since fled to Iraq, but the boy’s mother and several of his siblings have remained in Bahrain.
Saudi Arabia
8) Saudi police clash with protesters in Shiite east in new ripple of unrest in oil-rich kingdom
Associated Press, October 4
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/saudi-police-clash-with-protesters-in-shiite-east-in-new-ripple-of-unrest-in-oil-rich-kingdom/2011/10/04/gIQAcq0aLL_story.html
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia – Saudi police clashed with protesters in the country’s Shiite-dominated eastern region in a new ripple of unrest in the oil-rich kingdom, residents and security officials said Tuesday.
Police moved in on Monday to break up a second day of small protests against the arrests of the fathers of two fugitive dissidents, firing in the air and beating marchers with clubs, residents said.
The Interior Ministry blamed what it described as "seditious" residents, saying they attacked security forces with guns and firebombs and had the backing of a foreign enemy – an apparent reference to rival power Iran.
There is a long history of discord between the kingdom’s Sunni rulers and the Shiite minority concentrated in the east, Saudi Arabia’s key oil-producing region. Shiites make up 10 percent of the kingdom’s 23 million citizens and complain of discrimination, saying they are barred from key positions in the military and government and are not given an equal share of the country’s wealth.
[…] In the new unrest, the Interior Ministry said its forces came under attack on Monday from activists armed with guns and firebombs. Some of the attackers rode in on motorcycles, it said. The clash in the town of al-Awamiya wounded 11 security officers and three civilians, said a ministry statement carried by the official Saudi Press Agency.
[…] Al-Awamiya residents speaking to AP on condition of anonymity out of fear of reprisal said protests started on Sunday after authorities detained the fathers of two activists wanted for their part in earlier unrest.
Neighbors came out onto the streets carrying posters of Iran’s late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Lebanon’s Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, they said.
In Monday’s confrontations, protesters threw stones and damaged vehicles in response to the police crackdown, residents said. They made no mention of weapons carried by the crowd of about 50 protesters.
Responding to the unrest spreading from North Africa to the Arabian side of the Gulf, Saudi Arabia warned earlier this year that demonstrations were forbidden in the kingdom, arguing that they contradict Islamic laws and society’s values. It also said security forces were authorized to act against anyone violating the protest ban.
[…]
–
Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming US foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans. The archive of the Just Foreign Policy News is here:
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/blog/dailynews