An Analysis of Tacit British Involvement in the Bahraini Crackdown

( The BBC reports British troops training Saudi forces to crush the Bahraini uprising) 

As the Middle East goes deeper into the flames of resentment and civil disobedience, it has also witnessed the existing ruling elites of countries from Libya to Bahrain being ever more determined to remain in power. To make things darker, Middle Eastern strongmen have been cooperating with each other to put down domestic uprisings such as Syria flying Libyan jets to bomb protesters or Iran providing assistance to the Syrian regime on crowd control tactics while the West acts like a peacemaker. However the real truth is that the West has been playing a very dangerous double game of supporting uprisings in non friendly states like Libya while covertly assisting the repression of public sentiment in pro western countries. And no country plagued by this wave of revolutionary unrest could prove a better example than Bahrain. As the protest movement in Bahrain slowly withers away reports show that the British military did provide weapons and training to the Saudi National Elite guards that were deployed to crush the Bahraini revolt. Meanwhile Britain did continue its training and advising of top Bahraini military officers as the crackdown intensified.  

(Saudi forces enter Bahrain to quash the insurrection) 

After all, apart from Sunni Arab monarchies in the Persian Gulf, the UK and the US stand to lose the most from a successful Bahraini uprising. Firstly a successful Bahraini uprising could seriously threaten the presence of the US Fifth Fleet and British Royal Navy in Bahrain which happens to be the ultimate bulwark against Iranian military superiority in Persian Gulf. The combined US and British presence there also guarantees Saudi energy and airspace security against Iranian missiles and planes thus weakening Iran’s ability to intimidate the Saudis into accepting Iranian designs for the Middle East. Secondly was to prevent a spill over of the Bahraini insurrection into the heavily Shia populated Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia which is the location of much of Saudi energy reserves. This is to prevent the Saudis from being too distracted with domestic unrest that it takes its eye of Al-Qaeda whose presence has been growing in Yemen and blocks it from filling up the emerging geopolitical vacuum in Iraq as the US leaves and competing with Iran for influence throughout the region. Meanwhile growing unrest in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province could also send world oil prices higher, hurting the oil dependent economies of the US and the UK while boosting political and economic instability in highly volatile and anti western countries with Western allied governments like Pakistan and Yemen. Higher oil prices could also mean a financially stronger Russia, Iran and Venezuela thus giving them more room to ease domestic pressure at home while boosting their regional influence to the detriment of the US and the UK. US and British strategists also fear that the overthrow of the Bahraini monarchy could undermine the so called invincibility of Sunni Arab monarchies in the region thus weakening the legitimacy of the Saudi monarchy. The British could have also provided the continued training as part of their long term plan to maintain and expand their influence in the Persian Gulf. For the Saudis getting British military assistance is a vital step towards diversifying their dependence on foreign security thus preserving its sovereignty and freedom of action. 

  

(US naval forces conduct an exercise in the Persian Gulf.)

However like all major covert operations they are accompanied by huge risks that prove to be very damaging if properly manipulated by hostile powers. Among those risks is that it would show that so called Western support for the Arab spring is highly duplicitous in which repressive pro Western regimes are backed while unfriendly regimes in Syria, Libya and Iran are bashed up. This in turn could damage the West’s improved image earned by its handling of the Libya and Egypt crises, while paving the way for greater anti Western sentiment in the region. Anti Americanism could also grow as Britain is one of the strongest US allies and viewed by many Middle Easterners as an accomplice of the US. These sentiments are highly undesirable as Western governments struggle to accommodate with new and existing Middle Eastern regimes that are highly susceptible to domestic public pressures.  

The second risk posed by the British involvement in the Bahraini crackdown is a possible increase of distrust and anger among Bahrainis towards foreign powers. After all the Shia Bahrainis being so angered by the deployment of Saudi and UAE troops to crush their revolt could also become equally angry about the British role in assisting those forces with weapons and training. As a consequence Shia Bahrainis’ distrust of foreigners will grow, intensifying anger against not just the UK but also the US as Britain is viewed as America’s accomplice and that it had approved of the British decision at some point privately as it had a web of interests at stake. Ultimately this could play into Iran’s hands if popular opinion wants the US and British military personnel out of their territory as it would make it the dominant power in the region.

The tacit British support for the Bahraini crackdown could also foment greater distrust and anger towards Britain and possibly America among the Shia populations of Iraq and Lebanon and Iran. The Shias of those countries did in fact come out in the thousands to protest against the Saudi led military intervention in Bahrain and could possibly do the same against Britain and the US. This is especially serious in Iraq where the US is trying to secure an extended time frame for the US troop presence there to counter Iran’s increasing power in Iraq. It could also weaken the ability of British and American companies to obtain valuable Iraqi oil contracts in the future leaving other rivals like China, Russia Iran enjoy the profits. Meanwhile greater anger against the Britain and America could be used by Iran to silence dissent at home. Tehran’s usual tactics of accusing its opponents of cooperating with the UK and the US would become more effective as they capitalize on a stronger anti Western sentiment. Tehran could also use this anger against Britain to consolidate anti British and anti American sentiment to justify its repressive police state while diverting attention away from its growing economic troubles thus enabling Tehran to weather the current political storm in the Middle East. The rulers of Iran could exploit the British aided crackdown in Bahrain to solidify their original response to the Bahraini crackdown in which it blamed the US. Iran could say that the US would have given the green light to Britain to assist in the crackdown as Britain is the strongest of the US allies and shares many interests in Bahrain.  The result could well be greater anti Americanism in the Middle East and a resurrection of Iran’s credentials as the strongest defender of the Muslim world against US and UK aggression, helping it to gain support while deflecting attention away from its repressive domestic actions. 

The British involvement in the Bahraini crackdown could also play into Al Qaeda and other hardline Saudi Islamists especially when Saudi Arabia falls victim to revolutionary unrest as it gives them solid evidence regarding British backed repression in their country. Al Qaeda would also use it to demonstrate Saudi cooperation with infidel Westerners primarily the US and the UK in repressing the will of the Saudis, giving it more room to expand the appeal of its violent ideology. 

However the potential fallout of British involvement in the Bahraini crackdown can largely be contained if the British and the Americans are successful distracting the Arab public and if Iran decides not to respond. And the current situation shows that, that is just happening. The escalating violence in Yemen, reports of torture in Syria, a possible ceasefire in Libya and growing power tussle in Iran have all added to the complex of distractions that have made the official admission of British involvement in the Bahraini crackdown surprisingly quiet. Nevertheless an absolutely silent aftermath cannot be ruled out as Iran mentioned earlier stands to profit the most from its revelation to the Arab public. Among Iran’s options to divert Arab attention to British support for the crackdown would be to issue a severe official condemnation of British involvement. Any official condemnation has to be made either by Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran or President Ahamadinejad. Iran could also get highly popular pro Iran politicians in Iraq and Lebanon such as Moqtada al Sadr and Hassan Nasrallah respectively to condemn British actions. Iran could also covertly organize and fund various NGOs and political parties across Iraq, Pakistan and Lebanon into holding demonstrations against Britain and possibly America. These tactics are very useful to divert attention towards a particular issue as it was seen though out the Middle East when Saudi led forces entered Bahrain to quash the revolt. Protests attracting thousands were seen in Iraq Pakistan, Lebanon and even among the Saudi Arabian and Indian Shia communities even though global attention was initially fixed on Libya thus elevating the Bahraini uprising to the centre of attention while seriously damaging Saudi Arabia’s reputation. Iran could also try another tactic which is to send violent thugs or mobs to intimidate workers at the British embassies of Tehran, Baghdad and Beirut which is another successful tried and tested tactic to grab attention. In fact Iran had actually employed that move against Saudi Arabia as a form of retaliation when it sent troops to quash the Bahraini rebellion. 

  

(Iranian students hurl firebombs at the Saudi embassy in Tehran to protest Saudi actions in Bahrain.) 

Nevertheless it is not a losing situation for the UK and to a lesser extent the US as there are some severe obstacles to Iran’s ability to carry out those operations. Among those obstacles are the intensifying power struggle between the Supreme Leader of Iran Ali Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad. The unsually public spat between the two leaders has engulfed the Iranian national security and intelligence apparatus forcing many Iranian politicians to rethink their alliances and shore up domestic support. This in turn acts as a highly useful political distraction that limits Iran’s ability to influence events outside as its leaders are too preoccupied with domestic power politics. Secondly Iranian leaders are also stuck with other serious economic and financial complications as the EU prepares to impose another round of economic sanctions against Iranian banks. After all growing economic pressure on its banking system would undermine the financial strength of Iranian leaders while sowing greater unrest at home. Iran is also preoccupied with more serious regional geopolitical developments such as the possible relocation of Hamas’ headquarters from Syria to Qatar which could see Iran’s influence over Hamas, the Levant region and the Arab Israeli conflict decline. Iranian leaders are also struggling to cope with the Syrian Uprising whose success must be halted to prevent a greater loss of Iranian influence in the region and to curtail greater unrest in Iran. Besides, Iran might also be choosing not to condemn the UK due to its involvement in Syria, as possible Western and Arab diplomatic retaliation could thrust Iranian covert support to Al Assads back into the spotlight. The stakes are higher for Iran now ever since the reports of the torture and murder of a 13 year Syrian boy at the hands of Syrian security forces. Finally all of those developments have significantly diverted Iranian attention thus blocking it from exploiting British involvement in Bahrain for now at least.