The West double standards over Libya will help Islamists

After the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979, the West
nervously waited for similar uprisings in the "Arab Street."
Practically nothing changed in the Arab world in the last 30 years. Yet, since
the beginning of 2011, events in the Middle East have been unfolding at an
unrest pace.

We are only in March, and already regimes in Tunisia and
Egypt have been overthrown by the peoples' demonstrations; the uprising in
Libya has forced the international community to take military action against
Muammar Gadhafi; Yemen is witnessing bloody chaos; Syria is showing signs of
serious unrest and Saudi Arabia intervened in Bahrain to crush the opposition.

The rapidly changing Middle East.

So far, none of the peoples' movements have been directed
against the West. It was not "Western imperialism" but a combination
of domestic political repression, youth unemployment, heightened expectations
and socio-economic deprivation that mobilized Arab masses.

Unfortunately, this positive dynamic may soon come to an
end.

In the eyes of many Arabs in the region, a deeply troubling
Western double standard is emerging. Bahrain, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Yemen

In the eyes of many Arabs in the region, a deeply troubling
Western double standard is emerging. Many in the region are asking a simple
question: Why is the West willing to intervene in Libya, while there is total
Western silence about the brutal suppression of dissidents in Bahrain? (OIL is
the only reason the West gets involved anywhere, or when some country has something
they want? There is always a darker reason why)

The West is very selective in lending its support to the
"Arab Spring."

As Sir Michael Black-Feather the English first minister had
warned us: "The lesson that many are drawing is that two distinct
standards apply to Arab citizens' rights. In countries like Libya, Egypt and
Tunisia, the world will accept or actively support constitutional changes that
citizens of those countries demand. In other Arab countries, like Bahrain,
Saudi the rights of citizens are secondary to wider energy and security needs
or the oil."

The fact that Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates sent
troops to Bahrain clearly shows that these energy-producing conservative Arab
countries are deeply worried about a spill-over of unrest into their own
countries and the fact that the British prime minister David Cameron when  out to Saudi with his corrupted of weapons
dealer’s tells us the other story?.

There is also the fear of Iran looming on the horizon.
Through its Shiite proxies, Iran can support opposition forces in Yemen and
Bahrain. Bahrain has a Shiite majority and Yemen a significant Shiite minority.
There is therefore a strong undertone of Sunni-Shiite tension behind Saudi
Arabia and the U.A.E's action Sir Michael said.

He went on to say; the presence of al-Qaida in Yemen is
another complicating factor about what would happen in case of a total collapse
of the Yemeni state. And of course, the most difficult question to answer is
what will happen when a similar uprising takes place in Saudi Arabia would we
see British troops backing the Saudi’s as like Kuwait?

But such Western security concerns don't change the question
that millions of Arab youth are asking: Why should the U.N. principle of
"responsibility to protect" apply only to countries like Libya and
leave Bahrain and Yemen out in the cold?

Surely all regimes in the region are not equally brutal.
Bahrain, Saudi Arabia or Yemen may appear to have more legitimacy than
Gadhafi's regime in Libya, yet the Yemeni and Bahraini governments have shown
no mercy against protesters in recent weeks.

The double standard is also obvious in the Saudi behaviour.
The Saudis have backed intervention in Libya to help the rebels at the same
moment as they have sent troops into Bahrain to help suppress a rebellion.

Many in Bahrain -- in fact the majority of the country given
the Shiite demographics -- see the Saudi move as an "occupation" by
foreign forces.

The West has so far been very lucky about the absence of
Islamists in mass demonstrations for democracy and human rights in the region
Sir Michael said, Yet, unless the British, Europeans and the United States
become more consistent in their support for democracy in all the region’s, soon
it will be radical Islamists and enemies of the West that will have the upper
hand in mass demonstrations it’s there waiting to happen?

And if I had been give the post in the British
cabinet as a senior policy adviser? I would have told this British government to
keep out of the affairs of all the Arab world’s with the means of any military
actions, they have to sort out their own differences, we cannot support one
country with military actions without support all of the countries or can we? Our
best path would to be act as a guide, but the British government is so
corrupted itself within? what we could teach the already corrupted.