What is the current situation in Bahrain following the revolt from the Shiite majority?

It is necessary to clarify an important matter relating to the “Shiite majority”. The expression “Shiite majority in Bahrain” is similar to the one promoted by some Iraqis abroad before the Anglo-American occupation of Iraq. The British-American secret services worked on promoting this expression. Then, the American British occupants supported the “Dawa” shiite party in order to rule. It has ruled Iraq for nine years, and we expect it to stay [like that] for a long time, as long as it is supported by the American power.

Going back to the Bahraini majority, we have to affirm that there wasn’t any confessional statistic made throughout the country’s history, and until now no side can affirm that the Shiites constitute the majority of Bahraini people. The events of February and March proved this opinion, because during the last two weeks of those events, the radical Shiites controlled the capital by force. During the last three days they spread outside the capital, while the security forces retired from the streets in order to give a chance for the Crown Prince’s initiative of dialogue… Despite that, the radical rioters’ plan did not work because they didn’t have an important popular base. The “Shiite majority” allegations are just a lie promoted by the radical Shiite movement in Bahrain, re-promoted by the Western media. Shiites do not constitute a majority in Bahrain, and not all Shiites in Bahrain support the Radicals (Shiites) who are loyal to Wilayat-al-faqih in Iran. The situation in Bahrain is not completely stable because the radical and rioter groups are still going out in villages during the night and causing riots. The rioters also deliberately harm the security forces and [have] caused deaths and injuries among the security forces… The government is still dealing with these groups through different means, by security confrontation and continuing the dialogue between all parties and accelerating the democratic reform process.

What is the situation with the national reconciliation?

The radical Shiites in Bahrain have one principal demand: regime change. For

Bahraini people the regime constitutes a national legitimacy that protects all confessions and religions, whether Shiite or Sunni or others, and changing any standard in this regime’s form will lead to authoritarianism of confessions, and to dangerous security confrontations. That’s why Bahrainis insist that this demand has nothing to do with the democracy claimed by radicals, but aims at allowing the Shiite political Islam to rule. Radicals see that the regional circumstances supported by Americans are for their advantage, That’s why they refuse any kind of national dialogue that could expose their positions and uncover the Bahraini people’s refusal of their demands… On this ground, the national reconciliation between Sunnis and Shiites is going through ups and downs, and did not reach positive results. The most important positive part is that Bahraini people insist on refusing all kinds of confrontation and violence.

What is the role of Iran?

Iran represents a direct threat to the area.There is another more dangerous threat [to] the American scheme (The New Middle East Strategy), summarized by the American administration’s support in setting up confessional and ethnical microstates in the region, under the pretext of spreading democracy and supporting confessional and ethnical rights. Iran tries to undermine the security and stability in the region by imposing the Shiite hegemony in our country through the spreading and support of the radical Shiite movement. But after nine years of occupancy in Iraq all that emerged during that period is the American-British-Iranian cooperation in changing the political and demographical map in Iraq to the benefit of Iran. This, again, confirms that the Iranian role in Bahrain and the Arabian Gulf is supported by the Americans. The most dangerous American declaration is the one about pretending that they fear the repercussions of Bahrain’s events (against the Shiites) on the security of American soldiers in Iraq, under the pretext that Americans have paid great sums of money for Al Sistani and the Iranians to protect their soldiers in Iraq. The Americans only seek their interests and lie in front of the media saying that the American administration defends the people’s interests in the region, and we can see a lot of political banalities in those sayings, which makes the American administration lose its credibility and the trust of others…

Is Iran provoking a wider sunni-shia conflict in the region?

Iran knows how to play its political game in the region. From one side it supports the Muslim Brothers in the terrorist Hamas (Sunni) movement in Gaza, and from another it associates its interests with the terrorist (Shiite) Hezbollah party in Lebanon, under the pretext of resistance against Israel. All Arabs know that these two organizations (Hamas and Hezbollah) do not represent any resistance, but work for putting an end to the resistance.

These two parties have succeeded in dividing Palestinians and Arabs for the benefit of Israel. The Islamic Republic in Iran, therefore, plays with these two cards in order to prove that the Iranian revolution supports all liberation movements, while, in reality, the Khomeini republic regime – Persian and Shiite – holds a great hostility against Sunnis and Arabs. These are part of the constants affirmed in their dogmatic publications that we, members of the Shiite confession, know very well.

Creating internal commotions in the Arab countries and in Gulf States is one of the most important objectives of exporting the Iranian revolution that was announced by the Khomeini in 1979.

Do you feel that there is still a need for the Peninsula shield to be maintained in Bahrain?

The Peninsula Shield Forces are a joint Gulf army. One of its major objectives is to protect the security and stability of the region, and Bahrain participates in it through soldiers from the Bahraini army. The redeployment of these forces in Bahrain does not constitute any danger or problem for Bahrainis. These forces can also be redeployed in any other Gulf State. And the lies spread about the presence of the Peninsula Shield Forces in Bahrain are just part of the scheme against the region’s states for the benefit of Iran and the Shiite movement… It is strange how we didn’t hear any criticism about the intervention of NATO forces in Libya, without the permission of the Security Council, while these forces have used all kinds of violence and bombing and indiscriminate killings against Libyan people.

The Peninsula Shield Forces are criticized while they are accomplishing one of the most important objectives of their creation. Knowing that these forces have not interfered in internal Bahraini affairs, and have not been present in any city or village, they protect vital institutions and terrestrial, maritime and aerial borders, by fear of an unexpected external Iranian intervention against Bahrain.

What is the impact of the Arab Spring revolutions on the region?

The expression “Arab Spring revolutions” was first introduced by President Obama, and is not an Arabic expression, especially after the negative effects that emanated from these movements which, in fact, constitute a dangerous chaos, more than revolutions. What happened in Tunisia is, until today, shaded by a lot of ambiguities and cannot be called “a revolution”. What happened in Egypt is still taking the country to more chaos, poverty and dictatorship. This will create a religious terrorism and a division that may lead to dividing the country between religions. Some Libyan (revolutionaries), trained in Europe and the US, entered Gaddafi’s palaces under NATO protection, certainly that could not be called a revolution… revolution does by no means come from outside… For what is carried out with an outside force is nothing but a reconstitution of new dictatorships in the region, without anything to do with oppressed populations who are now experiencing more suffering due to the continuous chaos, from Tunisia to Syria and Yemen. We cannot deny the effect of this situation on the Arabian Gulf region.

Is instability in the region caused by Iran, and Israel?

It is the international struggle for power that started after the end of the cold war, and that defines the threat centers and the way of dealing with these threats… America declared, since September 11, 2001, the emergence of the terrorist threat to replace the communist threat, and it declared the war against terrorism to replace the cold war. They defined the region of Eurasia, extended from Afghanistan to Eritrea, as the center of this war. But this is the axe of the oil sources and its supply routes. The US decided that the Middle East region needed change. Since 2001 it is doing surgeries designed to change the region by force, under the pretext of supporting democracy. The US and the old European colonial countries are undertaking these “surgeries” in the region in order to ensure the direct control over the oil sources and preserve their power in the international system and save the Western economy threatened with collapse. This is the international struggle for power, and Iran and Israel are pawns used by the American administration according to its interests.