Although Manama rulers claim that these elections would be held in a completely democratic atmosphere, reports of rights advocacy groups says otherwise, and Amnesty International in its latest report on the Bahrain elections suggested that they are held in an atmosphere full of political repression which questions their legitimacy.
The parliament of Bahrain, which consists of 40 seats, is elected from among people who are submissive to the ruling family, and no political opposition can participate in it, and all the laws approved by the parliamentarians must be signed and approved by the king, otherwise they will be not implemented. Therefore, the members of parliament are only a cover behind which the ruling family’s dictatorship is hidden, as everything is within the authority of the king who runs the country according to his views.
Massive boycott by opposition
Although Al Khalifa put up a democratic face with a staged election, the vote was boycotted by the opposition factions.
Sheikh Isa Qassim, Bahrain's top Shiite leader, who had been preparing the atmosphere for the non-participation of the people in the elections for months and repeatedly warned the Bahrainis that they should not step into the Al Khalifa “trap”, this time, too, he sent a message to the people before the elections. In a speech to the nation, he said that participation in the parliamentary and city council elections “is a treason.” Bahrain's Shiite leader, who is in exile due to the illegal ruling of the regime's court to strip him of his nationality, said that “a true and just constitution is what the God is pleased with.” Sheikh Qassim considered the parliament of Bahrain to be in favor of the ruling family and to the detriment of the people of Bahrain and a tool of oppression and marginalization of the people. He further said that by boycotting the election, people teach the government a lesson. As long as the people have this awareness, all the government plans against the people will have no effect, he continued.
In addition to Sheikh Qassim, Wefaq movement and the secular Wa'ad Party, both of which banned in 2017, boycotted the election.
Earlier, in a debate organized by Wefaq on Twitter, the activists of the opposition parties said that the Bahraini parliament with its current composition is a tool in the hands of the government and called for its ban.
Opposition to forces argue that election participation is pointless when there would be no change to politics and regime's policies. They argue that the elections are not healthy even without the opposition presence. The opposition forces, led by Shiites, have been calling for fundamental changes to the governance structures in the tiny Arab kingdom, but Al Khalifa not only have not taken any measures to meet their demands but also over the past decade restricted the political atmosphere and purged opposition as much as possible.
Manama regime revoked the nationality of Sheikh Qassim and he had been living abroad since 2016. Since 2014, Wefaq Secretary-General Sheikh Ali Salman has been in prison serving life sentence. The government did the same thing to other political leaders, making the politics free of critics and opposition.
Bahrain has been in a real political repression since the government, assisted by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, repressed the protests, imprisoned the activists, stripped opposition figures of their national, and shut down the main independent newspaper. Crackdown has been so widespread in this country that human rights organizations have raised their voices in protest. In their frequent reports, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have compiled a long list of crimes committed by the Al Khalifa regime against the opposition, showing that despite international requests, this regime continues its actions against the opposition and no changes have been made.
The election boycott by the opposition groups comes as since the 2011 uprising, no promising political reforms have been made by Manama rulers, intensifying the discontentment of people who find it fruitless to take part in the elections. The lack of a fair constitution, lack of an independent justice system, and repressive policies against the opposition, lack of freedom of speech, systemic discrimination in the state institutions, and disallowing independent supervision of elections are the key reasons people boycott the election.
Continuing its policy, the ruling regime seems to seek to concentrate its power to silence the opposition further in the future. In its election day, the government cracked down on the opposition and instead of taking measures to protect its citizens, it demanded Saudi Arabia to send anti-riot forces to repress possible protests.
Future challenges of Al Khalifa rule
This election, in which the majority of people and opposition are
absent, not only brings no legitimacy to the Al Khalifa regime but also
increases its challenge in the future. This sham election closes the way
of dialogue with the opposition and takes off competition dissidents
who can help solve internal crises. This policy can perpetuate the state
of political instability in place since 11 years ago. Waves of
dissatisfaction with the political situation causes the rulers of Manama
to always think of how to silence the opposition instead of focusing on
the administration of the country, and this raises the government's
costs. The opposition groups that are dissatisfied with the current
situation and have no hope of reforms may step up their protests in the
future to topple the government and this means ongoing insecurity in
Bahrain.
In addition to political challenges, the economic issues will continue to plague Al Khalifa and will double its troubles in the future. Although some Persian Gulf monarchies, such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia, are making huge fortunes thanks to oil sales, Bahrain does not earn much from the sale of its energy resources due to limited reserves, and this is a major challenge for the rulers. Al-Khalifa, which is facing many economic problems, tried to get a lot of help from Saudi Arabia and the Israeli regime by agreeing to normalization with Tel Aviv but failed to attract the favor of the Israelis to invest in its economy, and therefore was left deprived of aids it was promised in return for thaw. The continuation of popular discontent causes Bahrain's economic problems to intensify day by day, and this issue can cause many crises for the government at a time when political instability is still prevalent.
Continuation of public discontentment amid insecurity scares away foreign investors from Bahrain. Thanks to foreign investment, the UAE as another normalizing state managed to turn Dubai into a regional economic hub. Similarly, the flow of foreign capital to Bahrain could help it improve its economic situation, but a decade of protests and repression of the opposition has led to foreign capital fleeing, and this trend will continue in the future. In such a weak economic situation, in order to downsize the Shiite majority, the Al Khalifa annually brings tens of thousands of foreign nationals into this country and grants them citizenship— a measure that imposes heavy costs on the government.
Another issue is that Bahrain's government lacks international legitimacy with which it can serve its interests. Widespread criticism by the rights groups, the UN, and even the EU against human rights violations and the inability to take steps towards reforms. This makes Bahrain a weak and independent state on the world stage and inevitably turning to foreign powers for settling its problems. Al-Khalifa's excessive dependence on Saudi Arabia in recent years, as well as entrusting security to American forces, have made it an unstable and shaky regime inviting others to seek more influence in Bahrain's internal affairs, as due to economic weakness and political instability, the government has lost its power to make decisions independently.
Al Khalifa remains illegitimate
Despite massive public boycott, Al Khalifa struggles to paint the
turnout high. The Bahraini authorities predicted that between 65 and 69
percent of the eligible voters will participate in the elections, a
prediction unlikely due to the absence of Shiites. Like other
authoritarian regimes, Bahrain manipulates the election figures to paint
people eager to vote. Still, the world knows that Al Khalifa is a
despotic regime not allowing criticism and silencing opposition voices
forcefully.
Although Al-Khalifa by holding such largely questioned election seeks to show that it has overcome the crisis and is not even afraid of low turnout, these actions will cause more damage to the foundations of the regime's power because they only enlarge the number of people who think the reforms have run into an impasse and only an uprising prevents a solution.
It is almost clear to all that those turning out to vote are not real Bahraini people but security forces and foreigners admitted into the country past years to make demographic changes. So, such people’s turnout cannot grant Al Khalifa a legitimacy.
Al-Khalifa tries to show that it has legitimacy among the people by holding such elections, but these actions are only self-deception, and many people are fed up with its policies and believe that any participation in selective elections will only legitimize the regime. Such elections, indeed, are meant to cover up Bahraini political structure’s flaws from the world. However, a government not enjoying popular legitimacy would not hold out long. People's support can come to the aid of the government and save it from danger in historical crises and widespread crises and external threats, but Bahrain does not have this popular support, because instead of its own people, the government entrusted the maintenance of its government foundations to the Saudi regime and recently to the Israelis, who themselves are in decline.
With Bahrain's political structure largely authoritarian,
meaningful changes in national politics should not be expected. Instead,
Al Khalifa bolsters its ties with the Israeli regime. With Benjamin
Netanyahu’s comeback, Persian Gulf Arab states’ relations with Tel
Aviv as a bulwark against Iran would be bolstered.
/129