Emirates Balk at Activism in Region Hit by Uprisings
By BEN HUBBARD
RAS AL KHAYMAH, United Arab Emirates — The white mosque, soccer field and wedding hall are still there.
But Islah, the Islamist group that once ran the social complex at the entrance to this city, is all but gone.
Its entire board has been replaced by government decree, scores of its
members have been put on trial and even its name has been changed.
The government of the United Arab Emirates has moved aggressively to shut it down, charging 94 of its members with conspiring with another Islamist group, the Muslim Brotherhood,
to overthrow the government. The defendants, facing up to 15 years in
prison, include prominent jurists, academics, even relatives of one of
this country’s royal families, who say they were not looking to
overthrow the leadership, but asking for democratic reform and a more
Islamic government.
“It’s a social organization, not political or economic, and it worked
with the people for the goal of preserving the Emirates as a Muslim
country with an Arab character,” said Khalid Alroken, whose brother is a
prominent lawyer and among those on trial. “The authorities saw our
activities as the first link in a chain towards toppling the government
and weakening the state.”
For the Emirates, the case is unprecedented in the gravity of the
charges and the prominence of the defendants. But it is also part of a
broader trend in the region, where kingdoms that dodged the calls for
democracy that inspired the Arab Spring have moved aggressively to stamp
out hints of political activism.
The Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf have long used petrodollars to
placate calls for political change, and are once again relying on the
threat of prison to silence dissent. In Qatar, a poet was sentenced in
February to 15 years for a subversive poem. Saudi Arabia has suppressed protests by its Shiite minority and prosecuted rights activists.
The case in the Emirates — a federation of seven dynasties that has
rocketed to prosperity thanks to vast oil wealth and business-friendly
policies — is perhaps the most sweeping, where the government is trying
to quash calls for change among Islamists and others. All three
countries are American allies, important as oil suppliers and as
regional counterweights to Iran.
Even while calling for reforms elsewhere, the United States has largely
remained silent on the gulf monarchies’ profoundly undemocratic
governments, and few observers believe their leaders will voluntarily
share control.
“I see no reason these governments are going to willingly take
significant steps by themselves to open their systems and hand power to
someone else, be it a parliament or whomever,” said David Roberts,
director of the Qatar office of the Royal United Services Institute, a
research group based in London.
The crackdown began in 2011 after the start of the Arab uprisings. There
were no protests in the Emirates, and in March 2011 the government
announced $1.6 billion in infrastructure projects for less developed
areas, widely seen as part of an effort to avert discontent.
That month, more than 130 activists, including academics and a few dozen
Islah members, submitted a petition to the ruling sheiks calling for
Parliament, controlled by the sheiks, to be freely elected and given
full legislative powers. A month later, five prominent activists and
government critics, most of whom had not signed the petition, were
arrested and tried on charges of insulting the rulers. All got prison
terms but were pardoned the next day.
The most prominent, Ahmed Mansoor, says that since then he has been
beaten up twice, his car has been stolen and about $140,000 has
disappeared from his personal bank account. He accuses the government of
trying to intimidate him and says it refuses to return his passport.
The government has not commented on his case, but says it uses legal
means to uphold stability.
In mid-2011, the crackdown turned to Islah, which had operated legally
in the country since 1974. In 1994, its headquarters in Dubai were shut
down, so the group’s leaders moved here to Ras al Khaymah.
But starting in 2011, seven of its members were stripped of citizenship
and scores were arrested, many held incommunicado for months without
charge, according to Human Rights Watch and family members. The
government dismantled the group, changing its name and appointing a new
board.
The arrests mounted, including, in April 2012, that of Sultan bin Kayed
al-Qassemi, Islah’s chairman and a cousin of the ruler of Ras al
Khaymah.
Finally, in January, the attorney general said why. The detained, he said in a statement,
“launched, established and ran an organization seeking to oppose the
basic principles of the U.A.E. system of governance and to seize power.”
At first glance, the Emirates appear an unlikely home for an Islamist
revival. Its leaders have used wealth, economic openness and foreign
labor to become a regional hub. The nation is a top importer of American
goods, and its ports host many American Navy ships.
But political openness has not followed. Political parties are banned,
and most citizens cannot vote. Half of Parliament is appointed by the
ruling sheiks; the other half is elected by a body chosen by those
sheiks.
“We are not a democratic country, but we are progressive on various
issues, on women and on what I would call tolerance,” said Anwar
Gargash, minister of state for foreign affairs. The government
emphasizes prosperity over political development, he said, adding, “We
think 20 percent politics/80 percent development, and I think that is
healthy.”
Many Emiratis agree, and fear that groups like Islah threaten a
stability that has made their country of 5.5 million wealthy, safe and
peaceful.
“It is apolitical, and that is why this country works,” said Sultan
Sooud al-Qassemi, a writer. “It is a political Islamist-free zone. We
don’t want your political Islam here. Go mess up another country.”
But the rush toward modernization has set off a debate about identity,
with many asking what it means to be Emirati in a country just 42 years
old, where foreigners outnumber locals four to one.
One vision is Dubai, the nation’s largest city, where locals are rare,
alcohol is widespread and women in miniskirts flirt with men in public.
The competing view, advocated by Islah, is prevalent in the less
affluent northern emirates where traditional social codes prevail.
Many from the latter group believe the Emirates have changed for the
worse. “There used to be alcohol, but not like now,” said Mr. Alroken,
whose brother is on trial. “There used to be prostitution, but not like
now. And we didn’t have beaches where the women are almost naked. Islah
says we need to protect the society by preserving its Islamic, religious
principles.”
But this is the kind of talk that the leadership will not tolerate. It
is perhaps paradoxical that the uncertainty, and in some cases chaos and
war, that followed the Arab Spring has increased support for the
government’s view.
“I worry that a democratic transition in this period for a state like
the U.A.E. would put us in the throes of reactionary conservatism,
probably for the next 30 or 40 years,” said Mishaal Al Gergawi, a
political analyst. “I look at what is happening in Egypt and other
places, and I wonder, do I need that kind of transition?”
The verdict is expected on July 2.
Can a picture show more contradiction in values and norms then this one?
ReplyDeleteI agree with the right of, and freedom by women to dress and act as they think and want, and I do agree with the fact that women are equal to men, and I am among the first who stand up to defend the rights of women to have and hold their own values, norms, I am beside the women to defend rights to have thoughts, ideas, values and norms, all in freedom, BUT the Emirates are not Western Europe, not America, not any western country were other values, norms are valid and active.
The Emirates are a collective of countries were other values and norms are valid and active, and though I do not adhere to those values and norms as a person who has been brought up in a western society and community, I recognize the values and norms that are valid and active in other countries.
I do acknowledge at the same time that the values and norms of and in the Emirates are changing, developing, evolving, were I feel and think that the differences as shown in the picture, a male in a traditional outfit and a female in a modern outfit, both in white, are conflicting seriously with each other, were I acknowledge seriously that the female is, so to speak, overstepping the line.........
The Emirates are developing, evolving and a too quick change, development, evolvement can be dangerous to a process of adapting, of change and of embracing new(er) ideas, thoughts, and perhaps values and norms!
Just my opinion, but can it be that were some want changes quickly, others need time to adapt to changes, and that too quick changes damage more then to bring improvements?