bahrain
bahrain
bahrain
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
These matters are admittedly difficult to treat fairly, but the bias of the human rights organisations is<br />
hard to deny. Unfortunately much of the media accept their views unquestioningly. The public<br />
picture presented is thus one‐sided.<br />
What is perhaps more important is that media presentations imply that the UK’s relations with<br />
Bahrain should be governed by human rights considerations, and furthermore that UK criticisms of<br />
Bahraini performance should be loudly stated. While this may have political resonance, it cannot be<br />
correct. The UK’s relationship with Bahrain is multi‐faceted, including trade, investment, culture, and<br />
above all the strategic role of Bahrain as a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council in a sensitive<br />
part of the world. The UK’s policies towards Bahrain, and the government’s public presentation of<br />
them, have to balance all these considerations.<br />
In the speech referred to above Mr Hague said that “Our starting point for engagement on human<br />
rights with all countries will be based on what is practical, realistic and achievable”. Practicality and<br />
realism will mean in most cases, and certainly with regard to friendly countries, that criticism should<br />
not be loudly voiced from the roof‐tops: states, like individual human beings, tend to react adversely<br />
to such criticism. The first step should be through normal diplomatic means to urge the governments<br />
concerned to live up to obligations they have themselves undertaken. Aside from the Universal<br />
Declaration of Human Rights, Bahrain is a party to various UN Conventions, including the Convention<br />
against torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the International<br />
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Other steps include the provision of specialised expertise.<br />
There is a place for public criticism, but it should be carefully judged. Dialogue should be the<br />
watchword. Achievement on the substance, and damage to other aspects of our relationship, should<br />
not be risked on the altar of giving satisfaction to single‐issue lobbies and the media.<br />
12 November 2012<br />
46