This paper proposes a different title to examine the revolutionary problem in Bahrain, in the shadow of a revolution that has widely ranged, and is suffering from political, security and social instability. We will through this research address this problem, via pointing out a number of important questions on the cognitive problem, as well as pointing out a number of shortcomings in the body of the revolution in Bahrain.
In reading through the difference between the opposition groups in Bahrain, the depth of that difference which sometimes progresses to the point of disagreement is very clear. It also manifests itself in different forms, some that are rational, and some are not. In the figure, the differences in the opposition body are multiple; however, is it also obvious in its in-depth?
If we go back to the dawn of the 14th February 2011, and what that day has resulted in increasing the numbers of demonstrators and protesters, and where the Pearl Roundabout became home for hordes of Bahraini people, at a massive 24/7 sit-in demanding radical change and the overthrown of the regime. An agreement in that very revolutionary moment occurred and featured enthusiasm, and insistence on shaking off a heavy legacy of the Bahrain history left by the one ruling family (the Khalifas) over two centuries and more.
Nevertheless, political forces demanding reform have appeared and created a huge split in the opposition groups, especially after the militarization of the Roundabout by the Peninsula Shield in March in the same year of the Revolution.
The Youth of February 14 has taken two methodologies, first was: “revolutionary” that was translated in the increasing techniques of civil disobedience, and the growing pace of reluctance and refusal to the running government rules. This methodology was extended until the second attack on the Pearl Roundabout in March 2011, and was described by some observers as the real revolutionary option, a more revolutionary choice than the field confrontations adopted with the rising of torture victims.
For example, the events between February and April of 2011, such as the sit-in near the Financial Harbour on the 7th of March 2011, and the protest to the Royal Court at the 11th of the same month, as well as the call raised by the detained leader at Haq Movement Abdul Jalil Al-Singace, to occupy key ministries and blocking main streets in Manama. All those methods were more revolutionary from using Molotov cocktails and iron bars and tires that were used in the period following the sit-in at the Pearl Roundabout was broken.
whereas, the second methodology adopted by the rebels, from the adoption of marches and sit-ins in Shiite areas, was such a significant shift in the revolution in Bahrain, due to the largely strict security option adopted by the Khalifi ruling family with the help of the Saudis.
Hereafter, two ways has been adopted in Bahrain, first: the revolutionary concept adopted by the youth in its two previously mentioned methodologies, second: the political reform concept adopted by the political societies. However, they both speak in the name of a revolution, which result in a dispute between the two components.
The Youth of 14th February cling on to the revolution title, because they were the ones who used it in the first place and lit its moment and made a lot of sacrifices for its sake. Where on the other hand, the political societies, specifically, Al Wefaq speaks in the name of revolution because it owns a big crowd that made a balance between the opposition and those that are pro-governments.
It can be said that the pleura of the revolutions dynamics makes both components’ revolutionary approach dissimilar, where the political societies led by Al Wefaq clearly pursue political approach, subject to purely political equations. Whereas, the Youth of 14th February practice protesting, which most are timid, and perhaps disturb and concerns the regime, yet not as much as putting security and economic burdens on it by only a marginal rise and descend through the emergence of revolutionary groups that are more organized, yet, quickly detected and suppressed.
Gustine Garder decides in his book “Sufi World” that Freud’s subconscious was seen as something inherent in human nature, where Freud believed in “a permanent relationship of conflict between man and his surroundings, specifically between human desires and instincts on the one hand, and the requirements and taboos of his surrounding world on the other hand. Not only the intellect steers our actions, because man is not a purely rational creature as the rational philosophers in the 18th century tried to persuade us, where very often the irrational gusts determines what we think or dream of.”
The actual parameters in the human mind interact with the nature of culture framed for behaviour. And in the Bahraini revolution frame, the eruptions in the circle of interest are what make up the revolutionary and political awareness. Of course, interest in its broad sense, with pleasure and pain-release concept, as well as psychological comfort of exotic options outside the cognitive sense.
It is possible to search the “revolution” in Bahrain through political, informatics or rights measures, but we could also build a cognitive research in this aspect too. It is a search between sociology and psychology, and is one of the exacting academic tools for understanding a society.
This area extends to the field, which is already manifested in a suppressed revolution (Youth of 14 Feb), that is unable to implement the tools of a revolution, and uses revolutionary titles as certain ratification. Moreover, this also extends to pure political implementation (political societies), that already calls itself as revolutionary for media consumption purposes, and is believed as a revolutions by its followers as certain ratification indeed.
And between this and that both are challenging each others in the details of their speciality, where the revolutionary challenges the political in its legal tools and frameworks that it could not derogate from, and where the political oppose the revolutionary in its bullish and various modalities, both of which are available as non-equivocal in real revolutionary act. The revolution by all its means is demolishing what is built already in order to reconstruct it, is noted alone as an alien fact in the Bahraini reality. If we are to be condescended in saying that, the word revolution is way far from the real happenings inside the country and it is not due to the political and security field if to get free from the political interpretation and arrogant media consumptions.
All events that occur in Bahrain are premised by the fateful pain of the people, where this cognitive pain should be noted by its people to solve their problem.
And here we can borrow the philosophy of Demerits in understanding the parts, being reproducible of different bodies;this metaphor drives in this question: why Bahrain revolution is downturned? There are political answers as we stated previously which political analysts can analyze a lot, but – as we stated also- there are other aspects of which a researcher shall study and detect.
Mental and psychological downturn represents a cornerstone of the human downturn in all its economic and political parts. And this downturn interacts mostly with conditions that easily react with human capabilities. Therefore, some inspiring revolutionaries (such as Gandhi and Khomeini for example) regard the concept of revolution with a broader view, that includes concepts, norms, conditions and society, and not only politics, government, security and economic situation. Therefore, the social shortage in Bahrain is not in the politicians or revolutionaries.
There is a lack in the cognitive/intellectual side, where despite the presence of well-educated persons, but we lack of intellectuals. There is also a lack in the strategic teleological aspect, where despite the presence of politicians, but we lack persons with strategic thinking. We lack professional planners, where despite the presence of revolutionaries, but we lack planners.
All these tools in the integration of an active revolution, point out questions to the opposition components, which resounds on the defects with premises, and treats its own illness with the medicine of some others, making them wander around making the others morass in wander too. The problem is that an event like this is not pure luxury that does not harm, but it is the fate that is tied to the lives and souls of people, linked to the well-being and the security and comfort of the citizens. And if not treated properly, and fulfilled the shortcomings truly, nothing will move and the situation will last forever, to affect the reality that did not change with its downturn after a while. Does God change the condition of a people until they desire to change it themselves?
(1) Gustine Garder , A novel on the history of Philosophy, Dar Al Mona, Page 454