The official explanation is that 43 of the 47 were Sunni jihadists rebels, some of them members of al Queda; and 4 were Shi'ites who had attacked Saudi police. But Human Rights Watch's director, Sarah Leah Whitson, said that "Regardless of the crimes allegedly committed, executing prisoners in mass only further stains Saudi Arabia's troubling human rights record."
Executing 43 Sunni rebels was apparently meant to show that this was about getting rid of threats to overthrow the government, not a Sunni./Shi'ia sectarian killing. But other Shi'ia nations are not going to see it that way, when the only person of note was the Shi'ia cleric who is widely seen as the inspirational leader of the Shi'ia minority in Saudi Arabia. It's reminiscent of the Romans crucifying two petty thieves alongside Jesus, trying to minimize the importance of this inspiring enemy of the ruling powers.
In addition to everything else, this puts further strain on the United States in the delicate negotiations to get a coalition -- some enemies of each other -- to fight ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Saudi Arabia, a U.S. ally, is a current member of the United Nations Human Rights Council and usually has the support of the United States and the United Kingdom in that body. Now its Shi'ia critics, chiefly Iran, are saying there is no difference between beheadings by ISIS and beheadings by the Saudi government.
It further complicates the Middle East tinder box that Saudi Arabia is a mostly Sunni nation (85-90%) needed to help counter the impression that fighting the Sunni ISIS is a sectarian war between Sunni and Shi'ia divisions of Islam. Now how do we get both (Sunni) Saudi Arabia and (Shi'ia) Iran to join in the fight and cooperate?
Ralph
No comments:
Post a Comment