Arabs are once again showing grit, courage and bravery in
Bahrain and Yemen against oppression and tyranny, but Western interference in
these countries is noticeably thin on the ground  compared to the military support given to Libya right now.

The rationale for using military force against Qaddafi as
stated by President Obama was because “innocent civilians were beaten,
imprisoned and in some cases killed. Peaceful protests were forcefully put
down. Hospitals were attacked and patients disappeared. A campaign of
intimidation and repression began.”

I could fairly take these words and apply them to what is
happening in Bahrain and Yemen. Forty-five people have reportedly been killed
and dozens of others injured after security forces fired on hundreds of
demonstrators in Yemen. The “pearl monument” in Bahrain was
demolished by the army and American apache helicopter gunships were shooting at
unarmed protesters in the center of the capital. Videos show police beating and
shooting protesters point blank. The regime was also going into hospitals and
harassing doctors and nurses and kidnapping patients who they have already
beaten badly. Western journalists who have come in contact with the activists
on the ground in Bahrain say that they too are begging for military
intervention from the West. They want the West to rescue them from their own
governments and the Saudis.

When images and reports of violence against protesters at
Qaddafi’s hands reach the U.S., the UN Security Council called for a “no
fly” zone. Meanwhile, the U.S. had already sent warships along with humanitarian
aid in Libya’s direction and levied top economic sanctions against the country
essentially freezing Libya out of the U.S. banking system.

Some in the administration are arguing that you can’t equate
Bahrain and Yemen with Libya. The king of Bahrain is not a tyrant, Qaddafi is.
But if we are to look at matters since the beginning of these revolutions, the
violence perpetrated by these regimes toward their people is different only in
degrees, not intentions. I also concede that we have different interpretations
of the word tyranny. In my book, it’s an expansive definition that essentially
adds up to what is power’s potential, not just what is its actual use. The
potential is always there for Bahrain’s king to be a tyrant, and he has
exhibited many tyrannical reactions. In the end, it’s not to what extent a
tyrant does or does not exercise his powers, but to what extent are the people
enabled to exercise autonomy and power of their own. It’s clear that the people
in Bahrain have no power at all, at least not institutionally, not politically.
From that perspective, no matter how benevolent, all power that devolves on the
people is ultimately tyrannical.

The U.S. always preaches about how much it cares about
values, human rights and democracy. But it looks like U.S. interests come at
the cost of human lives. Somehow, Libyan blood is more valuable and important
than Bahraini blood. Obviously, there is a double standard in the way the U.S.
deals with friend versus foe. We are tacitly behind autocrats or against them
depending on the threat to U.S. interests, not to people’s lives. This is a
hypocritical stance that goes against everything Americans believe in. In
Bahrain, the U.S. is intervening completely on the side of the government,
while in Libya it’s intervening on the side of the rebels. Our administration
seems unable to either shape events or adopt a consistent policy. U.S. foreign
policy is creating disgraceful and embarrassing double standards.

Further, don’t believe the harmful rhetoric used by some in
the administration that a more democratic Middle East will be anti-American,
fundamentalist or anti-women. It’s all about oil and geo-political military
strategy. The U.S. has a lot of military assets in the Persian Gulf and they
want to make sure they are secure. For decades, the U.S. has aided and abetted
countries with ruthless regimes so that the U.S. could continue to have access
to resources, markets and support for our policies — Bahrain is just another
example of such a government. Our administration has been dealing with a
minority Sunni monarchy that is immersed in oppression, corruption, repression
and widespread discrimination toward the Shi’a population. If you go into any
neighborhood in Bahrain, you can tell right way whether it is Sunni or Shi’a:
If it has bad roads and sewers and is ill-maintained, it is Shi’a; otherwise,
it is Sunni.

This is one of those times I wish I could reassure the
citizens of Bahrain and Yemen that the sentiment of the citizens of the U.S. is
not being represented by our government. Many of us want the U.S. to be an
honest broker for peace in the Middle East and we support the idea of
representative governments in the Arab world. We know, however, that can never
happen as long as our government supports the kind of rulers we ourselves would
never accept. It’s frustrating that the face of America is not the face of
Americans but rather a government that has for decades put business ahead of
the ideals upon which this country was founded.

The writer is professor of Interdisciplinary Studies at The University
of Toledo in Toledo, Ohio.