Archie Bland: Why won't Bernie Ecclestone lead by example in Bahrain?

Our Deputy Editor on why doing nothing is a form of complicity

Archie Bland
Wednesday 18 April 2012 17:04 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Let's say Bernie Ecclestone and a Bahraini official are conducting a business deal. As they shake hands on their transaction, the official uses his other arm to punch a passerby in the face. Mr Ecclestone continues to shake and the deal is done. Is he complicit in the violence?

Most of us would say yes, I think. Not Mr Ecclestone, or his fellow decision-makers in Formula One. For Mr Ecclestone, that would presumably be an act of internal politics, just like the protests that are still consuming Bahrain, and hence none of his business. "We don't get involved in politics," he explained recently. "They will sort out their internal problems, I'm quite sure." Accordingly, this weekend's Grand Prix still looks set to go ahead.

What Ecclestone and Co apparently fail to appreciate is that doing nothing can be just as meaningful an act as making a fuss. In Bahrain, as in South Africa during the apartheid years, the options aren't a powerful political statement vs a position of strict neutrality; instead, the two options are equally forceful.

By pulling Formula One out of Bahrain for a second year, Mr Ecclestone and his colleagues would be sending a signal that the country is still in crisis. That's a position strongly reinforced by an Amnesty International report earlier this week. Doing nothing, by extension, makes the opposite statement.

Since last year Formula One deemed a race in Bahrain would be a bad idea, the decision to go ahead this time implies that things are getting better. Max Mosley, a former Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile president, gets it: the Bahraini authorities, he wrote in The Daily Telegraph, "hope to show the world that the troubles were just a small, temporary difficulty... By agreeing to race there, Formula One becomes complicit in what happened."

There's still time for Ecclestone to see sense. But that looks increasingly unlikely. The chairman of the circuit, for one, sounds bullish, making the remarkable suggestion that the race will "put things in perspective", a claim that suggests we'd finally realise how meaningless all the death was when we saw a few cars whizzing round his track. And there's an official version of events that sounds similarly blithe. "The eyes of the world are trained on Bahrain," it proclaims, and "... the most important sporting event witnessed by the region."

That's half-right, I suppose. We'll all be looking at Bahrain this weekend. But we won't be watching the contest. And if Bernie Ecclestone really wants to stay out of the country's politics, he'd be well-advised to remove himself and his race cars from the picture before it's too late.

Follow @archiebland

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in