On 14 January 2014, a group of NGOs sent a joint letter to FIA President Jean Todt regarding the human rights situation in Bahrain. The letter urged the FIA to suspend the 2014 Bahrain Grand Prix until its Ethics Committee has held an inquiry to investigate the impact the Grand Prix has on the human rights situation in Bahrain. The letter was signed by a variety of human rights groups. They say that they have had no response to the letter.
The letter claims that there is a direct correlation between intensified crackdowns on civilians and protesters in the lead up to and during previous Formula 1 events, including enclosing villages in barbed wire, setting up an excessive amount of police checkpoints, firing a disproportionate amount of tear gas into residential areas, and imprisoning protesters. They also claim that journalists were denied access to or deported from Bahrain during the time of the Grand Prix and argue that the FIA has an ethical and moral responsibility to safeguard the integrity and reputation of motor sport worldwide by cancelling the Grand Prix until such abuses cease to exist.
In order for the Ethics Committee to meet there needs to be a complaint from an FIA member club, or its officers, members, or licence-holders or from officials, organisers, drivers, competitors or licence‐holders involved in an FIA activity. If that happens the FIA President decides if there is a need for a meeting of the Ethics Committee to discuss the issue and this then makes a report to the FIA President, who may act on the findings.
It is an interesting challenge because if the FIA does receive a complaint, it needs to react sensibly to ensure that its Ethics Committee structure remains credible. This is important as the Ethics Committee may face other questions in the future and if the body is seen as only involved when the FIA wants it to be, it will undermine the credibility of the process.
joeblogsf1 
This is silly, of course there is increased security around the time of an event such as a F1 Grand Prix. You’ll find as much and more around similar events, and in countries that or not at the verge of civil war.
So, who didn’t get his cheque? And who’d like to pee all over the FIA just a little more? Too bad for the people on the ground in Bahrain, their plight used for kindergarten-level politicking.
I did not notice villages being surrounded with barbed wire in the Monaco area. Did you?
Um; now that you come to mention it Joe, don’t think I ever remember seeing barbed wire at SPA, Imola, Silverstone, Hockenheim, Paul Ricard etc all those years ago? Oh well, I guess that I just can’t have been looking hard enough; must have just missed it…….
I wouldn’t know, never having been to the Monaco GP.
But how about Jerusalem? People there would scoff at barbed wire fencing for a few days a year, having been boxed in (or out) by 8 metre concrete walls for years now. But that’s a war zone, right?
So how about Sochi? Are the miles of permanent metal fence erected to keep the Olympic spirit in (or the locals out of sight) a boon for the people there? But that’s a totalitarian country trying to put on a show, right?
Then what about just about any G8 summit in the past 15 years, even the ones in the more civilized countries of the bunch? Forgot the miles-wide exclusion zones, the checkpoints hassling specifically the people actually living in the area out for the two weeks around the event, the permanent air surveillance and complete lack of privacy for the duration? They had barbed wire fencing, too!
Don’t get me wrong, Joe, I’d rather see Formula 1, or any event with enough of an audience, greeted with open arms in the countries they visit. But I see why the Bahraini leadership would take precautions against this turning into a symbol for the local opposition. Those are the realities of this being Bahrain’s only global event and tumultuous recent past.
But the fat cat NGOs trying to profit off this are just downright disdainful. I’m sure half the bunch would jump at the chance of “observing the human rights situation” first hand on invitation from the FIA, preferably from the Paddock Club.
Fat cat NGOs? I work with a number of human rights NGOs and I would like you to point out to me how they are “fat cats.” You can disagree with the politics but don’t paint them with such a wide brush. The fat cats are in fact sitting in the paddick club.
I suggest you start with the fun ex-pat groups in Washington, the UK, and “Europe” – the words “awareness” and “tax exempt” are dead give-aways. Follow the money, someone always gets payed.
As for the locals, well, they seem to be party to the underlying conflict, so I’m sure the human rights angle is merely a convenience.
Instead of writing “NGOs”, we could call these groups what they really are, a bunch of lobbyists and parts of the Bahraini opposition.
Do they have a point or not?
I’m sure I could be persuaded to hear them out. Over dinner, or maybe while witnessing a major sports event.
Increased security, as you proesterchen mention, is not the same as increased repression, which is the main argument put forward by the NGOs
Ask the people at the wrong end of the security measures how they feel about your assertion.
I’m usually on the side of saying business is business, entertainment is entertainment and racing is racing. When you are running a global company , however, as F1 with billions of people watching it, long-term effects need to be considered carefully, too.
While no one has a problem with China as of now, it wasn’t the case during the Olympics. While Sochi sounded more or less sensible when it was conceived, it doesn’t sound like a sensible idea going there currently for the bad rep it F1 could get. Word is floating around connected to Baku, while there was a considerable amount of uproar concerning Kyalami during the height of the Apartheid and I guess there were some eyebrows raised when F1 went to Hungary the first few times, etc. Bahrain fits into the list perfectly, only when you got multiple “Bahrains” as your playground, it does evoke some of the pre-war atmosphere of GP racing and does not necessarily make F1 as a fun-to-watch Sunday lunchtime pass time activity, which may hurt its long-term business model.
well, that fundamental issue is the F1 owners are looking for short term profit and then quick sell of the assets, not really care long term.
thus you get the GP at places where CVC is paid a lot, regardless of how boring the races are.
Joe,
Whereas I agree that the political situation in Bahrain is very far from ideal, my personal view is that it pales into insignificance compared with the hundreds of thousands of foreign labourers being used effectively as slaves in Qatar, to build the football stadia and for other construction jobs. There is soon to be a round of the MotoGP there at the Losail circuit, sanctioned by the FIM, a close associate of the FIA. Therefore if the FIA take action in Bahrain, would the FIM be obliged to match their action in Qatar?
The admixture of sports, ethics and politics is always difficult and I cannot think of any good answers. Would sports boycotts of these countries change anything? Probably not is the answer and therefore, is a boycott anything more than an empty gesture, to appease the more strident elements of the media in other countries?
I am very glad it is not me making the decisions, as it seems a lose – lose situation, where the decision makers will be castigated whatever they decide.
Wilson
The FIA didn’t care when Abu Dhabi used similar labour to build the Yas Marina Circuit and at practically every major construction project in the UAE, so why should FIM feel obligated to give a damn in Qatar?
“Like”
Joe, there are so many hypocrisies here it’s difficult to know where to start. If this letter was written back in January why is it only being reported on now? Why wasn’t the campaigning done before the calendar was fixed? Where is the evidence to support the letter’s content? Why make a glib comment about Monaco? Human rights in China are far more draconian and widespread but this is the tenth year of F1 in China. Perhaps after last years debate about attending Bahrain you should stand by your principles and not attend this year?
Because the only just put out a press release. We don’t get to read JT’s mail…
Wilson, the corollary would be if the hosting of the MotoGP appeared to lead (or corrolate) to an increase in general, or specific, human rights abuses over the relevant period.
That is, the letter in question is making a very specific point:
– it is *not* holding a sporting body responsible to reacting to a host nation’s human rights record crossing a (possibly arbitrary) line relative to other nations;
– it *is* holding a sporting body responsible for an event running under their name where the holding of the event itself is correlating, and by implication leading, to an *increase* in human rights abuses increase in the period up to and including the event.
It seems, to me, a cute argument — sidestepping the “but every country has human rights abuses” rebuttal by seeking to demonstrate attritbution of some abuses to the actual hosting of the event.
I once contacted an expat working in Qatar requesting advice on making some professional enquiries in that location. He stated,inter alia, that the country abolished slavery just a few decades ago and I took that to mean don’t waste my time.
Good luck with that one. Too much money, too few morals…
Amen!
I’m not sure how to think about the ethics of putting on a big show on a tiny island which is a flashpoint for the Sunni/Shia competition in the Persian Gulf. Hold on, don’t Saudi and Abu Dhabi also promote petroleum pleasures through paying for the teams to prance around on the TV? Let’s ask Riyadh what the right thing to do is, hmmmm?
what about China?
750,000 people in the UK are conscripted onto Forced Unwaged Labour schemes by the UK government, in breach of Article 4(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights, let’s scrap the British GP.
Well that letter received exactly the answer it deserved, none. 😉
Now with 2 problem-free Bahrain tests behind us and with only 4 weeks to go until the race, even a complaint from a party that FIA do have to take seriously won’t lead to cancellation of the race or the Ethics Committee to hold an inquiry.
Taking into consideration the habitual time-frames in communication then tops a few letters will be exchanged and the 2014 Bahrain GP will have long finished before any decisions will and can be made.
Well there’s always next year.
an oppressive regime kills and imprisons people protesting the GP and the FIA sits idle. nice. the power money has over people is sickening at times.
I wonder if the letter writing has started regarding Sochi. It should have if not.
What has changed since you did your own investigation Joe? Did you see any barbed wire in Bahrain last year? Did you speak to anyone apart from the F1 enclave?
Of course if an F1 related event, test, or race is held at the same time each year it will coincide with the unrest marking the anniversary of the uprising as it did a couple of weeks back.
No. I saw no barbed wire. Yes, I spoke to people outside the enclave.
What about our human lefts! ; )
It’s easy to dismiss problems with the comment “racing is racing” but the truth is a world sporting event – and F1 is a world sporting event – makes a host country look better than it might otherwise look.
The glamour and outrageous opulence of F1 promotes the free market world of money, power and opportunity.
For a sport such as F1 to embrace and support the good side of Bahrain does not imply support of oppressive behaviour but conversely silence on the matter implies that same support.
Almost anything is contentious to some group or other but that is no excuse for silence or looking the other way when those groups wish to be heard.
personally i don’t think an F1 race makes a country look any better than it might otherwise look. it is a race, at a track. it comes, it races and then it leaves. politics should simply be a non event. HR’s orgs jump on any opportunity to bang on about anything they can grasp to push their relevancy.
they are a distraction, nothing more and nothing less. stay out of F1, they don’t actually live in the real world.
In the case of Bahrain, F1 is the only event of global reach they host on any regular basis, and the lack of F1 race in 2011 probably did make them look worse. (by however small amount when compared to the civil war being fought at the same time)
It’s no wonder the GP attracts all sorts of interest.
Motorsport, especially F1, has no moral foundation to address these issues. It raced in South Africa during the apartheid days, for example.
This is one of the concerns that alienates Motorsport in too many ways – a perception of an uncaring, money-chasing bunch of ‘piranhas’ – with the result that the sport itself, driver vs driver in on-the-edge competition, is totally lost.
F1 only ever cancels an event if the the deal, the money, isn’t there. Never on moral grounds. And that’s where the collective leadership of FIA, FOM and teams has failed – in my opinion…..
I think you should ask what these piranhas do (quietly) for charitable causes before condemning them all out of hand. Just because they don’t talk about it, doesn’t mean they don’t do it!
Yes, correct; just like a RD – a point I made in an earlier post. There will, I’m sure, be others.
FOM cancels events on the grounds that the money is there – not FIA. “F1” is not one organisation. As far as FOM are concerned the Bahraini organisers have met all their obligations and the show must go on.
There is a way for FIA to act, but they have to be convinced that the race is being used to further a political objective. This is rare, and when it does happen it’s nearly always AFTER the event. EG the Turkish GP when a member of government for “Northern Cyprus” (a state that only Turkey recognises) gave out one of the trophies on the podium. FIA ruled that this was using the race to further a political objective and hit the organisers with a big fine and told them to not do it again.
F1 was never a sport for national representative teams like, say, Soccer is. In Soccer there is one team called “England”, another called “Italy” and so on. These teams represent a nation and government can act to refuse contact between the representative team and a regime they detest. So for some years England would not play cricket with SA, but English players went to SA for the English winter and played there.
This situation was increasingly restricted until by the mid 80s any English sportsman going to play in SA, even as an individual, would be in hot water (not jail, but he’d find it very hard to go about his business).
FISA (as it then was) fell, I think, roughly in step with that. – pulling out after 1985 and going back in 1992 by which time SA was playing international cricket and rugby again.
Perhaps the “ethics” committee could take a look at Eccelstones support of Putin on the gay rights issue, seems Bernies business principals wont be swayed by human rights, seems the old jewish adage “business is business” holds true.
Ecclestone is allowed his personal opinions (outdated though they may be). He is not THE sport, he is a representative of the sport.
A good number of people taking the time to comment, but seemingly not reading the article. The point, made very clearly, relates to potentially increased human rights abuses as a direct result of the F1 circus being in town.
Citing other countries with human rights issues is irrelevant in this context, there are no reports of the Chinese govt firing tear gas into local villages during the Beijing GP.
This is a difficult issue. I generally support the view that sports is often an inspiration and entertainment that rises above politics but where do we draw the line? The point being made re: Bahrain is that the event itself results in harm to the citizens there and I think compels special consideration. By that standard, should we be considering the many credible reports of substantial repressive and abusive actions by the Russian government before and during the Olympics and whether something similar could happen as a result of the the F1 race?
This has got nothing to do with Bahrain, nor what is or is not happening on the ground. JT chose to ignore the fact that perception is reality to snuggle up to political allies. The world thinks that the situation in Bahrain is far worse than it really is. The problem is that the FIA is not going to change perceptions with the GP, but rather it will make things worse because the event provides a platform for the opposition to exploit. This means that the perception is that the sport is doing something bad. That’s not really true. It is doing something unwise. It is for Bahrain to sort out its troubles (and play a better propaganda game than the opposition) not for F1 to do it for them. This is someone exploiting that attitude to try to damage JT and the Ethics process. Who would want to do that, and why? What is required, in my opinion, is a better understanding within the FIA of communication in the modern world…
Comms and sports bodies are always an ongoing sore point. So much power and so little competency.
“They say that they have had no response to the letter.”
This does not sound like J.T. office ….. Oh wait a minute…
Bahrain may not be the most democratic country out there, but it seems Bernie just doesn’t give a damn about this kind of thing.
We haven’t heard even a whisper about Russian GP being in danger because of what the Russians are doing in Ukraine.
And now F1 is about to move to Azerbaijan.
What next, North Korea?
The only democratic country in the region is Yemen. Not exactly an example of peace… Bahrain is much more peaceful if the UK expats there are to be believed.
The situation in Ukraine is evolving so rapidly that it will probably be old news by the time F1 arrives in Sochi in October.
No not F1, it’s the Globe Theatre Company going to North Korea! Best of luck to them,they will need it, though I cannot understand why they are going, unless they have all learned to speak Shakespeare in Korean. Maybe they, like JT, have buckets of sand that they carry around with them, though of course his follows in a limousine.
I would definitely question F1 going to North Korea
If they offer enough money…
A great, measured comment, Wilson, and Proesterchen makes some valid points too.
I’m cynical, for many reasons. In 2012 it was fashionable among the media to be virulently anti the Bahraini government, and several newspapers had made up their minds well before the race. Mine asked me specifically to venture out and see what was going on. It was even suggested that if I got arrested it would make a better story. I’m not a political hack by any stretch of the imagination; I’m a racer, pure and simple. But I did venture out, with Joe and Brad Spurgeon of the New York Herald Tribune. We weren’t seeking the Pulitzers that some of our colleagues coveted (I kid you not). We just spoke to Sunnis and Shias alike and wrote what we heard and felt and got ripped apart for it, as if we’d been duped.
Well, the duping is on both sides. It’s just that the anti-Bahrainis are much better at pr than the government.
One man’s repressive police behaviour is another’s uprising. If security and ‘repression’ are stepped up prior to the race, perhaps that’s because the protests are ramped up too… It’s far from one-sided. I don’t remember seeing photographs published in the media, that I saw, of Bahraini policemen dying because they had been set on fire with petrolbombs.
NGOs are the bane of our lives. Look what Al Gore and his ilk put us all through with laws in the name of saving the planet, while turning a blind eye to everything China does to negate that each and every day. So I’m very sceptical about them. Of course there are good people involved with them who believe as passionately about what they are doing as I do about racing, but there’s always that nag in my mind that if there wasn’t a problem, many of them would not have a raison d’etre.
The cynic in me remembers that in 2012 there was massive uproar about the GP, and even after my fact-finding venture my newspaper chose to believe the lobbyists rather than its man on the ground until I spoke my mind to the guy I was dealing with and, to my astonishment, a positive story he’d wanted toned down actually was published as written. A story that made the point that both warring factions were in agreement that Bahrain’s economy desperately needed the race.
I recall that there was a GP2 race the following weekend, over which nobody raised the slightest protest or objection – anti-Bahrainis or UK media. Yet surely the political situation had not been resolved? That sort of selective righteousness is so hypocritical. And also suggests that to the antis the race is actually propaganda manna from heaven, even if some pretend to hate it. Without, where would they have their platform?
I have no idea what the answer is to the Bahrain problem, or any other such as Sochi. But I agree with the comment that sport and politics mix badly.
I just reiterate our findings: that both sides in Bahrain are agreed the race is essential to their economic wellbeing.
a most sensible and well written article. thank you for that. i like your comment vis-a-vis NGO’s. i also share your sentiments re cause and effect.
It’s nice to hear from, Joe and you, people who were there and it’s encouraging to hear that newspaper editors contemplate publishing stories which divert from the accepted storyline as a result of journalists actually being there.
We should remember that 4 team members of Force India were attacked with Molotov cocktails as the team was driving from the track to its hotel. Likely this attack was launched by the opposition February 14 Movement, initially a largely peaceful protest group, or its more militant arm Asab al-Thawra.
It’s unknown whether Force India were singled out but that wouldn’t be inconsistent with Asab al-Thawra’s tactics. Their first high-profile attack was to hijack and torch a bus owned by the country’s largest private transportation company. The company is operated by Indians, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis, who make up the majority of the expatriate workforce in Bahrain. By threatening foreign workers – something the February 14 movement also did – Asab al-Thawra hopes those workers will leave undermining the Bahraini economy and advancing its goal of forcing the al-Khalifa regime from power. This goal which would serve a number of foreign actors including Iran.
The stories which were fashionable in the run up to the Bahrain GP promoted a narrow view of what is a nuanced and delicate situation, the outcome of which could have huge significance. Though, there is always room to be improve, the Al Khalifa regime is has created one of the most modern, open societies in the GCC- Bahraini women can work, have the right to vote, there are elections, women aren’t fully veiled, Bahrain host a US military base, there is a bicameral political system where, though the upper house are appointed, the lower house is elected. The Bahraini shoe throwing index is low and its future is important.
Though public opinion and ethics may make it difficult to do otherwise the FIA aren’t qualified to take the decision to cancel the Grand Prix on political grounds. Joe I think you disagree with me on this but I believe that in this situation the best way forward is to carry on with existing Grands Prix and take a thoughtful approach to where we go racing in the future.
I think one would say that Force India people happened upon a Molotov Cocktail rather than being attacked. Your description is not at all what happened.
Was it an accident that a team got hit? I didn’t know that or you don’t think they knew it was Force India?
No team was hit by anything. What happened was that a Force India minibus arrived at a place where protesters and police were throwing things at each other closer to the motorway (I believe). They were not the target at all and they went through or around it without too much drama, as did all the other traffic. It was wildly exaggerated.
Everyone has an interest and an agenda. NGOs, Governments, rich men, poor men, dogs and monkeys.
I’ll leave your comment about NGOs aside, but your observations about seeking Pulitzers and a GP2 race going ahead without unrest I think speaks volumes for how ‘hot’ the situation is for the journalists and what International sporting events do for human rights in reality.
Thanks for sharing, and save travels to you, to Joe, and to all your colleges joining you on the trek this year!
People don’t care about a GP2 race. F1 has a vast international audience, how many people watch GP2? Same reason why no one cared about the golf tournament or the WEC race later in the year.
I’m curious how the race is crucial for the economic wellbeing of Bahrain? The race is sparsely attended, so it’s not like tourists are visiting the country for the event, and the F1 circus is only there for a week or so. From what I’ve read and heard (friends in the military stationed in Bahrain), the military presence of the USA and Britain is far more crucial to the country than the F1 race, which is viewed as an ego trip for the rulers.
Completely off-topic. Joe, When will the GrandPrix+ season preview be published?
Tomorrow
Thanks – looking forward to that.
On a related ethics issue, do you think thatthe announcement of the arrest of Bernie’s lawyer Stephen Mullens (reported by a certain ‘journalist’ and buried in the Saturday news) affect CVC’s decision to maintain support for Bernie at all?
Bernie’s former lawyer had been indicted. He represented Bambino. I am not surprised at all. In fact I thought it happened a while ago.
Will you be attending the Bahrain Grand Prix Joe? Where does your ethical barometer tell you?
I go where I have to go to make a living. I don’t decide on the venues. I don’t think Bahrain is any worse than a number of other places F1 visits. I know some will not agree with that. I did not think that way until I went there. In my opinion the vast majority of Bahrainis not only support the race and do not like the bad publicity about their nation. There are always exceptions but who is anyone to judge when the land of the free boasts Guantanamo Bay. My view is that this is sport and sport it should remain.
All sounds very sensible Joe; hard for any reasonable person to disagree.
So, UniF1ed was a sporting slogan, not a political one?
For a country like Bahrain, a GP is a political event as much as it is a sporting one. It gives the country international attention or why else would the government back it? It’s not like enough Bahrainis attend the race to make it profitable…
Did I say that UniF1ed was a sporting slogan. No, I did not. Don’t put words into my mouth.
No, but you said F1 is a sport and sport it should remain, but the Bahrain government, and opposition, clearly views it as a political event.
There are no huge sponsors forming queues to get their names all over F1. One of the most successful teams, McLaren hasn’t got a major sponsor at all.
We keep on hearing it’s because of the recession, but that’s almost over. Could it be that high profile companies don’t want to associated with a sport that is being used by corrupt regimes like Bahrain ? Do they want their money to line the pockets of a man who a Judge called a liar and a criminal?
Jonno This is incorrect. F1 remains one the largest (by volume of money) sponsorship platforms in the world. It’s revenues have stayed stable over time even though tobacco money was lost through regulation.
An F1 team is typically attracting more in sponsorship than a top premier league football club. In fact until recently when a combination of UEFA financial fair play regs, vanity/political investors and teams football sponsorship sales teams getting their act together combined to balloon Football sponsorship revenues, a single well run F1 team would be attracting more sponsorship revenue than the combined value of all shirt deal in the premiership.
Uncertainty about Mr E’s future doesn’t help the F1 global partner programme I guess but teams are doing some stunning deals this year. Mclaren not having a title partner is part of a natural cycle and the gap in its funding is more than filled by Honda’s (a big corporation entering F1) money.
F1 is no longer a “sport”, it is a competition based big business that carries a load of international prestige, similar to an Olympics.
When wealthy small countries import such an event it will, by its nature, become the focus of any disgruntled organization for protest, peaceful or otherwise.
Does anyone really expect the FIA, on ethical grounds alone, to step up and order Bernie and CVC to leave Bahrain? Or Russia, China, or any other repressive regime willing to pay the cost of hosting F1?
@georgeK…..my thoughts exactly. just another excuse for the NGO’s to wave their flags for a ‘look at me moment. F1 is about racing and not politics. if bahrein has a problem then the bahreini’s will sort it out,or not. nothing to do with F1. just arrive, race, and leave. simple really.
Umm….sport – business; business – sport……? Where does one start and the other end? Let’s not forget that ‘Premiership’ football has also aligned itself to ‘big business’ for many years now. I have to admit, I still love Sir F W’s oft-quoted saying about whether F1 is business or sport……’for 2 hours on a Sunday afternoon, it’s sport; the rest of the time, it’s business’.
A-P: “lead (or corrolate) to an increase in general, or specific, human rights abuses over the relevant period”.
So at best what you’re saying is, that can be no justification to complain on witnessing (or just the awareness of abuse), providing our presence hadn’t led to an escalation over previous levels…..thats worrying.
Of the most current locations of concern it seems to me the FIA and FOM have, not surprisingly, totally lost the plot in Bahrain and looking at the Crimea situation will have lost it in Sochi also.
But as worrying is the sense that ordinary people like yourself that happen to enjoy F1 and many of those who’s livelihood depends on it, can suspend belief leaving their silence to be taken as tacit agreement that whats happening there is acceptable.
Begs the question why even F1’s sporting body which has the moral duty to pull the plug on events in any country where well documented human rights abuses occur and International Law flouted…haven’t done so.
Don’t suppose money could be at the root and on which point Mr Stephen Mullens, Mr Ecclestone’s erstwhile lawyer who’s been busily distancing himself from Mr E over the last couple of years has found himself charged with being complicit in the Ecclestone bribery case by the Munich Prosecutor.
Now one wonders if SM will will roll over to save his own skin.
No, TJ, you’re completely wrong to attribute those points of view to me from what I wrote. Go back and read it again.
At no point did I suggest or infer that it was right (or wrong), or good (or bad), for the FIA or whoeverelse to hold (or withdraw) events anywhere based on whether the given event attracted no more (or much more) human rights abuses than the norm for the hosting region.
There was no explicit or implicit “suspending of belief”, as you put it, nor other stance reflected — that’s all your own imagination. I was simply appreciating the NGOs approach in the relevant letter.
“Ethics” essentially just means being “nice” and “fair”. Having enough money to host an F1 race is likely to come from somewhere that’s not especially “nice” or “fair”.
Having said that, one person’s interpretation of what constitutes “nice” or “fair” can be very different to another’s. Whether it’s age, sex or religious discrimination, it’s always the dreadful hypocrasy that really winds me up. E.g. Lets ban going to Bahrain because they treat political opponents so poorly but lets not mention Abu Dhabi/China/India etc where they treat them so well. Or their views on women, rape, domestic violence etc etc.
There’s far more child poverty, child slavery, infant death, murder, malnutrition and lack of education in Brazil than in Bahrain, but don’t let that put you off enjoying Interlagos.
Is the report available online? It would be good to read it and to really see what sources they have for their claims. Not that I’m saying the guys in charge over in Bahrain wouldn’t do such a thing, of course they are capable of that, they have done it before.
I just think it is important to realise that their are people playing at their own politics. Much of the Middle east is being wrenched by the various proxy politics between the Saudi’s and Iranians for regional influence. So before we take these NGO reports at face value we should be wary of who may benefit, scrutinise the actual NGO and we should certainly read what these reports actually say.
[“NGO” means nothing, a not insignificant amount of NGO’s are playing to an agenda of various government backers, be it American, Russian or Saudi “NGO’s”]