The latest sale is to the island country of Bahrain. They happen to be an ally of the US in our current struggle against Iran, which makes arming them an important tactical decision. Still, the country itself is questionable when it comes to human rights issues. Though the types and amounts of arms that are being allowed in the recent sale are limited, we are still providing weapons for a country that treats its citizens poorly enough that they are close to revolt.
The Bahraini government has been accused on many occasions of torturing and killing protestors in their country. And yet we are still willing to give them these weapons. A key US naval base rests on the island, so keeping them happy is important to the military, regardless of how they act. Our pledges to protect human rights get put on the fence when it comes to such strategic matters.
The United States is once again shaming itself by demonstrating that our commitment to human rights is less important than our commitment to maintaining a strong military presence in the Middle East. Human rights get put on a sliding scale. Peace and change are measured against tactical advantage. If we are not going to stick to our principles in such matters, how can we expect our own government to not hold the same view when it comes to its own citizens? Do those who create our laws balance the maintaining of power with the human rights of its own people? Is it even possible for us to truly dedicate ourselves to the ideals that we profess to follow when it comes to the suffering of our fellow human beings?