Omar Al-Shihabi in the Guardian: the Bahrain Royal report

I met Omar at Oxford University a few years ago and he left an excellent impression on me.  I read this piece by him in the Guardian and was more than disappointed.  First, Omar should have mentioned a conflict of interest: my sources tell me that he in fact was hired to do research for the Dependent Bahrain Royal Commission.  In fact, I am told that he worked on the historical section, for which he offers praise here.  This should have been pointed out to the readers up front, although I am told that he added a comment in the comments section under the article to indicate his involvement.  If I am not mistaken, Omar also attended the royal party that accompanied the release of the report.  So all that should have been pointed out to the readers.  I fault Omar for this and fault the Guardian for failing its readership.  Secondly, I did not like the article one bit.  It makes the conflict in Bahrain one pitting one (sectarian) side against another (sectarian) side, when the conflict is really between the ruling dynasty and the population, although the ruler resorts to sectarian agitation and mobilization to bolster his rule and to justify the Saudi/UAE military intervention.  Omar made the conflict in Bahrain--not different from the conflict in Syria, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan--into a dispute for which people need to hug and kiss and let bygone be bygone.  I don't relish writing this comment here at all.  It pains me due to the very high regard in which I have held Omar.