Arab foreign ministers agree on establishing a joint Arab military force !!

[HannibalBarca]

What is the status quo nowadays?

It is much needed.

Obviously there is the IMAFT led by KSA and which hosted a few large joint military exercises and parades earlier this year (where the likes of KSA and Qatar paraded next to each other etc.) but personally I do not believe that the existence of those two are mutually exclusive. They should be able to coexist side by side without much trouble.

In fact I believe (for naturally obvious reasons) that a joint Arab force regulated by the Arab League (if there is a real desire by the regimes and leaders in power) and which operates within the Arab world, would have a much easier job at succeeding than the IMAFT.

Obviously for it to succeed in practice a few regimes need to learn to coexist and work together for the greater good of the Arab world which should be something completely natural if the Arab street had a say. Likewise peace and stability in the likes of Syria, Yemen, Libya and to a lesser extent Iraq.

However it is more than realistic if there is a serious political will.

@Frogman @The SC @MICA @Gomig-21 @fachfouch @HannibalBarca @Hamilcar @ezerdi2 @SALMAN F @OutOfAmmo @Arabi @Full Moon etc.

Can't happen nowadays since Too many Ideological/Political rift among Arab nations.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

What is the status quo nowadays?

It is much needed.

Obviously there is the IMAFT led by KSA and which hosted a few large joint military exercises and parades earlier this year (where the likes of KSA and Qatar paraded next to each other etc.) but personally I do not believe that the existence of those two are mutually exclusive. They should be able to coexist side by side without much trouble.

In fact I believe (for naturally obvious reasons) that a joint Arab force regulated by the Arab League (if there is a real desire by the regimes and leaders in power) and which operates within the Arab world, would have a much easier job at succeeding than the IMAFT.

Obviously for it to succeed in practice a few regimes need to learn to coexist and work together for the greater good of the Arab world which should be something completely natural if the Arab street had a say. Likewise peace and stability in the likes of Syria, Yemen, Libya and to a lesser extent Iraq.

However it is more than realistic if there is a serious political will.

@Frogman @The SC @MICA @Gomig-21 @fachfouch @HannibalBarca @Hamilcar @ezerdi2 @SALMAN F @OutOfAmmo @Arabi @Full Moon etc.

No pakistan will train them and its generals will lead them

Yes, of course!

Arabs, whose military history is only rivaled by a very, very, very small number of entities, ethnic groups etc. is going to be "taught" (despite most modern-day Arab nations militaries predating the existence of Pakistan by decades, if we include predecessor states by several millennia) by a nation which has not won (objectively speaking) a single war. I am not saying that the modern-day Arab war record is great in comparison (despite going to war with the foremost superpower (USA) several times, and its creation (Israel). Different league altogether than the likes of India and Bangladesh.....

You see history goes up and down but what remains the case (unless proven otherwise in the next following millennia (s) ) is that Arabs are looking down on Pakistanis on this front (military history and achievements) rather than up. The same Arabs that conquered the heartland of Pakistan (Sindh) etc. 1300 years ago btw.

Arab states in the GCC (KSA and UAE mostly) have a long history of close ties with the Pakistani military establishment. Don't confuse that for more than what this is.

And which due respect, Arabs regularly train with the world's most powerful militaries. KSA has trained with the likes of USA, UK, France, CHINA and everyone in between (almost) in the past 2 years alone. Regularly. While we are speaking this occurs in Egypt currently.

Not to say fighting a war in Yemen for 3.5 years which complexity is only rivaled by the war in Syria nowadays.

But yeah, keep living in La La Land and obsessing about Arabs, lol.

Can't happen nowadays since Too many Ideological/Political rift among Arab nations.

The ideological rift as we speak is less than what it was 3.5 years ago. Take KSA as an example. In that time period relations with Sudan have returned to normal/excellent once again (KSA regularly trains with Sudanese brothers) and apparently operates a military base in Sudan (in all secrecy) and Sudanese are fighting side by side in Yemen with the Arab coalition that the likes of Morocco, Jordan, Egypt etc. are a part of. Relations with both the Tripoli government and Haftar are cordial as well.

Relations with Iraq have improved tenfold to the degree that we can talk about an actual alliance with the ISOF, Al-Abadi and the non-Iranian aligned groups. Basically the actual Iraqi military.

What is a stumbling block is the failed Qatari "MB" project (to simplify it) which I believe will end in a not too distant future and the Al-Assad regime although, contrary to popular belief, KSA has been less adamant of removing the Al-Assad regime post Russia-intervention and the road link from KSA (via Jordan) to Syria has reopened on both sides. One of MbS's first statement was "Al-Assad is staying". Publicly. On national and Arabic media. That showed a big switch in policy. Which already occurred in late 2014, a few months prior to the Yemen-intervention.

Moroccan-Algerian reconciliation, I believe, is also a question of time. We have seen improvements on this front lately.

If the likes of Ethiopia and Eritrea can come together (with the help of KSA, UAE etc.) then surely those political conflicts/disagreements should be solvable.

 

[Ceylal]

Almost chocked from laughing so hard...An Arab force to defend the Arabs state from being attacked...That’s just like the Condemned joining their hangmen.....
Just imagine joining the Egyptian army of thugs under the command of a dimwitted Saudi..Joining the Houthis is the only winning ticket so far..

 

[HannibalBarca]

What is the status quo nowadays?

It is much needed.

Obviously there is the IMAFT led by KSA and which hosted a few large joint military exercises and parades earlier this year (where the likes of KSA and Qatar paraded next to each other etc.) but personally I do not believe that the existence of those two are mutually exclusive. They should be able to coexist side by side without much trouble.

In fact I believe (for naturally obvious reasons) that a joint Arab force regulated by the Arab League (if there is a real desire by the regimes and leaders in power) and which operates within the Arab world, would have a much easier job at succeeding than the IMAFT.

Obviously for it to succeed in practice a few regimes need to learn to coexist and work together for the greater good of the Arab world which should be something completely natural if the Arab street had a say. Likewise peace and stability in the likes of Syria, Yemen, Libya and to a lesser extent Iraq.

However it is more than realistic if there is a serious political will.

@Frogman @The SC @MICA @Gomig-21 @fachfouch @HannibalBarca @Hamilcar @ezerdi2 @SALMAN F @OutOfAmmo @Arabi @Full Moon etc.



Yes, of course!

Arabs, whose military history is only rivaled by a very, very, very small number of entities, ethnic groups etc. is going to be "taught" (despite most modern-day Arab nations militaries predating the existence of Pakistan by decades, if we include predecessor states by several millennia) by a nation which has not won (objectively speaking) a single war. I am not saying that the modern-day Arab war record is great in comparison (despite going to war with the foremost superpower (USA) several times, and its creation (Israel). Different league altogether than the likes of India and Bangladesh.....

You see history goes up and down but what remains the case (unless proven otherwise in the next following millennia (s) ) is that Arabs are looking down on Pakistanis on this front (military history and achievements) rather than up. The same Arabs that conquered the heartland of Pakistan (Sindh) etc. 1300 years ago btw.

Arab states in the GCC (KSA and UAE mostly) have a long history of close ties with the Pakistani military establishment. Don't confuse that for more than what this is.

And which due respect, Arabs regularly train with the world's most powerful militaries. KSA has trained with the likes of USA, UK, France, CHINA and everyone in between (almost) in the past 2 years alone. Regularly. While we are speaking this occurs in Egypt currently.

Not to say fighting a war in Yemen for 3.5 years which complexity is only rivaled by the war in Syria nowadays.

But yeah, keep living in La La Land and obsessing about Arabs, lol.



The ideological rift as we speak is less than what it was 3.5 years ago. Take KSA as an example. In that time period relations with Sudan have returned to normal/excellent once again (KSA regularly trains with Sudanese brothers) and apparently operates a military base in Sudan (in all secrecy) and Sudanese are fighting side by side in Yemen with the Arab coalition that the likes of Morocco, Jordan, Egypt etc. are a part of. Relations with both the Tripoli government and Haftar are cordial as well.

Relations with Iraq have improved tenfold to the degree that we can talk about an actual alliance with the ISOF, Al-Abadi and the non-Iranian aligned groups. Basically the actual Iraqi military.

What is a stumbling block is the failed Qatari "MB" project (to simplify it) which I believe will end in a not too distant future and the Al-Assad regime although, contrary to popular belief, KSA has been less adamant of removing the Al-Assad regime post Russia-intervention and the road link from KSA (via Jordan) to Syria has reopened on both sides. One of MbS's first statement was "Al-Assad is staying". Publicly. On national and Arabic media. That showed a big switch in policy. Which already occurred in late 2014, a few months prior to the Yemen-intervention.

Moroccan-Algerian reconciliation, I believe, is also a question of time. We have seen improvements on this front lately.

If the likes of Ethiopia and Eritrea can come together (with the help of KSA, UAE etc.) then surely those political conflicts/disagreements should be solvable.

You have to understand, That everything isn't because of MB... KSA Diplomacy in the previous years impacted a lot the "Arab" coalition.
Even before any Qatar/Mb/KSA drama, for decades ago, KSA Diplomacy was the main target of discontent...

We can see it in North-African societies or in Sham/Levent. Where KSA isn't seen as a reliable partner, neither in time of need. And that since The Gulf war and her "proximity" with the US agenda back in the days. Then Afghanistan/Iraq/Palestine etc...
Things get even worse With the Rise of Trump and KSA behavior, or Now with The Fall of Tension with Israel.

It doesn't mean KSA can do anything about it, But just the lack of "counter-speech" is enough to push societies to support X or Y. Even more When Such Nation is seen as the "Pillar" of the Community (Mecca/MEdina etc..)

Ppl are not stupid either, the MB project is also similarly perceived, but with Erdogan in the Equation, many Arabs see that it's better to support someone who voice his concern and is on top of a strong country like Turkey.
And it's not only Arabs, you've Got Pakistan/African Nations and South Asian ones.

KSA image may change with Time, But What I can see, it will take time.
Therefore, The Arab Military Force is IMO not for Today and far from Tomorrow, If such Rift stay.

The Political landscape is shaped by the Society perceptive a T-time. And Societies perceptive evolve rapidly, while Political landscape don't... So, When you have X Gov supporting Y, it doesn't mean his society is Ok with it. Per exemple MOR involvement in the coalition was very criticized by every sides and by the ppl too. The King was under pressure and even more when that F-16 crashed...

Just as an Info, North African nations don't see any GCC Nation as "Good" / "Worthy to follow". Same for Sub Saharan Islamic NAtions were "KSA" is respected for it's Holy cities, but not much more.

And the Worst of all, if you ask ppl... it's the UAE... Well it's another level... And I believe ppl are against KSA diplomacy by combining UAE and KSA as one entity and therefore the lvl of "critics" toward UAE is indirectly falling on KSA.

Ps: Just to add, That ppl of respective nations aren't targeted, it's purely based on perception by each societies on the other guy "Political/Diplomatic sys"

 

[The SC]

This Joint Arab Military force has a very good foundation proven in the Ramadan war in 1973..it was embryonic but already functional ..

 

[Ceylal]

@SC, Algeria’s army is light years ahead of her MENA’s counterpart..Don’t compare her to the Arab Army’s freak show..

 

[HannibalBarca]

This unified Arab military force has a very good foundation proven in the Ramadan war in 1973..it was embryonic but already functional ..

At that time, Everyone was "NEw" therefore Rift were "almost" non existent.
Nowadays, every Nation got his "Enemy" and "Ally"... and Each Nations saw what others int he block were capable to... whatever it's was against them or with them...

 

[Saif al-Arab]

You have to understand, That everything isn't because of MB... KSA Diplomacy in the previous years impacted a lot the "Arab" coalition.
Even before any Qatar/Mb/KSA drama, for decades ago, KSA Diplomacy was the main target of discontent...

We can see it in North-African societies or in Sham/Levent. Where KSA isn't seen as a reliable partner, neither in time of need. And that since The Gulf war and her "proximity" with the US agenda back in the days. Then Afghanistan/Iraq/Palestine etc...
Things get even worse With the Rise of Trump and KSA behavior, or Now with The Fall of Tension with Israel.

It doesn't mean KSA can do anything about it, But just the lack of "counter-speech" is enough to push societies to support X or Y. Even more When Such Nation is seen as the "Pillar" of the Community (Mecca/MEdina etc..)

Ppl are not stupid either, the MB project is also similarly perceived, but with Erdogan in the Equation, many Arabs see that it's better to support someone who voice his concern and is on top of a strong country like Turkey.
And it's not only Arabs, you've Got Pakistan/African Nations and South Asian ones.

KSA image may change with Time, But What I can see, it will take time.
Therefore, The Arab Military Force is IMO not for Today and far from Tomorrow, If such Rift stay.

The Political landscape is shaped by the Society perceptive a T-time. And Societies perceptive evolve rapidly, while Political landscape don't... So, When you have X Gov supporting Y, it doesn't mean his society is Ok with it. Per exemple MOR involvement in the coalition was very criticized by every sides and by the ppl too. The King was under pressure and even more when that F-16 crashed...

Just as an Info, North African nations don't see any GCC Nation as "Good" / "Worthy to follow". Same for Sub Saharan Islamic NAtions were "KSA" is respected for it's Holy cities, but not much more.

And the Worst of all, if you ask ppl... it's the UAE... Well it's another level... And I believe ppl are against KSA diplomacy by combining UAE and KSA as one entity and therefore the lvl of "critics" toward UAE is indirectly falling on KSA.

Ps: Just to add, That ppl of respective nations aren't targeted, it's purely based on perception by each societies on the other guy "Political/Diplomatic sys"

Most Arab states (Muslim included BTW) are aligned to the Western world order. That goes for 95% of all Arab nations. The exceptions are the likes of Syria (military regime closely aligned to Russia since the House of Al-Assad gained power - evident of Russia wanting/being willing to waste billions upon billions of dollars while sanctioned and its economy being in free-fall for years (losing close to half of its value since the sanctions) on the Al-Assad regime to save it), Algeria (another military regime, that despite great natural resources (gas and oil), is one of the most badly managed countries in the world) and Sudan (generally unstable and semi-crazy regime led by Omar al-Bashir).

KSA is not a savior of anyone and is not acting as such. The last time an Arab country/leader/regime tried to act like the top dog geopolitically and politically (Egypt's Nasser) it was overall a great failure.

You are talking/focusing about your point of view (how you view politics and what you want to see) while an Arab with a different viewpoint would have a different opinion. This is normal.

I am also thinking out of "regime context" here. Hence the "Arab street" comment and that being much needed if you ask the Arab people.

As for looking up to regime or the opposite, I don't think that any Arab populace is doing that towards any Arab country. It's not like people in KSA are thinking about emulating (those disagreeing with the regime in power) the likes of Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Mauritania etc. While some (mostly liberals but not only) look at Tunisia in somewhat favorable terms, their "ideal" societies are those found in the West.

Anyway this is not a discussion about the Arab people anyway as if that was the case none of the existing regimes, political systems etc. would be existing if the majority had a say.

It's more about the Arab world facing similar challenges and opportunities and increased regime/government cooperation being more mutually beneficial (if done correctly) instead of disunity and hostility.

A perfect example is Iraq and Syria. Long at odds despite sharing much, much, much more in common than the opposite. Thanks to past regimes (since the Ba'ath party took power in both countries, instead of cooperating they became mortal enemies, even fighting on opposite sides during the Iraq-Iran war) later to (even post 2003) have hostile ties only to lately have more cordial ties. Now both countries sovereignty is violated due to their regimes stupidity rather than cooperation. When both states were strong no outsiders (let alone regional countries) were able to mess with them.

That's what the Arab regimes in power should work towards avoiding. Thinking about transforming the Arab League into a EU-like movement is at least 2 decades away for obvious reasons.

But yeah, of course, in dictatorships/authoritarian systems you cannot talk about "people" in the same fashion as I can talk about the "will of the people" in say Denmark. That is why (IMO) there is so much trouble with finding a common ground. Arabs (as a people) are denied this opportunity so of course there will be more trouble than the opposite (politically speaking) while in reality, a Saudi Arabian and Tunisian share much, much more in common than the opposite and would have amble of opportunity and will to work together for common goals.

You know this as well as me. Arabs outside of the Arab world are sticking together as glue. It does not matter if I have a Saudi Arabian, Iraqi or Mauritanian passport. Rivalry is limited to banter. We all know this such behavior is much more of a reflection of the Arab people than what the regimes in power are doing.

Unless of course somebody here is trying to convince me of some century-old hatred between the regular Saudi Arabian and Qatari.

BTW, although I am not too fond to write it here, where most Iranian users are Mullah drones, ordinary Arabs in Eastern Arabia and Southern Iraq and Southern and Western Iran across the pond have had millennia old ties on every front and intermarriages have occurred and occur to this very day. Ever wondered why the largest Iranian diaspora outside of the US is based in the GCC next door? Much in common. Yet you never hear about this. It's not part of the discourse and not interesting. Why? Because of regimes in power and geopolitics while an KSA-Iranian alliance in the region would benefit both actors objectively speaking as an example.

 

[HannibalBarca]

Most Arab states (Muslim included BTW) are aligned to the Western world order. That goes for 95% of all Arab nations. The exceptions are the likes of Syria (military regime closely aligned to Russia since the House of Al-Assad gained power - evident of Russia wanting/being willing to waste billions upon billions of dollars while sanctioned and its economy being in free-fall for years (losing close to half of its value since the sanctions) on the Al-Assad regime to save it), Algeria (another military regime, that despite great natural resources (gas and oil), is one of the most badly managed countries in the world) and Sudan (generally unstable and semi-crazy regime led by Omar al-Bashir).

KSA is not a savior of anyone and is not acting as such. The last time an Arab country/leader/regime tried to act like the top dog geopolitically and politically (Egypt's Nasser) it was overall a great failure.

You are talking/focusing about your point of view (how you view politics and what you want to see) while an Arab with a different viewpoint would have a different opinion. This is normal.

I am also thinking out of "regime context" here. Hence the "Arab street" comment and that being much needed if you ask the Arab people.

As for looking up to regime or the opposite, I don't think that any Arab populace is doing that towards any Arab country. It's not like people in KSA are thinking about emulating (those disagreeing with the regime in power) the likes of Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Mauritania etc. While some (mostly liberals but not only) look at Tunisia in somewhat favorable terms, their "ideal" societies are those found in the West.

Anyway this is not a discussion about the Arab people anyway as if that was the case none of the existing regimes, political systems etc. would be existing if the majority had a say.

It's more about the Arab world facing similar challenges and opportunities and increased regime/government cooperation being more mutually beneficial (if done correctly) instead of disunity and hostility.

A perfect example is Iraq and Syria. Long at odds despite sharing much, much, much more in common than the opposite. Thanks to past regimes (since the Ba'ath party took power in both countries, instead of cooperating they became mortal enemies, even fighting on opposite sides during the Iraq-Iran war) later to (even post 2003) have hostile ties only to lately have more cordial ties. Now both countries sovereignty is violated due to their regimes stupidity rather than cooperation. When both states were strong no outsiders (let alone regional countries) were able to mess with them.

That's what the Arab regimes in power should work towards avoiding. Thinking about transforming the Arab League into a EU-like movement is at least 2 decades away for obvious reasons.

But yeah, of course, in dictatorships/authoritarian systems you cannot talk about "people" in the same fashion as I can talk about the "will of the people" in say Denmark. That is why (IMO) why there is so much trouble with finding a common ground. Arabs (as a people) are denied this opportunity so of course there will be more trouble than the opposite (politically speaking) while in reality, a Saudi Arabian and Tunisian share much, much more in common than the opposite and would have amble of opportunity and will to work together for common goals.

Ppl perceptive whatever they are right or not is one the most important conditions for out subject about "Arab Military Force."
Since in any "Coalition", you need at least One or few Ruling/Leader Head. You can't create a group where everyone is equal, otherwise it wouldn't be called a "group".
So, That where "perceptive" comes in... and Thus the Q: "Is everyone around the block willing to accept X or Y Nation as their Leaders?"

The Answer as of Now, it's a No.

Having common Enemies/Problems isn't enough to unite a Group or make it more "Solid". You need "Belief", You need to say, if the one in front of you is the same as you, Feel the same as you, Got the same common Objective as me and so on... If A society can't say yes at most of them, then No Group is possible.

Being Arab/Turk/European/Asian also doesn't matter when you feel threatened or forced. Arab throughout History allied with Turks/Persians/EU against their own Arabs brothers and Vice versa... Being Culturally and ethnically similar doesn't make X and Y Allies or Enemies.

In Tunisia per exemple, The Majority tend to favor Turkey than any GGC member. Half a century ago it was the opposite and so on... and it's the shared opinion of The Maghreb region. and many others.

Same goes for Iran, per exemple, Where anti-Iranian Sentiment is almost non-existent... in the region.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Ppl perceptive whatever they are right or not is one the most important conditions for out subject about "Arab Military Force."
Since in any "Coalition", you need at least One or few Ruling/Leader Head. You can't create a group where everyone is equal, otherwise it wouldn't be called a "group".
So, That where "perceptive" comes in... and Thus the Q: "Is everyone around the block willing to accept X or Y Nation as their Leaders?"

The Answer as of Now, it's a No.

Having common Enemies/Problems isn't enough to unite a Group or make it more "Solid". You need "Belief", You need to say, if the one in front of you is the same as you, Feel the same as you, Got the same common Objective as me and so on... If A society can't say yes at most of them, then No Group is possible.

Being Arab/Turk/European/Asian also doesn't matter when you feel threatened or forced. Arab throughout History allied with Turks/Persians/EU against their own Arabs brothers and Vice versa... Being Culturally and ethnically similar doesn't make X and Y Allies or Enemies.

In Tunisia per exemple, The Majority tend to favor Turkey than any GGC member. Half a century ago it was the opposite and so on... and it's the shared opinion of The Maghreb region. and many others.

Same goes for Iran, per exemple, Where anti-Iranian Sentiment is almost non-existent... in the region.

As I wrote initially the only Arab regimes that are not on the Saudi Arabia/Egypt (the two current Arab heavyweights that shape most of the current political trends) bandwagon are Algeria (for now although ties have improved greatly of late and Algeria publicly supported KSA in its row against Canada a few weeks ago, military officials have visited each other frequently in the past 1 year etc., an Saudi Arabian-Algerian cooperation council has been created and the first few meetings have been held between military, political and business representatives of both countries), Syria (or rather the Al-Assad regime - no explanation needed here although as I said earlier, I can see KSA-Al-Assad regime tolerating each other and being at "peace" again) and Qatar since June 2017. That's pretty close to an unanimous "bloc" although there are a few differences here and there which exist in every walk of life let alone the likes of NATO, EU etc.

What you are saying is not wrong (pre-1979 KSA had better relations with Iran next door rather than numerous Arab nationalist ruled Arab countries, neighboring Egypt being the perfect example, although the people (Hijazis in particular) share more in common with Egyptians than we do with Emiratis for instance 1000 km away LET ALONE Iranians and vice versa).

However as per all surveys in the Arab world, the 3 most disliked entities are Israel, the US and Iran (especially since the Syrian conflict began). This trend is pretty evident from Morocco to Oman. If you ask Arabs from the Mashriq (Egypt, Sham, Iraq and Arabia) it's pretty much unanimous.

In Algeria France is included on that "non-favorable" list at the expanse of the Mullah regime (Iran) as the Maghreb has almost no relationship/day to day/historical dealings with the likes of Iran as a region due to geography but due to religion/sect they don't have favorable views of Iran and the regime. Less so post-Syria. The only exception that I have seen are some stateless Kabyle fanatics who are anti-Arab by default so they support Kurds, Iran, Israel and everything in between as long as they don't have to support "the evil oppressive Arabs". Those individuals are found in the French diaspora and mostly active on Youtube and online. That's the degree their influence extends to, lol.
We both know this. However there is no rivalry just like there is no rivalry between KSA and France for instance. Just a lack of ties/interaction, historical and today.

Let's extend the discussion past "regimes in power" here as they won't rule forever and there will come a point in time where the Arab world, just like for millennia/centuries in the past (the Arab League predates the UN!) will naturally transform itself to an EU-like movement. Speeding this process up by hoping for/encouraging current regime cooperation across Arab borders, is not only needed but mutually beneficial for most Arab countries (despite me you or millions of others not necessarily liking the policies of regime x or y), especially those that are unstable and cannot defend themselves and whose sovereignty is violated by foreigners.

If such a solidarity (between the regimes) existed, Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Libya would not be where they are today. And let us be honest. Most sane people in those countries and Arabs as a whole would prefer peace and stability rather than the removal of regime x or y just because regime x or y is disliked.

The financial power of KSA, UAE and Qatar alone (if all 3 were on the same boat and worked towards the same goals) would do wonders within a very short time span alone. And if sanity prevailed/people's will, this would be the case right now. Leaders from all 3 countries would be sitting in the same room, drinking Arabian coffee, eating dates, various sweets and dishes, and cordially working towards the same goal. Like during the era of Sheikh Zayed (ra).

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

A long shot....

A paradigm shift in regional balance of power is expected if this agreement results in a solid military alliance.

You know who have been changing the paradigms of the world power maps for the last thousand years!!!!

 

[HannibalBarca]

As I wrote initially the only Arab regimes that are not on the Saudi Arabia/Egypt (the two current Arab heavyweights that shape most of the current political trends) bandwagon are Algeria (for now although ties have improved greatly of late and Algeria publicly supported KSA in its row against Canada a few weeks ago, military officials have visited each other frequently in the past 1 year etc., an Saudi Arabian-Algerian cooperation council has been created and the first few meetings have been held between military, political and business representatives of both countries), Syria (or rather the Al-Assad regime - no explanation needed here although as I said earlier, I can see KSA-Al-Assad regime tolerating each other and being at "peace" again) and Qatar since June 2017. That's pretty close to an unanimous "bloc" although there are a few differences here and there which exist in every walk of life let alone the likes of NATO, EU etc.

What you are saying is not wrong (pre-1979 KSA had better relations with Iran next door rather than numerous Arab nationalist ruled Arab countries, Egypt being the perfect example, although the people (Hijazis in particular) share more in common with Egyptians than we do with Emiratis for instance 1000 km away LET ALONE Iranians and vice versa).

However as per all surveys in the Arab world, the 3 most disliked entities are Israel, the US and Iran. This trend is pretty evident from Morocco to Oman. If you ask Arabs from the Mashriq (Egypt, Sham, Iraq and Arabia) it's pretty much unanimous.

In Algeria France is included on that "non-favorable" list at the expanse of the Mullah regime (Iran) as the Maghreb has almost no relationship/day to day/historical dealings with the likes of Iran as a country due to geography.

The thing that cemented the "Arab world" after Fall of Empires...Is the Common "enemy" that is Israel.
Every Nation whatsoever, put Israel as a cornerstone of our mutual "complicity" across the region.

The Drastic partition of The Arab ideology came to an End, When EGY signed the Final peace treaty with Israel and the Beginning of the Palestinian conflict. Added to that The bipolar Global front (Soviets/US)...

At that Moment, Each Dictator/President/King started to go back to his original "Job", You've got those who wanted to acquire more Lands, others more Power, others Allies etc... But the Israeli Problem was and IS still the Cornerstone on how you judge another Arab Nation.

You've got the Anti, The Neutrals and The "Semi" Pro... So, When you have Arab nation who don't elevate their voices or Act against Israel or Those who Do, Then you've got a reshuffle of the chessboard...

Per Exemple in TN, You are an Ally if you are Anti-Israel, That's Why The Gov didn't Put Hezb on the Terro list back when Many GCC+Others did so. Or not Having a Direct anti-iranian Stance or willing to join an anti-Iranian front.

But it doesn't mean they are Pro-X or Y...

Same for Turkey, With her Anti-Israel stance in the last Decade. Prior to that stance, TR wasn't in TN radar, not as it is today.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

What is the status quo nowadays?

It is much needed.

Obviously there is the IMAFT led by KSA and which hosted a few large joint military exercises and parades earlier this year (where the likes of KSA and Qatar paraded next to each other etc.) but personally I do not believe that the existence of those two are mutually exclusive. They should be able to coexist side by side without much trouble.

In fact I believe (for naturally obvious reasons) that a joint Arab force regulated by the Arab League (if there is a real desire by the regimes and leaders in power) and which operates within the Arab world, would have a much easier job at succeeding than the IMAFT.

Obviously for it to succeed in practice a few regimes need to learn to coexist and work together for the greater good of the Arab world which should be something completely natural if the Arab street had a say. Likewise peace and stability in the likes of Syria, Yemen, Libya and to a lesser extent Iraq.

However it is more than realistic if there is a serious political will.

@Frogman @The SC @MICA @Gomig-21 @fachfouch @HannibalBarca @Hamilcar @ezerdi2 @SALMAN F @OutOfAmmo @Arabi @Full Moon etc.



Yes, of course!

Arabs, whose military history is only rivaled by a very, very, very small number of entities, ethnic groups etc. is going to be "taught" (despite most modern-day Arab nations militaries predating the existence of Pakistan by decades, if we include predecessor states by several millennia) by a nation which has not won (objectively speaking) a single war. I am not saying that the modern-day Arab war record is great in comparison (despite going to war with the foremost superpower (USA) several times, and its creation (Israel). Different league altogether than the likes of India and Bangladesh.....

You see history goes up and down but what remains the case (unless proven otherwise in the next following millennia (s) ) is that Arabs are looking down on Pakistanis on this front (military history and achievements) rather than up. The same Arabs that conquered the heartland of Pakistan (Sindh) etc. 1300 years ago btw.

Arab states in the GCC (KSA and UAE mostly) have a long history of close ties with the Pakistani military establishment. Don't confuse that for more than what this is.

And which due respect, Arabs regularly train with the world's most powerful militaries. KSA has trained with the likes of USA, UK, France, CHINA and everyone in between (almost) in the past 2 years alone. Regularly. While we are speaking this occurs in Egypt currently.

Not to say fighting a war in Yemen for 3.5 years which complexity is only rivaled by the war in Syria nowadays.

But yeah, keep living in La La Land and obsessing about Arabs, lol.



The ideological rift as we speak is less than what it was 3.5 years ago. Take KSA as an example. In that time period relations with Sudan have returned to normal/excellent once again (KSA regularly trains with Sudanese brothers) and apparently operates a military base in Sudan (in all secrecy) and Sudanese are fighting side by side in Yemen with the Arab coalition that the likes of Morocco, Jordan, Egypt etc. are a part of. Relations with both the Tripoli government and Haftar are cordial as well.

Relations with Iraq have improved tenfold to the degree that we can talk about an actual alliance with the ISOF, Al-Abadi and the non-Iranian aligned groups. Basically the actual Iraqi military.

What is a stumbling block is the failed Qatari "MB" project (to simplify it) which I believe will end in a not too distant future and the Al-Assad regime although, contrary to popular belief, KSA has been less adamant of removing the Al-Assad regime post Russia-intervention and the road link from KSA (via Jordan) to Syria has reopened on both sides. One of MbS's first statement was "Al-Assad is staying". Publicly. On national and Arabic media. That showed a big switch in policy. Which already occurred in late 2014, a few months prior to the Yemen-intervention.

Moroccan-Algerian reconciliation, I believe, is also a question of time. We have seen improvements on this front lately.

If the likes of Ethiopia and Eritrea can come together (with the help of KSA, UAE etc.) then surely those political conflicts/disagreements should be solvable.

Just one point, are you (KSA/GCC etc.) ready for something like "We are born in our homes, and we die at the battlefields"?????

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Just one point, are you (KSA/GCC etc.) ready for something like "We are born in our homes, and we die at the battlefields"....

I don't know what you are blabbering about but you are speaking to people who created 3 of the 11 largest empires in human history (more than any other ethnic group in history) and who ruled several caliphates, empires, kingdoms, sultanates, emirates, sheikdoms, imamates etc. on 3 continents (Asia, Africa and Europe) and who were behind 90% of all Islamic conquests and whose ancestors and military heroes are admired, outright worshipped and respected by enemies and foes alike.

Turks here openly say that you are a Pakistani troll while Pakistanis the opposite. I am not sure what your agenda in this thread is or what you have to do with the topic of this thread as a non-Arab, but your one-liners and blabbering is not interesting let alone relevant for those few Arabs who remain on PDF and who are discussing this topic. No disrespect but play the "history card" and "Islam card" to some Kazakhs, Chechens, Malaysians, Nigerians or what not "who need to prove themselves". It's not working for Arabs, Arabians in particular.

The Arabized Ottomans (Arabic alphabet, Ottoman language being more Arabic than Turkic, the Caliphate being taken/stolen from the Arabs who ruled it for 1000 years prior, Arabic titles (Sultan, Caliph), lands (most Arab), people (2/3 of all Ottomans were Arabs) have long ended. Just like the Rashidun, Umayyad, Fatimid and Abbasid caliphates ended. I suggest waking up and smelling the coffee. It's year 2018. You are living in La La Land, I have noticed.

The thing that cemented the "Arab world" after Fall of Empires...Is the Common "enemy" that is Israel.
Every Nation whatsoever, put Israel as a cornerstone of our mutual "complicity" across the region.

The Drastic partition of The Arab ideology came to an End, When EGY signed the Final peace treaty with Israel and the Beginning of the Palestinian conflict. Added to that The bipolar Global front (Soviets/US)...

At that Moment, Each Dictator/President/King started to go back to his original "Job", You've got those who wanted to acquire more Lands, others more Power, others Allies etc... But the Israeli Problem was and IS still the Cornerstone on how you judge another Arab Nation.

You've got the Anti, The Neutrals and The "Semi" Pro... So, When you have Arab nation who don't elevate their voices or Act against Israel or Those who Do, Then you've got a reshuffle of the chessboard...

Per Exemple in TN, You are an Ally if you are Anti-Israel, That's Why The Gov didn't Put Hezb on the Terro list back when Many GCC+Others did so. Or not Having a Direct anti-iranian Stance or willing to join an anti-Iranian front.

But it doesn't mean they are Pro-X or Y...

Same for Turkey, With her Anti-Israel stance in the last Decade. Prior to that stance, TR wasn't in TN radar, not as it is today.

Israel has nothing to do with the fact that the Arab world shares millennia long shared history on every front, that people share language, culture, religion (s), geography, ancestry, DNA, climate, cuisine, symbols, music, mutual interests, similar fate, economic relations, people to people relations etc.

The Arab League predates the UN for a reason. It predates the birth of Israel.

Reducing common interests to Israel (pro or anti despite 99% of all Arabs having negative views of Israel) is with all due respect incredibly simplistic and inaccurate.

I don't know about your ideology (Arabs like any people have different views and nationalism, history, shared features etc. is irrelevant for many people like those shared features are for millions of non-Arabs) but I know that most Arabs agree with me because I see it every single day on every media and in person. I am quite sure (all the Maghrebis that I know at least share the same wish) that most people of the Maghreb wish for closer ties in the Maghreb (governmental) region and with the Arab world as whole. If that was not the case all those pan-Arab organizations (political to grassroots) would cease to exist as their existence would have no purpose. Literally 1000's upon 1000's of news channels, newspapers, economic, political, religious, historical, cultural etc. organizations would cease to exist. From Morocco to Oman.

We two would have nothing in common either expect religion (Islam) which we might interpret differently, just like Islam in Niger is different from Islam in Malaysia. We would not be discussing historical, political, cultural, linguistic etc. topics that we have done numerous times on PDF. Just like I don't do that with the regular Indian, Chinese, Bangladeshi etc. user here.

Maybe I have misunderstood your initial comment and sentences. Might have.

Yes, Israel remains the main grievance, in particular the older generation, but when it comes to the youth it is changing in favor of regional conflicts. Not talking about "replacement" here but focus. Case in point the Syrian conflict....Or the Yemeni one.

Hezbollah was put on a terrorist list (post 2006 moreover, years after 2006 Hezbollah members lived in GCC freely and engaged in money laundering, in particular in UAE (Dubai) openly) because that organization is a proxy of the IRGC and along with the Dawa Islamic Party in Iraq (which conducted the first suicide bombing in the Muslim world back in 1981 when they targeted the Iraqi embassy in Beirut) used to attack targets in various Arab states, including GCC (mostly Kuwait but not only). Yet that did not prevent the people from supporting them back in 2006 if you look at all surveys and even if you remember how the internet worked back then.

Today, post-Syria, that would not necessarily be the case and this goes for many Arabs.

Well, if Tunisians are really looking up to Erdogan as some kind of anti-Western anti-Israel (despite Turkey being a NATO member state, hosting Israeli embassies and consulates and doing business with Israel, military included, more than any other Muslim nation) then I am afraid to say, that there is little hope (in the next decade at least) for the Arab world to change the status quo if people in a relatively free country (for Muslim standards), Tunisia, are having such simplistic/populistic/unrealistic/absurd views......

BTW, it is not much different from blind regime supporters in the Muslim world as a whole. I am not singling out anyone here but I was hoping for Tunisians being a bit smarter on this front seeing that you guys no longer live in a dictatorship and even the most impoverished Tunisian somewhere in Sahara or rural areas, has access to free media and the internet which is not censored (I believe). Disappointing.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

I don't know what you are blabbering about but you are speaking to people who created 3 of the 11 largest empires in human history (more than any other ethnic group in history) and who ruled several caliphates, empires, kingdoms, sultanates, emirates, sheikdoms, imamates etc. on 3 continents (Asia, Africa and Europe) and who were behind 90% of all Islamic conquests and whose ancestors and military heroes are admired, outright worshipped and respected by enemies and foes alike.

Turks here openly say that you are a Pakistani troll while Pakistanis the opposite. I am not sure what your agenda in this thread is or what you have to do with the topic of this thread as a non-Arab, but your one-liners and blabbering is not interesting let alone relevant for those few Arabs who remain on PDF and who are discussing this topic. No disrespect but play the "history card" and "Islam card" to some Kazakhs, Chechens, Malaysians, Nigerians or what not "who need to prove themselves". It's not working for Arabs, Arabians in particular.

The Arabized Ottomans (Arabic alphabet, Ottoman language being more Arabic than Turkic, the Caliphate being taken/stolen from the Arabs who ruled it for 1000 years prior, Arabic titles (Sultan, Caliph), lands (most Arab), people (2/3 of all Ottomans were Arabs) have long ended. Just like the Rashidun, Umayyad, Fatimid and Abbasid caliphates ended. I suggest waking up and smelling the coffee. It's year 2018. You are living in La La Land, I have noticed.



Israel has nothing to do with the fact that the Arab world shares millennia long shared history on every front, that people share language, culture, religion (s), geography, ancestry, DNA, climate, cuisine, symbols, music, mutual interests, similar fate, economic relations, people to people relations etc.

The Arab League predates the UN for a reason. It predates the birth of Israel.

Reducing common interests to Israel (pro or anti despite 99% of all Arabs having negative views of Israel) is with all due respect incredibly simplistic and inaccurate.

I don't know about your ideology (Arabs like any people have different views and nationalism, history, shared features etc. is irrelevant for many people like those shared features are for millions of non-Arabs) but I know that most Arabs agree with me because I see it every single day on every media and in person. I am quite sure (all the Maghrebis that I know at least share the same wish) that most people of the Maghreb wish for closer ties in the Maghreb (governmental) region and with the Arab world as whole. If that was not the case all those pan-Arab organizations (political to grassroots) would cease to exist as their existence would have no purpose. Literally 1000's upon 1000's of news channels, newspapers, economic, political, religious, historical, cultural etc. organizations would cease to exist. From Morocco to Oman.

We two would have nothing in common either expect religion (Islam) which we might interpret differently, just like Islam in Niger is different from Islam in Malaysia. We would not be discussing historical, political, cultural, linguistic etc. topics that we have done numerous times on PDF. Just like I don't do that with the regular Indian, Chinese, Bangladeshi etc. user here.

Maybe I have misunderstood your initial comment and sentences. Might have.

Yes, Israel remains the main grievance, in particular the older generation, but when it comes to the youth it is changing in favor of regional conflicts. Not talking about "replacement" here but focus. Case in point the Syrian conflict....Or the Yemeni one.

Hezbollah was put on a terrorist list (post 2006 moreover, years after 2006 Hezbollah members lived in GCC freely and engaged in money laundering, in particular in UAE (Dubai) openly) because that organization is a proxy of the IRGC and along with the Dawa Islamic Party in Iraq (which conducted the first suicide bombing in the Muslim world back in 1981 when they targeted the Iraqi embassy in Beirut) used to attack targets in various Arab states, including GCC (mostly Kuwait but not only). Yet that did not prevent the people from supporting them back in 2006 if you look at all surveys and even if you remember how the internet worked back then.

Today, post-Syria, that would not necessarily be the case and this goes for many Arabs.

Well, if Tunisians are really looking up to Erdogan as some kind of anti-Western anti-Israel (despite Turkey being a NATO member state, hosting Israeli embassies and consulates and doing business with Israel, military included, more than any other Muslim nation) then I am afraid to say, that there is little hope (in the next decade at least) for the Arab world to change the status quo if people in a relatively free country (for Muslim standards), Tunisia, are having such simplistic/populistic/unrealistic/absurd views......

BTW, it is not much different from blind regime supporters in the Muslim world as a whole. I am not singling out anyone here but I was hoping for Tunisians being a bit smarter on this front seeing that you guys no longer live in a dictatorship and even the most impoverished Tunisian somewhere in Sahara or rural areas, has access to free media and the internet which is not censored (I believe). Disappointing.

Your agenda is perfectly clear - to be the perfect stooge of Lawrence the Homosexual....