Emirates---GCC Nations & Kashmir:---

[Pakistan Space Agency]

And we all breath oxygen which is not hydrogen.

You are obviously demonstrating amazing intellect that a less than intellectual being like myself can hardly fathom.

Kindly go beyond one liners and explain your POV like I have tried to do in relative detail with geo-strategic and geo-political facts and their implications.

I find your thinking quiet childish and not worth conversing.

 

[Khafee]

I find your thinking quiet childish and not worth conversing.

I think clueless kids like you should be restricted to the children's forum.

 

[MastanKhan]

Emirates has a problem with Pakistan because we often ignore their interests but want them to stick to ours. It is a two way road but we keep poking them in the eyes with Qatar but don't want UAE to look for alternate friends like Iran has in India.

Self inflicted memory loss aside, our Afghans who hold Pakistani Passports, are biggest smugglers of narcotics into ME. Yet we want the UAE police chief to complement us for our pro Iran stand.

The military to military relation with KSA and UAE is quite good, as is evident by PAF's accolades on 27th and post skirmish events.

Hi,

Thank you for some excellent eye opening posts---.

 

[Globalwarrior]

Pakistan has to carry its own weight vis a vis India. If you can’t do it alone then don’t make a hoopla about support esp if it’s that important to you.
People like to see a nice fight anyway. They done like to see a fighter always looking at the ropes calling for help to come in which has been PK’s position all these years. Shows weakness of mind and body.
We have to have a plan other than a kamikaze type mindset.

 

[gangsta_rap]

I think clueless kids like you should be restricted to the children's forum.

believe us the feeling is mutual

 

[Shane]

It is indeed naive to expect another country to cut off trade with India on behalf of Pakistan or Kashmiris but why single out UAE?

The trade volume between the UAE and Iran last year was around $19 billion, according to the Financial Times.

The U.A.E is not even willing to cut-off trade ties with Iran because of the economic stakes and to expect it to do so with Indians because of Pakistan is as I said earlier, naive !

Whats naive is someone trying to post an excerpt but only posting half of a self serving paragraph and not posting the other sentence in the same para Quoting TRT and Financial Times:
"The trade volume between the UAE and Iran last year was around $19 billion, according to the Financial Times, which in a recent article said the threat of sanctions could slash the volume of trade by half this year."


Now let me get back to my argument at the start of my post about singling out.

Is there a country around us in this region that can be singled out for going out of its way to facilitate our enemy?

It is indeed naive to expect another country to cut off trade with India on behalf of Pakistan or Kashmiris but why single out UAE?

Why not expect Turkey to cut off trade ties with India too?

Now this is indeed naive to go selective in ones rhetoric to single out Arabs and to do propaganda against countries who support Pakistan in ways that go beyond what meets the eyes. Turkey is indeed another excellent friend of Pakistan and has strategic projects going with us but at the same time, Turkey has growing trade ties with India and is looking to boost its trade with India too, go google it.

How naive it would be to expect Turkey to cut off trade with India?

While UAE, Malaysia and Turkey etc continue to trade with India despite supporting Pakistan in strategic projects and the later even in FATF, I don't know what is wrong with people who try and single out Arabs for doing trade when your neighbor next door has handed its strategic port to your enemy.

Iran has actually handed over its Chabahar port - a direct competitor to Gwadar" to India to invest, build and operate from. That is the strategic difference between doing trade and going hand in glove to provide your enemy strategic advantage and freedom of operations right next door to you.

If that is not enough of an eye opener then sadly some people are indeed naive to think that Kulbhushan must have dropped down from the sky instead of having a base of operations in Chabahar right next door to Gwadar for trade purposes rather than espionage and for supporting CPEC rather than trying its hand at destroying it.

But I guess even stark ground realities cannot convince people who have a particular sectarian agenda. So lets agree to call Roti ko Chochi.

 

[Winchester]

It is indeed naive to expect another country to cut off trade with India on behalf of Pakistan or Kashmiris but why single out UAE?



Whats naive is someone trying to post an excerpt but only posting half of a self serving paragraph and not posting the other sentence in the same para Quoting TRT and Financial Times:
"The trade volume between the UAE and Iran last year was around $19 billion, according to the Financial Times, which in a recent article said the threat of sanctions could slash the volume of trade by half this year."


Now let me get back to my argument at the start of my post about singling out.

Is there a country around us in this region that can be singled out for going out of its way to facilitate our enemy?

It is indeed naive to expect another country to cut off trade with India on behalf of Pakistan or Kashmiris but why single out UAE?

Why not expect Turkey to cut off trade ties with India too?

Now this is indeed naive to go selective in ones rhetoric to single out Arabs and to do propaganda against countries who support Pakistan in ways that go beyond what meets the eyes. Turkey is indeed another excellent friend of Pakistan and has strategic projects going with us but at the same time, Turkey has growing trade ties with India and is looking to boost its trade with India too, go google it.

How naive it would be to expect Turkey to cut off trade with India?

While UAE, Malaysia and Turkey etc continue to trade with India despite supporting Pakistan in strategic projects and the later even in FATF, I don't know what is wrong with people who try and single out Arabs for doing trade when your neighbor next door has handed its strategic port to your enemy.

Iran has actually handed over its Chabahar port - a direct competitor to Gwadar" to India to invest, build and operate from. That is the strategic difference between doing trade and going hand in glove to provide your enemy strategic advantage and freedom of operations right next door to you.

If that is not enough of an eye opener then sadly some people are indeed naive to think that Kulbhushan must have dropped down from the sky instead of having a base of operations in Chabahar right next door to Gwadar for trade purposes rather than espionage and for supporting CPEC rather than trying its hand at destroying it.

But I guess even stark ground realities cannot convince people who have a particular sectarian agenda. So lets agree to call Roti ko Chochi.

Funny that you would accuse me of that while you have just cheery picked a part of my post and built your whole argument around that.

The U.A.E was singled out because the thread is about our relationship with the U.A.E and how our actions impacted that relationship not Turkey or Malaysia. Moreover, I don't remember Turkey or Malaysia asking for our troops to fight for them and I don't remember at least Turkey or Malaysia backing Indian actions in Kashmir through its ambassador in India, something that still hasn't been denied by the U.A.E foreign ministry.

No, I don't want the U.A.E to cut-off trade relations with India, the whole premise of my argument was that it would be naive to expect the Emirates to fully back you based on its actions in the past even if Pakistan had gone into Yemen.

And as far as I remember, Pakistan though not sending its troops inside Yemen sent a Naval support ship as well as has reinforced our troop presence in Saudi Arabia. Pakistan also has diplomatically fully backed the Saudi-led coalition.

That is at least unlike the U.A.E as I mentioned earlier which has come diplomatically in support of the Indians and let's not forget the invitation to the Indian Foreign Ministry after the February standoff for the OIC summit.

Folks like you want Pakistan to go full out in Yemen to salvage our relationship with our Emirati masters but lets dissect the actions of U.A.E itself vis-a-vis Iran

The Yemen conflict began in 2015, but yet we see very strong trade relations between U.A.E and Iran at least till 2018. I left that point in the article because the drop is expected because of U.S. sanctions and not through U.A.E's desire to curtail it's trade relations.

The U.A.E last month was also in a bilateral negotiation with Iran to settle its island dispute.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tr...-behind-the-uae-iran-maritime-talks-28669/amp

Here more on U.A.E's Iran policy from the Washington Post

https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/world/the-uaes-ambitions-backfire-as-it-finds-itself-on-the-front-line-of-us-iran-tensions/2019/08/11/d3ee41a0-509d-11e9-bdb7-44f948cc0605_story.html?outputType=amp#scso=_VWxVXaT2JaaLlwTarrCwBw9:0

From the article

After limpet mines exploded on tankers off the UAE’s coast in June, the UAE stood apart from the United States and Saudi Arabia and declined to blame Iran.

the Emiratis are shifting gears, calling for de-escalation with Iran and distancing themselves from the Trump administration’s bellicose rhetoric.

The U.A.E actions in Yemen also raises plenty of questions and prove that Pakistan dodged a bullet by not going in that quagmire.
From the guardian
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...en-as-uae-backed-fighters-seize-parts-of-aden

“Scores” of people were killed and hundreds wounded during recent fighting in Yemen’s key port of Aden when southern separatists – trained by the UAE – seized key locations of the city from Saudi-backed government forces.

The U.A.E not only pulled its troops half way in the conflict but now is actively supporting an Anti-Saudi group. This while Saudi takes the brunt of Houthi missile attacks.

But I guess even stark ground realities cannot convince people who have a particular sectarian agenda.

I have called for in this forum to increase our troop presence in Saudi Arabia. I believe that China, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are our three most important strategic allies. Does that fit into my "sectarian" agenda too?

Our relationship with the U.A.E should simply be how it sees its relationship with us i.e. "Transactional".

Again repeating what I posted earlier, if the U.A.E itself doesn't put its eggs in one basket then neither should we. This U.A.E policy is not even limited with regards to Pak-India, its following the same trend even in regards to Saudi-Iran.

If the U.A.E can't even fully back Saudi in its Iran policy than to expect it to come to our aid in case of our full support is at best na.... and at worst itself a product of a backward sectarian agenda that puts the interest of another country ahead of Pakistan.

 

[Shane]

Funny that you would accuse me of that while you have just cheery picked a part of my post and built your whole argument around that.

The U.A.E was singled out because the thread is about our relationship with the U.A.E and how our actions impacted that relationship not Turkey or Malaysia. Moreover, I don't remember Turkey or Malaysia asking for our troops to fight for them and I don't remember at least Turkey or Malaysia backing Indian actions in Kashmir through its ambassador in India, something that still hasn't been denied by the U.A.E foreign ministry.

No, I don't want the U.A.E to cut-off trade relations with India, the whole premise of my argument was that it would be naive to expect the Emirates to fully back you based on its actions in the past even if Pakistan had gone into Yemen.

And as far as I remember, Pakistan though not sending its troops inside Yemen sent a Naval support ship as well as has reinforced our troop presence in Saudi Arabia. Pakistan also has diplomatically fully backed the Saudi-led coalition.

That is at least unlike the U.A.E as I mentioned earlier which has come diplomatically in support of the Indians and let's not forget the invitation to the Indian Foreign Ministry after the February standoff for the OIC summit.

Folks like you want Pakistan to go full out in Yemen to salvage our relationship with our Emirati masters but lets dissect the actions of U.A.E itself vis-a-vis Iran

The Yemen conflict began in 2015, but yet we see very strong trade relations between U.A.E and Iran at least till 2018. I left that point in the article because the drop is expected because of U.S. sanctions and not through U.A.E's desire to curtail it's trade relations.

The U.A.E last month was also in a bilateral negotiation with Iran to settle its island dispute.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tr...-behind-the-uae-iran-maritime-talks-28669/amp

Here more on U.A.E's Iran policy from the Washington Post

https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/world/the-uaes-ambitions-backfire-as-it-finds-itself-on-the-front-line-of-us-iran-tensions/2019/08/11/d3ee41a0-509d-11e9-bdb7-44f948cc0605_story.html?outputType=amp#scso=_VWxVXaT2JaaLlwTarrCwBw9:0

From the article

After limpet mines exploded on tankers off the UAE’s coast in June, the UAE stood apart from the United States and Saudi Arabia and declined to blame Iran.

the Emiratis are shifting gears, calling for de-escalation with Iran and distancing themselves from the Trump administration’s bellicose rhetoric.

The U.A.E actions in Yemen also raises plenty of questions and prove that Pakistan dodged a bullet by not going in that quagmire.
From the guardian
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...en-as-uae-backed-fighters-seize-parts-of-aden

“Scores” of people were killed and hundreds wounded during recent fighting in Yemen’s key port of Aden when southern separatists – trained by the UAE – seized key locations of the city from Saudi-backed government forces.

The U.A.E not only pulled its troops half way in the conflict but now is actively supporting an Anti-Saudi group. This while Saudi takes the brunt of Houthi missile attacks.





I have called for in this forum to increase our troop presence in Saudi Arabia. I believe that China, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are our three most important strategic allies. Does that fit into my "sectarian" agenda too?

Our relationship with the U.A.E should simply be how it sees its relationship with us i.e. "Transactional".

Again repeating what I posted earlier, if the U.A.E itself doesn't put its eggs in one basket then neither should we. This U.A.E policy is not even limited with regards to Pak-India, its following the same trend even in regards to Saudi-Iran.

If the U.A.E can't even fully back Saudi in its Iran policy than to expect it to come to our aid in case of our full support is at best na.... and at worst itself a product of a backward sectarian agenda that puts the interest of another country ahead of Pakistan.

My post, in a nut shell, is that UAE is actually the least of our concern.

My post is about shedding the blinders of naivety and opening eyes to recognizing the meaning of a country handing out a key strategic post to our enemy right next door to Gwadar.

We can choose to blame each other of being sectarian or put 2 and 2 together.

Its actually that simple and right in front of all to observe.

After reading your long post, I would like to give you the benefit of doubt but some Pakistanis still knowingly choose to call Roti ko Chochi.

 

[Mav3rick]

Those who think UAE or any other GCC country supports Pakistan need to read the following:

https://www.dawn.com/news/1499669/i...nse-to-new-delhis-actions-in-occupied-kashmir

Gulf Arab countries have remained mostly silent as India’s government moved to strip the Indian-occupied sector of Kashmir of its limited autonomy, imposing a sweeping military curfew in the disputed Muslim-majority region and cutting off residents from all communication and the internet.

This muted response is underpinned by more than $100 billion in annual trade with India that makes it one of the Arabian Peninsula’s most prized economic partners.

Regional heavyweight Saudi Arabia urged restraint and expressed concern over the brewing crisis. Other Gulf countries — Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman — do not appear to have issued any statements. The United Arab Emirates has gone a step further by apparently siding with India, calling the decision to downgrade occupied Kashmir’s status an internal matter.

Saudi Arabia’s response to the Kashmir situation is complicated by its close ties with both India and Pakistan, which have fought two wars over the disputed Himalayan region, as well as its ideological rivalry with Turkey and Iran for supremacy in the Islamic world.

Prime Minister Imran Khan has reached out to leaders in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain in recent days to discuss India’s actions in Kashmir, but it’s unclear whether he would find Arab backing if he took his concerns to the United Nations Security Council.

The brief Saudi statement on the Kashmir events said the kingdom “is following up on the current situation” and called for a “peaceful settlement” in line with international resolutions.

Gulf Arab states are home to more than 7 million Indian expatriates who help drive the region’s economy and keep its cities teeming with doctors, engineers, teachers, drivers, construction workers and other laborers.

Nowhere in the region is this relationship more pronounced than in the UAE, where Indians outnumber Emiratis three to one. Bilateral trade surpassed $50 billion in 2018, making India the UAE’s second-largest trade partner.



Indian investments in the UAE amount to $55 billion and Indians are the largest foreign investors in Dubai’s real estate market, according to India’s Ministry of External Affairs. Meanwhile, DP World, Dubai’s global port operator, has plans to develop a logistics hub in Indian-controlled Kashmir.

The UAE doubled down on this strategic relationship when it signaled support for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government as New Delhi rushed to send tens of thousands of additional soldiers to occupied Kashmir, already one of the world’s most militarised regions. The troops were deployed to prevent unrest and protests over the August 5 decision to strip the territory of its special constitutional status.

The UAE’s ambassador to India, Ahmed al-Banna, was quoted in local media in both countries as saying the changes in Kashmir “would improve social justice and security [...] and further stability and peace.”

The decision by Modi’s Hindu nationalist government carries religious overtones for Muslim residents of the Indian-occupied Kashmir.

The revocation of the region’s constitutional status, which needs the approval of the ruling party-controlled parliament, means Kashmiris lose their hereditary right to jobs, scholarships and land ownership. Government critics see the move, which would allow Indians from outside the region to permanently settle and buy land, as an attempt to alter Kashmir’s culture and demographics with Hindu settlers.

These religious tensions have made Kashmir another field of contest between Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey to champion Muslim causes worldwide, said Hasan al-Hasan, an expert on Gulf-Indian relations at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

“The Turks are trying to cultivate influence in Kashmir. The Iranians are trying to cultivate influence in Kashmir. So I doubt that Saudi Arabia would want to concede a lot of ground to the Turks and the Iranians in terms of this broader symbolic contest over the leadership of the Muslim world,” he said.

Turkey, which has less than $7 billion in annual bilateral trade with India, has thrown its weight behind Pakistan. A readout from a recent call between the President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Pakistan’s prime minister emphasised Kashmiri self-determination.

Iran permitted a symbolic protest of around 60 students outside the Indian Embassy in Tehran last week, and a senior cleric there told worshippers during Friday prayers that India’s actions in Kashmir were “an ugly move”. However, both President Hassan Rouhani and the foreign ministry have issued more tempered statements, calling for dialogue and peace between Pakistan and India. The varied response comes as bilateral trade plummets following India’s decision to stop buying Iranian oil due to US sanctions on Iran.

In contrast, Saudi Arabia is home to 2.7 million Indians and is India’s second biggest supplier of oil after Iraq, according to Indian government statistics. Saudi oil exports to India dominated $27.5 billion in bilateral trade last year.

On Monday, the eighth day of the military curfew in Kashmir, India announced one of the biggest ever foreign investments in the country — a $15 billion purchase by Saudi Arabia’s state-owned Aramco in India’s Reliance oil and chemicals business. Beyond that, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has vowed $100 billion of Saudi investments in India by 2021.

Gulf Arab countries may also be wary of supporting Kashmiri rights because it centers on “people’s right to their own freedoms”, said Hafsa Kanjwal, a Kashmiri American assistant professor of South Asian history at Lafayette College.

Bahrain, rocked in recent years by Arab Spring protests, reported that a number of people were arrested after South Asian residents held a protest there in support of Kashmir and against India after Sunday’s Muslim prayers for the Eidul Azha holiday.

“Kashmir is linked to movements for self-determination and people’s rights and democracy, which these Gulf countries, and Israel, are very much against and very much wary of,” Kanjwal said.

 

[nahtanbob]

Hi,

In the background of what has transpired in kashmir---pakistan govt must declare a state of emergency in the nation---just like Indira Gandhi did in india and bring some control to the workings of the govt---.

And across the pond---the GCC nations should reconsider the issue and take a very strong stand for kashmir's independence and support pakistan---.

The GCC nation like the Emirates which may be analyzing the situation must support the cause of the Kashmiri muslims fair & square---because it has nothing to lose in the end---.

Emirates can never trust India---because emirates does not have the geography to benefit india over the long run---.

Tactically---India will always stand with Iran because of its special deal for oil---and then land route to many other regions---even if Iran supports the Kashmiri cause---.

With un-conditional support of kashmir---emirates comes up ahead of the game in the long run---. Emirates must not commit itself against the cause or stay neutral---because this game has just started---there are lots of players in it---and this game is not ending soon. For emirates---india is a captive audience for now---.

The union of indian states is not on solid grounds---there are one too many separist movements going on. They just need some kind of catalyst to go into a higher gear and explode out of control---.

What Modi has done to Kashmir is to break Kashmir but if that does not happen then rest of india would be in turmoil---. The other states will look at the happenings in Kashmir and feed of the changes taking place in that mountain region---.

Once those movements pickup steam---it would be very difficult to control the split up of the states---.

I personally believe that it does not do any good for emirates to stay on the side lines & now is the time to put its 100% support for Kashmir and pakistan---.

I am not sure what planet you live on. With solar energy and Tesla petroleum is on a downward spiral in the long run. If you do not believe me look at the stocks of oil companies. Why would the GCC states alienate a big customer in such a scenario ?

If the Gulf Arabs are starving tomorrow it is not like Pakistanis are going to feed them. The Somalis were starving a lot for the past two decades. It is not like Pakistan did anything for them

Funny that you would accuse me of that while you have just cheery picked a part of my post and built your whole argument around that.

The U.A.E was singled out because the thread is about our relationship with the U.A.E and how our actions impacted that relationship not Turkey or Malaysia. Moreover, I don't remember Turkey or Malaysia asking for our troops to fight for them and I don't remember at least Turkey or Malaysia backing Indian actions in Kashmir through its ambassador in India, something that still hasn't been denied by the U.A.E foreign ministry.

No, I don't want the U.A.E to cut-off trade relations with India, the whole premise of my argument was that it would be naive to expect the Emirates to fully back you based on its actions in the past even if Pakistan had gone into Yemen.

How many Pakistanis do Turkey or Malaysia employ ?
How much oil do Turkey or Malaysia provide on deferred credit ?

Turkey won't even give Pakistan a break on textile tariffs
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2012156/2-pakistan-turkey-trade-drops-due-protective-duties/