What's new

Iran concerned over Raheel's appointment as head of Saudi-led military alliance: envoy

Since, Iran and Saudi rapprochement is not in sight, at least not in near term, Pakistan has to juggle relations on both end. Gen. Sharif appointment can be seen on that context. In reality, there is no prospect for such alliance get to see light of the day in current geo strategic context. If REAL purpose, scope and goals of the appointment are properly explained to Iranians, sure they can understand. In fact, Iran itself are in such conflicting and balancing act in different places.
 
. . .
Iran has expressed its reservations regarding the appointment of the former army chief, retired Gen Raheel Sharif, as head of the Saudi-led 39-nation Islamic military alliance, saying it is not 'satisfied' with the coalition.

Iran's state-run IRNA news agency quoted Ambassador to Pakistan Mehdi Honardoost as saying that Pakistan had contacted Iranian officials before issuing the no-objection certificate (NOC) to Gen Sharif to lead the Saudi alliance.

"But that does not indicate that Iran is satisfied with this decision or it has accepted the same," the envoy said.

Honardoost said Tehran had informed Islamabad that Iran would not become part of such a military alliance, adding that neither had Iran been extended an offer to join a coalition of this sort.

He proposed that all important Islamic countries come together to form a "coalition of peace" in order to resolve their issues "rather [than] forming a controversial military alliance".

Gen Sharif is likely to assume command of the anti-terrorism alliance, being dubbed the ‘Muslim Nato’, in April.

The government had issued an NOC for Sharif to join the alliance after an understanding was reached between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia on the matter, retired Maj Gen Ijaz Awan, a defence analyst and close associate of the former army chief, had told Dawn.

A controversial appointment
The appointment of Gen Sharif as the leader of the 39-country military alliance sparked debate over how the move will impact Pakistan's foreign policy, and whether it was fully sanctioned by parliament.

Pakistan had initially found itself in the crosshairs of Middle Eastern politics as Saudi Arabia named it as part of its newly formed military alliance of Muslim countries meant to combat terrorism, without first getting its consent.

However, after initial ambiguity, the government had confirmed its participation in the alliance, but had said that the scope of its participation would be defined after Riyadh shared the details of the coalition it was assembling.

Gen Sharif last March accompanied the prime minister to Raadal Shamaal, the first military exercises of the alliance in which Pakistani troops also participated.

The coalition was envisaged to serve as a platform for security cooperation, including provision of training, equipment and troops, and involvement of religious scholars for dealing with extremism.

The Saudi government had surprised many countries by announcing that it had forged a coalition for coordinating and supporting military operations against terrorism in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt and Afghanistan.

Iran, Saudi Arabia's archrival for influence in the Arab world, was absent from the states named as participants, as proxy conflicts between the two regional powers rage from Syria to Yemen.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1324597/i...-as-head-of-saudi-led-military-alliance-envoy
If Iran is concerned then why an Indian is telling us that? Iranis themselves can tell us any thing any time.
 
. .
If pakistan first just like how turks say about their country than drop the word islamic from your country name and be nationalist instead and tell your leaders that they have nothing to do with the gulfies which they want your army to be their servant,mercenary, and slave

it was a personal decision of a retired pak general... not an official policy move by pak establishment... lets not make mountains out of mole hills....
 
.
Allegation that a dozen+ Sabre fighter jet were purchased by Iran from Germany and sent to Pakistan and it was under the Shah rule ( Not the Islamic regime of today) during the war.

Shah rule!!

Couple of things people need to know:

- Shah era is long over!! It's not coming back!

- Shah was an autocratic leader.. his actions did not represent the will of the Iranian people.

- Shah did not do anything out of love for people of Pakistan.. he acted simply out of paranoia, out of fear that Soviets + India + whoever else is ganging up on him.. he did not want Pakistan to fall to his real/imaginary enemies! He had contingency plans to annex Pakistani territory had Pakistan been invaded/disintegrated by other powers.

Just some history lesson.
 
.
Shah rule!!

Couple of things people need to know:

- Shah era is long over!! It's not coming back!

- Shah was an autocratic leader.. his actions did not represent the will of the Iranian people.

- Shah did not do anything out of love for people of Pakistan.. he acted simply out of paranoia, out of fear that Soviets + India + whoever else is ganging up on him.. he did not want Pakistan to fall to his real/imaginary enemies! He had contingency plans to annex Pakistani territory had Pakistan been invaded/disintegrated by other powers.

Just some history lesson.

Don't jump on your horses against me... I was just stating few lines of history THAT YOU asked... with your previous post
 
.
If pakistan first just like how turks say about their country than drop the word islamic from your country name and be nationalist instead and tell your leaders that they have nothing to do with the gulfies which they want your army to be their servant,mercenary, and slave
and who exactly are you to dictate how our country should be named? at least we are Islamic Republic of Pakistan
and not Theocratic Republic of Iran
 
. .
If Pakistan had contacted you before giving NOC to Raheel shareef that is more than enough from our side, but don't take it as we were seeking your permission. Stay put don't swell.
 
.
Iran should mind its own business. Majority in Pakistan supports this decision and we also dont want any confrontation with Iran. If Iran is involved in terrorism only then they should be worried.
majority does not support this decision,,only pml-n is supporting, because they want to humilate reheel
no need to fight some one elses war,
usa
russia
learned that lesson
now its our turn.. to be trapped in this mess

who cares about what Iran think, and what are Iran's concern?

pakistan first. that what general mushi said also
look where hes hiding now
what a brave ssg, a discrease to pak army
 
. .
wish Pakistan don't involve in Yemen in any way your butt will be spanked for no reason plus the loss of life.



Easy with the words dear B*** . And don't worry about us worry about your country






majority does not support this decision,,only pml-n is supporting, because they want to humilate reheel
no need to fight some one elses war,
usa
russia
learned that lesson
now its our turn.. to be trapped in this mess


You are wrong dear only pro Iranians supporters don't support this mostly while we support it.

If RUSSIA and US learned what are they doing in Syria Iraq and "Afghanistan" since 2001
 
Last edited:
.
Iran should mind their own business, stop recruiting "Zaynabiyoon" from Parachinar and other areas of Pakistan, stop firing mortars at Balochistan, and atop poking nose in Pakistan's internal matters.
What Raheel Sharif does or does not is his private matter. He is retired and has no accountability to anyone about what he wants to do with his life after he completed his service.
Iran too has no right to give dictations to Pakistan or any Pakistani citizen
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom