Islamic Military Alliance: Give it a chance it might actually become Muslim World’s NATO

[GlobalVillageSpace]

Islamic Military Alliance: Give it a chance it might actually become Muslim World’s NATO
Global Village Space |

Abubakar Farooqui |

Following a period of ambiguity over the approval of NOC from the Government of Pakistan, former Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif is finally in Saudi Arabia to command Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism (IMAFT). However, this approval has not only failed to convince Iran and Iraq have explicitly criticized it for being of a sectarian nature.

Objective of Islamic Military Alliance
Deputy Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammad Bin Salman said that the anti-terrorism coalition will operate in Iraq, Syria, and Libya. With its headquarters set up in Riyadh, the IMAFT definitely aims at securing Saudi Arabian sovereignty.

The objective of the alliance itself is apparently not controversial, given that terrorism is the biggest challenge facing the Islamic World today. Not only has the Muslim World been terribly affected by the gigantic terror waves rising from the chaotic Middle East but the West is also taking hits both directly and indirectly. There is no question in any ones mind that this needs to be effectively countered. There is no straight answer as to how to counter it. The combined civil wars going on in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen have led to a generational crisis in the Middle East; that has been incinerating city after city, causing unimaginable damage to life and property. Islamic Military Alliance aims at guiding the Muslim Countries to victory against the ogre specters of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

ISIS is a mutually agreed threat not just to the Muslim World but to a large part of the globe. Even global heavyweights; USA and Russia have been justifying their intervention in Syria on the basis of countering ISIS. Furthermore, earlier statements by Deputy Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammad Bin Salman, has confirmed the anti-terrorism coalition will operate in Iraq, Syria, and Libya. With its headquarters set up in Riyadh, the IMAFT definitely aims at securing Saudi Arabian sovereignty and all this now with a Pakistani General at its helm.

Read more: Will the Muslim Military Alliance bring trouble for Pakistan & other Islamic Nations?

Is Pakistan’s neutrality compromised?
Pakistan’s attitude which has so far been quite positive in striking balance between two of its allies Saudi Arabia and Iran. Pakistani parliament maintained neutrality after rebuffing Saudi Coalition call in Yemen in 2015.

Pakistan’s is one of the most powerful militaries of the Islamic World and the past decade it has shown success in thwarting terror. Pakistan’s extensive experience in Countering Terrorism is unparalleled in the entire Islamic World. Under the command of General Raheel Sharif, Pakistan launched Operation Zarb-e-Azb that secured its Tribal Areas of TTP militants and drastically reduced terrorism in the country. With so many successes against terrorism to his name, General Raheel Sharif was a good choice for those looking for someone to command their military alliance.

Perhaps the most significant question is, will the Islamic Military Alliance operations in Syria, Iraq, and Libya, only counter ISIS and Al-Qaeda or will they generate a greater intervention into Syrian conflict on Saudi behalf that the countries like Pakistan have hitherto been successfully avoiding? In addition, will it be used to ensure Saudi sovereignty at the cost of regional run-ins such as with Yemen? The answer to these questions lies in Pakistan’s attitude which has so far been quite positive in striking balance between two of its allies Saudi Arabia and Iran. Pakistani parliament maintained neutrality after rebuffing Saudi Coalition call in Yemen in 2015. General Raheel Sharif, in his one of the three conditions set to command IMAFT, has also included that Iran is invited to join the alliance.

Read full article:
Islamic Military Alliance: Give it a chance it might actually become Muslim World’s NATO

 

[Tshering22]

How can it be complete without Iran's partnership?

Iran was not offered favourable terms that other countries got.

This is sheer sectarianism at its best.

 

[EmeraldRabbit]

How can it be complete without Iran's partnership?

Iran was not offered favourable terms that other countries got.

This is sheer sectarianism at its best.

Such as?

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

How can it be complete without Iran's partnership?

We offered and they refused not our fault.

Iran was not offered favourable terms that other countries got.

What are you talking about? Iran was offered inside the Alliance and all they had to do was contribute troops and political support like the rest of the countries. Why are you making things up?

This is sheer sectarianism at its best.

Complete bull, we offered Azerbaijan in too. There are only 2 Shia majority countries in the world and we invited them both so screw off with your allegations of sectarianism.

 

[StraightShooter]

How can it be complete without Iran's partnership?

Iran was not offered favourable terms that other countries got.

This is sheer sectarianism at its best.

If NATO can function without and against USSR/Russia, Islamic NATO Alliance can function without and against Iran.

 

[Attila the Hun]

How can it be complete without Iran's partnership?

They were invited weren't they? You cannot force them to join if they don't want to.

 

[Thorough Pro]

LOL

How can it be complete without Iran's partnership?

Iran was not offered favourable terms that other countries got.

This is sheer sectarianism at its best.

 

[Clutch]

How can it be complete without Iran's partnership?

Iran was not offered favourable terms that other countries got.

This is sheer sectarianism at its best.

Can you please give any references to the unfavourable terms offered to Iran? Or is your comment actually sheer sectarianism or are you just lying?

 

[AUz]

IMAFT (Islamic Military Alliance Against Terrorism)

It should be pronounced as I-MAFT. Sounds cool lol

 

[Tshering22]

Can you please give any references to the unfavourable terms offered to Iran? Or is your comment actually sheer sectarianism or are you just lying?

Iran is the leader of Shiites in the world. This is about equal contribution rather than leadership of one nation called Saudi Arabia. That too when they know that Iran is no less in military capabilities than KSA. There should have been efforts made to accommodate Iran's wishes.

Why have a this-or-that leadership model at all when this alliance could havehad a one vote per member model?

 

[somebozo]

Provided it is led by a competent authority and does not become a mud slinging contest like OIC!

 

[Clutch]

Iran is the leader of Shiites in the world. This is about equal contribution rather than leadership of one nation called Saudi Arabia. That too when they know that Iran is no less in military capabilities than KSA. There should have been efforts made to accommodate Iran's wishes.

Why have a this-or-that leadership model at all when this alliance could havehad a one vote per member model?

You didn't reference any of the unfair terms offered to Iran. It is your opinion. It may be right or wrong but it isn't a proper factual reference.

 

[Tshering22]

You didn't reference any of the unfair terms offered to Iran. It is your opinion. It may be right or wrong but it isn't a proper factual reference.

Perhaps.

What I am saying is that this should be an alliance of equals where all countries are given the same respect. Iran knows that under a Saudi leadership it will never have an equal say and the alliance doesn't represent the shiite community, due to the lack of Iran's participation.

In the countries that are in this alliance, only Pakistan, Iran and Turkey are the three battle-hardened militaries. Saudis have fancy equipment but they really don't have much combat experience compared to these three.

Turks leading this initiative would have been more acceptable to Tehran.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

We offered and they refused not our fault.



What are you talking about? Iran was offered inside the Alliance and all they had to do was contribute troops and political support like the rest of the countries. Why are you making things up?



Complete bull, we offered Azerbaijan in too. There are only 2 Shia majority countries in the world and we invited them both so screw off with your allegations of sectarianism.

Unity is strength.

Like I said, I see the violence in the Middle East in the same way that I saw the Chinese Civil War. The war ends when the people unite under one banner, maybe the IMA will be that banner?

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

Iran is the leader of Shiites in the world

Nobody is leader of any sect at all.

Saudi Arabia.

What is wrong with Saudi Arabia leading? They are the ones who made it. Egypt a country of 90 million is behind it and arguably houses the most important head of the Sunni sect, yet we are behind Saudi Arabia. So what? Just because you have a lot of a certain sect in your country does not give you the right to lead at all.

You do not get a leadership position simply because you are more "shia" then the rest of us.

Unity is strength.

Like I said, I see the violence in the Middle East in the same way that I saw the Chinese Civil War. The war ends when the people unite under one banner, maybe the IMA will be that banner?

Hopefully