Pakistan caught between Iran and Saudi rivarly

[Hyde]

I think what he meant was do what India is doing, don't meddle in their business, and let them try to sort things out on their own. Because otherwise you gonna piss off both of them or at least one of them. Like what India is doing with Iran and Israel, India has great relations with both countries.

yes but Iran's own policy is totally messed up. How many countries in the world would support Iran if the war takes place? I can count many for India, Saudi Arabia or even Pakistan. So in this case Pakistan's pathetic foreign policy is better than Iran. Surely Iran's internal policy is much better than most of the countries in the world. But their foreign policy is as worst as good their internal policy is. They are united and that is their biggest strength... but when it comes to foreign policy, they are united to die together instead of making their way out of the trouble. They probably have too many honest people in the government and honest people screws up everything in politics

 

[IndoUS]

yes but Iran's own policy is totally messed up. How many countries in the world would support Iran if the war takes place? I can count many for India, Saudi Arabia or even Pakistan. So in this case Pakistan's pathetic foreign policy is better than Iran. Surely Iran's internal policy is much better than most of the countries in the world. But their foreign policy is as worst as good their internal policy is. They are united and that is their biggest strength... but when it comes to foreign policy, they are united to die together instead of making their way out of the trouble. They probably have too many honest people in the government and honest people screws up everything in politics

You can't change their foreign policy, but you should also make sure that they don't come after you if a war breaks out. Because Iranians are more like do or die people, I consider their action as complete insane act and like shooting yourself. But its better to be on the safe side.

 

[King Solomon]

Iran's model is the worst one when it comes to foreign policy. Being brave is a good thing but committing suicide is insane

yes but Iran's own policy is totally messed up. How many countries in the world would support Iran if the war takes place? I can count many for India, Saudi Arabia or even Pakistan. So in this case Pakistan's pathetic foreign policy is better than Iran. Surely Iran's internal policy is much better than most of the countries in the world. But their foreign policy is as worst as good their internal policy is. They are united and that is their biggest strength... but when it comes to foreign policy, they are united to die together instead of making their way out of the trouble. They probably have too many honest people in the government and honest people screws up everything in politics

Theoretically, that may be true. But what do we see in practice?

While Iran adopted independent foreign policy from 1979, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Arabs adopted a foreign policy in which literally they accept US and Zionists as their master (no offense, that is the truth, from Pakistan's Bhutto/Zia to Saud's Fahd/Abdullah).

Who was the beneficiary? Despite Iran iraq war and massive infrastructure damage, sanctions, Iran is now the 18th largest economy and a pioneer in the field of science and technology. Their defense doctrine (missile) is very thoughtful and advanced. I cannot list enough Iranian successes here. A self-sufficient energy superpower. Count in the increased Shia influence in Iraq too. Count in the Russian and China's backing as well. Iran cannot be viewed as completely isolated. Its just people's perspective - they think if you are not in bed with west, you are isolated. Is that so?

What happened to the latter? For Pakistan, you would know better than me what is the case with Zionist Zardari in power. For Arabs, they are falling like dominoes - Iraq, Libya, Lebanon, Syria etc. Pakistan is one step away from destruction with US forces stationed in Afghanistan and India ready to invade from east (regularly conducting war games to practice invasion). Some loyal puppets like House of Saud and UAE are still enjoying in their oil money. Hey, but so was Saddam once upon a time, isn't it? In case of a conflict with the real enemy (Israel), Arabs will be sanctioned and their advanced western weaponries may be next to useless due to lack of critical spare parts.

Iran's example goes on to show that if you have belief on yourself, even if the whole world abandons you, you will eventually come out stronger.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

As far as I remember, Jordan fought Israel with western equipment, it's performance in all Arab-Israeli wars was relatively the best.

 

[King Solomon]

As far as I remember, Jordan fought Israel with western equipment, it's performance in all Arab-Israeli wars was relatively the best.

That may be true. But I have heard Jordanian king warned Israel of 1973 invasion beforehand in fear of losing territory, is that true?

Kissinger admitted in 1973 that Egyptian 3rd class Soviet equipment defeated 1st class (US supplied) Israeli equipment.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

That may be true. If so, salute to Jordan. But I have heard Jordanian king warned Israel of 1973 invasion beforehand in fear of losing territory, is that true?

Kissinger admitted in 1973 that Egyptian 3rd class Soviet equipment defeated 1st class (US supplied) Israeli equipment.

Egyptian chairman of the national security, Abu Algeit denied that. Israel was completely surprised by the attack. No one knew about it but only Egyptian and Syrian leaders. Jordan contributed effectively in the war, the famous Jordanian brigade (40) rescued Damascus along with Iraqi Army from falling.
"During Fattal Jordan Arab Army, a Syrian Reconnaissance Battalion officers captured Israeli officers screaming over phones to their leaders, "Save us from Brigade of Jordan were advancing towards us and we do not know retreat and we are clearing our sites to them," it was handed over to the brigade commander of Jordan (40), Major General Khalid Ahjhoj Majali after the end of this battle in sunset by General Mustafa Talas, Syrian Defense Minister."

وأثناء فتال الجيش العربي الأردني التقطت كتيبة الاستطلاع السوري الضباط الصهاينة يصرخون مخاطبين قادتهم "أنقذونا من اللواء الأردني انهم يتقدمون باتجاهنا ولا يعرفون التراجع ونحن نخلي مواقعنا لهم" وقد سلم التسجيل إلى قائد اللواء الأردني (40) اللواء الركن خالد هجهوج المجالي بعد انتهاء هذه المعركة في الغروب من قبل العماد مصطفى طلاس وزير الدفاع السوري.

 

[King Solomon]

Egyptian chairman of the national security, Abu Algeit denied that. Israel was completely surprised by the attack. No one knew about it but only Egyptian and Syrian leaders. Jordan contributed effectively in the war, the famous Jordanian brigade (40) rescued Damascus along with Iraqi Army from falling.
"During Fattal Jordan Arab Army, a Syrian Reconnaissance Battalion officers captured Israeli officers screaming over phones to their leaders, "Save us from Brigade of Jordan were advancing towards us and we do not know retreat and we are clearing our sites to them," it was handed over to the brigade commander of Jordan (40), Major General Khalid Ahjhoj Majali after the end of this battle in sunset by General Mustafa Talas, Syrian Defense Minister."

وأثناء فتال الجيش العربي الأردني التقطت كتيبة الاستطلاع السوري الضباط الصهاينة يصرخون مخاطبين قادتهم "أنقذونا من اللواء الأردني انهم يتقدمون باتجاهنا ولا يعرفون التراجع ونحن نخلي مواقعنا لهم" وقد سلم التسجيل إلى قائد اللواء الأردني (40) اللواء الركن خالد هجهوج المجالي بعد انتهاء هذه المعركة في الغروب من قبل العماد مصطفى طلاس وزير الدفاع السوري.

One or two sources does not prove anything. But it is true that the advanced weaponries which some Arab nations like KSA is now getting are useful for Iran (god forbid) , but not for dealing with Israel. At that time, the regional dynamics was different to now. There was no petrodollar, so no explicit western interest in sanctioning Arabs. But this time it may be different altogether. i'd advise to look at what happened to Pakistan's airforce during sanctions. Their F 16s could barely be used in Kargil war in fear of becoming useless. Indian Migs could bomb at will but PAF could not do anything in return. I don't think Saudi F 15s Typhoons etc. may be any different.

You may chose to live in dream world, but I vouch for reality.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

Okay I believe you. But I still believe that the advanced weaponries which some Arab nations like KSA is now getting are useful for Iran (god forbid) , but not for dealing with Israel. At that time, the regional dynamics was different to now. There was no petrodollar, so no explicit western interest in sanctioning Arabs. But this time it may be different altogether. i'd advise to look at what happened to Pakistan's airforce during sanctions. Their F 16s could barely be used in Kargil war in fear of becoming useless. Indian Migs could bomb at will but PAF could not do anything in return. I don't think Saudi F 15s Typhoons etc. may be any different.

Their main target is Egypt. They are viewing Egypt as the biggest threat to Israel's expansion of borders. That is why they permanently stationed Zion forces in Libya.

As far as I am concerned, I don't care whether you believe it or not. I just chose to reply this time. Bye...

 

[King Solomon]

As far as I am concerned, I don't care whether you believe it or not. I just chose to reply this time. Bye...

I see. You are becoming mature day by day, albeit slowly. Good boy.

 

[Banu Umayyah]

This how I view it:
As a realist, I firmly believe that Pakistan should/is seeking out its interest first and foremost. That being said, to understand the conflict between us and the Iranians we have to look first at its root.
We had good relations with Iran until 79. Then they became a sectarian state(welayat alfaqih) that wanted to export its revolution, and that made Iran in a collision course with S.Arabia. With the start of the Iraq-Iran war, S.Arabia wholeheartedly supported Iraq, which made the Iranians much more hostile toward us and they started assassinations and the Hajj riots, as result we broke all relations with the country. During the 90's tensions declined and relations improved. Then came 9/11. The US took out Iran's closest enemies(Taliban & Saddam) which the Iranian government saw as a golden opportunity to expand and grow its influence in the ME, hoping to force S.Arabia into allowing Iranian"investment and extraction" of GCC oil and gas, which we wouldn't allow to happen without a fight. Again back to the collision course. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Hamas came under Iranian influence. So now we are at this pivotal moment in history during the Syrian revolution, If Bashar succeeds in crushing the Syrian people, then you can count on a Muslim World War happening in ME within the next few years. The fact is the region is very polarized at the moment, one of several things could trigger a wide conflict(e.g Sunni ethnic cleansing in Syria). However with Syria(and Lebanon by default) back to Arab camp(by toppling Bashar) it would indeed be a fatal blow to the Iranian agenda in the region and prevent a major conflict.


When it comes to Pakistan role in the conflict, lets not forget that 40% of world's oil supply comes out of the Arabian Gulf, and ANY country that holds a monopoly on it won't be beneficial to Pakistan(whether S.Arabia or Iran) as it would most certainly raise the price of exported oil despite the drop in price from eased tensions. Secondly, Iran is a big country, its a Shia sectarian country that borders Pakistan and Pakistan has a significant Shia population. So from a geopolitical stand point, Iran has the POTENTIAL of destabilizing Pakistan, and if for whatever reason that Pakistan gets in a conflict with Iran, then Pakistan would be literally surrounded with enemies from every direction(India, Iran and Afghanistan) which would be considered a strategic nightmare scenario for Pakistan. However, Saudis chilling in the desert don't have the capability to destabilize Pakistan even if they wanted too.
So, I am convinced that the current close relations between us and the Pakistanis are not as we say in S.Arabia(for the Blackness of our eyes) but came after careful readings of the geopolitical situation that the Pakistani policymakers found themselves in.

 

[King Solomon]

This how I view it:
As a realist, I firmly believe that Pakistan should/is seeking out its interest first and foremost. That being said, to understand the conflict between us and the Iranians we have to look first at its root.
We had good relations with Iran until 79. Then they became a sectarian state(welayat alfaqih) that wanted to export its revolution, and that made Iran in a collision course with S.Arabia. With the start of the Iraq-Iran war, S.Arabia wholeheartedly supported Iraq, which made the Iranians much more hostile toward us and they started assassinations and the Hajj riots, as result we broke all relations with the country. During the 90's tensions declined and relations improved. Then came 9/11. The US took out Iran's closest enemies(Taliban & Saddam) which the Iranian government saw as a golden opportunity to expand and grow its influence in the ME, hoping to force S.Arabia into allowing Iranian"investment and extraction" of GCC oil and gas, which we would allow to happen without a fight. Again back to the collision course. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Hamas came under Iranian influence. So now we are at this pivotal moment in history during the Syrian revolution, If Bashar succeeds in crushing the Syrian people, then you can count on a Muslim World War happening in ME within the next few years. The fact is the region is very polarized at the moment, one of several things could trigger a wide conflict(e.g Sunni ethnic cleansing in Syria). However with Syria(and Lebanon by default) back to Arab camp(by toppling Bashar) it would indeed be a fatal blow to the Iranian agenda in the region and prevent a major conflict.


When it comes to Pakistan role in the conflict, lets not forget that 40% of world's oil supply comes out of the Arabian Gulf, and ANY country that holds a monopoly on it won't be beneficial to Pakistan(whether S.Arabia or Iran) as it would most certainly raise the price of exported oil despite the drop in price from eased tensions. Secondly, Iran is a big country, its a Shia sectarian country that borders Pakistan and Pakistan has a significant Shia population. So from a geopolitical stand point, Iran has the POTENTIAL of destabilizing Pakistan, and if for whatever reason that Pakistan gets in a conflict with Iran, then Pakistan would be literally surrounded with enemies from every direction(India, Iran and Afghanistan) which would be considered a strategic nightmare scenario for Pakistan. However, Saudis chilling in the desert don't have the capability to destabilize Pakistan even if they wanted too.
So, I am convinced that the current close relations between us and the Pakistanis are not as we say in S.Arabia(for the Blackness of our eyes) but came after careful readings of the geopolitical situation that the Pakistani policymakers found themselves in.

You are analysing the whole thing on a sectarian perspective. I don't think that is right. Whole Arab world + west tried to destroy Iran in the 80s. Fortunately, their evil ambitions failed. Iran is ever more powerful today, by the grace of God.

Now Iran is gaining more and more influence. Iraq is already like an Iranian colony after US left. Saddam, the genocidal terrorist is obliterated, finally. Taliban terrorists have also lost in Afghanistan. Surely, you people committed ruthless injustice against Iran just because you consider Shias as Kuffars, don't forget that. God is helping Iran gain influence. I hope he ushers his mercy on Iranian nation more.

 

[Banu Umayyah]

You are analysing the whole thing on a sectarian perspective.

I think neither the Saudi nor the Iranian leadership look at things from a sectarian view. I think both of them couldn't care less about religion and their main focus is Power. However, religion does play a vital role in international politics, and it can be used as a means to influence and rally people under a cause and from alliances. You only need to look at Arab world today to see this. That wasn't the case before the Iranian revolution and specially wasn't the case before the US invasion of Iraq.

 

[King Solomon]

I think neither the Saudi nor the Iranian leadership look at things from a sectarian view. I think both of them couldn't care less about religion and their main focus is Power. However, religion does play a vital role in international politics, and it can be used as a means to influence and rally people under a cause and from alliances. You only need to look at Arab world today to see this. That wasn't the case before the Iranian revolution and specially wasn't the case before the US invasion of Iraq.

Your point is Iranian revolution was bad for the Islamic world at large?

 

[Banu Umayyah]

3. A fraction of Arabs who are Zionists, acting for Zionist interests. Such as when the UAE demanded Pakistan to release Raymond davis and requested not to vacate air base.
.

I read that several times now in this forum.
Can you post your source?
What would the UAE gain from Pakistan handing over Davis?

Your point is Iranian revolution was bad for the Islamic world at large?

Yes. Very much so.
But as a Sunni I can't claim objectivity

 

[King Solomon]

I read that several times now in this forum.
Can you post your source?
What would the UAE gain from Pakistan handing over Davis?

Little mistake, it would be Saudi Arabia, not UAE. UAE just demanded Pakistan doesn't force Americans to leave Shamsi airbase after killing 26 soldiers.

BBC News - Pakistan anger over release of CIA killer Raymond Davis

His arrest had threatened to derail US relations with Pakistan, a key ally.

Meanwhile a senior Pakistani official has told the BBC that the "blood money" was paid to the families in Saudi Arabia, as part of a deal brokered by the Saudi government.

I read that several times now in this forum.
Yes. Very much so.
But as a Sunni I can't claim objectivity

I am (by tradition) a Sunni too. But I consider myself to be just "muslim" and don't promote sectarianism

Analysing from neutral perspective, I find the Iranian revolution to be good for the Iranian people and for Islam at large.

Anyway, nice to meet you. I like your argument style. Quite different compared to existing Saudi members