Zibago
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 37,006
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
'Pakistan has its hands full
There’s enough by way of ‘war against terror’ at home
As war rages in Syria, more and more countries are gearing up to jump into the fray. The protracted war has spawned two opposing camps: pro-Assad and anti-Assad. Russia and Iran have been actively propping up the Assad regime by fighting against a range of extremist organisations, including the self-styled Islamic State.
The United States, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia (along with other Arab countries) want to see the back of Assad. The Assad regime is America’s bête noire on account of its association with Iran, an avowed enemy of Israel. With the ouster of Assad, Iran will lose an ally and a foothold in the Middle East.
Commenting on the issue political analyst Dr Faizullah Jan told DNA that alarmed by the rise of Shia Houthis in the neighbouring Yemen, Saudi Arabia has upped ante against Iran by bringing other Arab and Gulf monarchies on an anti-Iran platform. The kingdom was unnerved when Iran signed a landmark nuclear deal with six world powers, including the United States, which freed the state from almost 40 years of punishing sanctions.
Dr Faizullah added that Pakistan seems to be on the brink of being sucked into the Syrian war with no strategic interests of its own.
“When Saudi Arabia announced a 34-country ‘alliance against terrorism,’ Pakistan — seemingly — was caught unawares. Even now, it has to clarify where it stands in the murky situation.”
However, there are serious consequences for Pakistan if it chooses to be a party to the war, which is marked by sectarian and regional rivalries. Sectarian violence has always strained the social and cultural fabric of Pakistan.
Now that Saudi and Turkish ground troops are poised to intervene in Syria in support of their extremist allies, Pakistan will definitely face pressure on account of its strategic relations with the House of Saud. Pakistan’s covert or overt role in the Syrian war will unleash sectarianism inside the country.
Adding to what Dr Faizullah stated, political analyst Yasmeen Aftab Ali said that this is not the first time Saudi Arab wants Pakistan to fight its war. In Yemen, Pakistan refused to fight the war for Saudis and rightly.
Yasmeen added that of the coalition countries, only Pakistan and Turkey have armies of strength in number and quality. The whole brunt would fall on the shoulders of Pakistan and Turkey.
Pakistan must also keep in mind while taking the decision, that Pakistan needs Russia and Iran on their side in the upcoming China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
Sartaj Aziz’s statement needs clarification
Well known academic and columnist Yasser Latif Hamdani thinks that Pakistan should steer clear of the Saudi coalition. Sartaj Aziz’s statement needs to be clarified. What would our commitment be? Are we sending planes? Ground troops? It would inevitably mean pitting ourselves against the Iranians. Pakistan cannot afford to take sides in this fratricidal conflict.
Yasser added that the war is likely to complicate many matters. US and Saudi Arabia want to fight ISIS and Assad. Turkey wants to fight ISIS and PKK and also wants to topple Assad. US wants to support the Kurds against ISIS and against Assad. This obviously goes against Turkey’s legitimate interests. Meanwhile, Russia has put its might behind Assad against the rebels and ISIS. Broadly speaking, US and Saudi Arabia are going to attempt to shore up as many anti-Assad and anti-ISIS groups as possible, which also means supporting the rebels, many of whom have a dubious past.
So what should Pakistan’s role be?
Yasser said Pakistan’s should play a conciliatory role between Turkey and Russia, between Saudi Arabia and Iran, between Assad and Turkey and between US and Russia.
“Once ISIS is taken care of, resolving the Syria crisis would become much easier. Our position till there are any clear winners in this conflict should be to support the legitimate Syrian government i.e., Assad’s regime,” said Yasser.
Political analyst Jalal Hussain opined that Pakistan’s muddled foreign policy stance on the Middle East crisis stems from not having a formal channel through which foreign policy is formulated. Currently Pakistan’s foreign policy seems to be devised by three concurrent channels, the foreign office, the prime minister and the military.
The Middle Eastern crisis has exposed the fact that these stakeholders are not on the same page. The government’s reluctance on appointing a full time foreign minister is quite baffling, given Pakistan’s geopolitical position, he said.
Jalal added that the government wants to appease the Saudis given the personal links the prime minster enjoys with the Saudi royalty, but are facing resistance from the military and the foreign office who realise that taking positions in this conflict might lead to Pakistan facing the brunt of potential fallout.
Journalist Kunwar Khuldune Shahid was of the opinion that Pakistan’s foreign policy – on paper – showcases a desire to remain neutral in Saudi-Iran conflicts or mediate between the two – which is what Pakistan endeavoured to do last month.
“Historically Pakistan’s ostensible neutrality has been marred by its ‘acquiescence’ to Saudi petrodollars – $2.5 billion was charged to send forces to Syria and Bahrain in 2014,” said Khuldune.
“But with last year’s Iran nuclear deal, it’s evident that Pakistan benefits even more from trade and energy sharing ties with a country it shares the border with. This in turn means calling for Bashar al-Assad to be a part of any solution in Syria, in addition to rethinking Pakistani military services in countering popular Shi’a rebellions in Bahrain and Yemen.”
Khuldune added that the only position Pakistan should take is against ISIS. With Pakistanis fleeing to fight for ISIS and local jihadist groups gravitating towards the terror group as well, the only business that Pakistan should get itself involved in is the war against ISIS.
Political and defence analyst Faraz Darvesh told DNA there are still doubts what Saudi Arabia wants to achieve in the Middle East and mainly in Syria. Saudi Arabia has had a history of supporting groups like ISIS to throw Bashar Al-Assad in Syria.
However, recently Saudis have announced that they are ready to fight ISIS in Syria with its allies including Pakistan. The question remains open whether Saudis are forming coalition to fight Shi’a forces in Syria to weaken Iran’s influence or will it really fight ISIS? ISIS and Saudis share the Wahhabi ideology and Saudis may face local repercussions.
“The Saudis are in a tough spot because the world is now vocally questioning Wahhabi ideology and Saudi Arabia is seen as ideological base and financial pipeline in the spread of Wahhabism,” said Faraz.
Pakistan must focus on militarily and ideologically defeating its internal enemies such as LeJ, SSP, TTP, Jundullah, and al Qaeda and improve its relations with its neighbours.
Pakistan has its hands full | Pakistan Today
@django @Ammara Chaudhry @DESERT FIGHTER @waz @WAJsal
No need to join ummah united
There’s enough by way of ‘war against terror’ at home
As war rages in Syria, more and more countries are gearing up to jump into the fray. The protracted war has spawned two opposing camps: pro-Assad and anti-Assad. Russia and Iran have been actively propping up the Assad regime by fighting against a range of extremist organisations, including the self-styled Islamic State.
The United States, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia (along with other Arab countries) want to see the back of Assad. The Assad regime is America’s bête noire on account of its association with Iran, an avowed enemy of Israel. With the ouster of Assad, Iran will lose an ally and a foothold in the Middle East.
Commenting on the issue political analyst Dr Faizullah Jan told DNA that alarmed by the rise of Shia Houthis in the neighbouring Yemen, Saudi Arabia has upped ante against Iran by bringing other Arab and Gulf monarchies on an anti-Iran platform. The kingdom was unnerved when Iran signed a landmark nuclear deal with six world powers, including the United States, which freed the state from almost 40 years of punishing sanctions.
Dr Faizullah added that Pakistan seems to be on the brink of being sucked into the Syrian war with no strategic interests of its own.
“When Saudi Arabia announced a 34-country ‘alliance against terrorism,’ Pakistan — seemingly — was caught unawares. Even now, it has to clarify where it stands in the murky situation.”
However, there are serious consequences for Pakistan if it chooses to be a party to the war, which is marked by sectarian and regional rivalries. Sectarian violence has always strained the social and cultural fabric of Pakistan.
Now that Saudi and Turkish ground troops are poised to intervene in Syria in support of their extremist allies, Pakistan will definitely face pressure on account of its strategic relations with the House of Saud. Pakistan’s covert or overt role in the Syrian war will unleash sectarianism inside the country.
Adding to what Dr Faizullah stated, political analyst Yasmeen Aftab Ali said that this is not the first time Saudi Arab wants Pakistan to fight its war. In Yemen, Pakistan refused to fight the war for Saudis and rightly.
Yasmeen added that of the coalition countries, only Pakistan and Turkey have armies of strength in number and quality. The whole brunt would fall on the shoulders of Pakistan and Turkey.
Pakistan must also keep in mind while taking the decision, that Pakistan needs Russia and Iran on their side in the upcoming China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
Sartaj Aziz’s statement needs clarification
Well known academic and columnist Yasser Latif Hamdani thinks that Pakistan should steer clear of the Saudi coalition. Sartaj Aziz’s statement needs to be clarified. What would our commitment be? Are we sending planes? Ground troops? It would inevitably mean pitting ourselves against the Iranians. Pakistan cannot afford to take sides in this fratricidal conflict.
Yasser added that the war is likely to complicate many matters. US and Saudi Arabia want to fight ISIS and Assad. Turkey wants to fight ISIS and PKK and also wants to topple Assad. US wants to support the Kurds against ISIS and against Assad. This obviously goes against Turkey’s legitimate interests. Meanwhile, Russia has put its might behind Assad against the rebels and ISIS. Broadly speaking, US and Saudi Arabia are going to attempt to shore up as many anti-Assad and anti-ISIS groups as possible, which also means supporting the rebels, many of whom have a dubious past.
So what should Pakistan’s role be?
Yasser said Pakistan’s should play a conciliatory role between Turkey and Russia, between Saudi Arabia and Iran, between Assad and Turkey and between US and Russia.
“Once ISIS is taken care of, resolving the Syria crisis would become much easier. Our position till there are any clear winners in this conflict should be to support the legitimate Syrian government i.e., Assad’s regime,” said Yasser.
Political analyst Jalal Hussain opined that Pakistan’s muddled foreign policy stance on the Middle East crisis stems from not having a formal channel through which foreign policy is formulated. Currently Pakistan’s foreign policy seems to be devised by three concurrent channels, the foreign office, the prime minister and the military.
The Middle Eastern crisis has exposed the fact that these stakeholders are not on the same page. The government’s reluctance on appointing a full time foreign minister is quite baffling, given Pakistan’s geopolitical position, he said.
Jalal added that the government wants to appease the Saudis given the personal links the prime minster enjoys with the Saudi royalty, but are facing resistance from the military and the foreign office who realise that taking positions in this conflict might lead to Pakistan facing the brunt of potential fallout.
Journalist Kunwar Khuldune Shahid was of the opinion that Pakistan’s foreign policy – on paper – showcases a desire to remain neutral in Saudi-Iran conflicts or mediate between the two – which is what Pakistan endeavoured to do last month.
“Historically Pakistan’s ostensible neutrality has been marred by its ‘acquiescence’ to Saudi petrodollars – $2.5 billion was charged to send forces to Syria and Bahrain in 2014,” said Khuldune.
“But with last year’s Iran nuclear deal, it’s evident that Pakistan benefits even more from trade and energy sharing ties with a country it shares the border with. This in turn means calling for Bashar al-Assad to be a part of any solution in Syria, in addition to rethinking Pakistani military services in countering popular Shi’a rebellions in Bahrain and Yemen.”
Khuldune added that the only position Pakistan should take is against ISIS. With Pakistanis fleeing to fight for ISIS and local jihadist groups gravitating towards the terror group as well, the only business that Pakistan should get itself involved in is the war against ISIS.
Political and defence analyst Faraz Darvesh told DNA there are still doubts what Saudi Arabia wants to achieve in the Middle East and mainly in Syria. Saudi Arabia has had a history of supporting groups like ISIS to throw Bashar Al-Assad in Syria.
However, recently Saudis have announced that they are ready to fight ISIS in Syria with its allies including Pakistan. The question remains open whether Saudis are forming coalition to fight Shi’a forces in Syria to weaken Iran’s influence or will it really fight ISIS? ISIS and Saudis share the Wahhabi ideology and Saudis may face local repercussions.
“The Saudis are in a tough spot because the world is now vocally questioning Wahhabi ideology and Saudi Arabia is seen as ideological base and financial pipeline in the spread of Wahhabism,” said Faraz.
Pakistan must focus on militarily and ideologically defeating its internal enemies such as LeJ, SSP, TTP, Jundullah, and al Qaeda and improve its relations with its neighbours.
Pakistan has its hands full | Pakistan Today
@django @Ammara Chaudhry @DESERT FIGHTER @waz @WAJsal
No need to join ummah united
