Pakistan-Iran-Turkey confederation

[dabong1]

Lebanon would be good, not least because it would bring in Arabs and remove any perception of an anti-Arab agenda.

I think it would be better for nations that have borders like Pakistan-Iran-Turkey to join together first and let the arab nations make there own union which in time can merge with the Pakistan-Iran-Turkey union.

 

[Developereo]

I think it would be better for nations that have borders like Pakistan-Iran-Turkey to join together first and let the arab nations make there own union which in time can merge with the Pakistan-Iran-Turkey union.

I agree.

The first step, the kernel, would have to be Pakistan-Iran-Turkey.
Start small, show other countries that it is working, and they will want to join.

Problems between Turkey and Iran over Armenia can, hopefully, be sorted out.

But this cannot happen until we have good leaders in all three countries at the same time.
Right now Iran is bogged down in internal divisions.
Don't know about Turkey.
And Pakistan has leaders who have zero vision or statesmanship.

 

[Developereo]

current Iranian administration does espouse Muslim unity and brotherhood which is good.

If true, that is good.

I thought the big problem was the Iranian Revolution took Iran far towards Shia side.

And General Zia's friendship with Saudi Arabia took Pakistan far towards Sunni side.

I was reading somewhere that the Shia-Sunni divide has actually gotten worse over the last 30-40 years.

This will be the biggest problem. How to form the union without offending Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries, because they really don't like Iran or Turkey.

 

[A1Kaid]

Ahmadinejad urges Muslim unity against enemy



Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:29:01 GMT




Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (L) with his couterpart, Ismail Omar Guelleh

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called on Islamic countries across the world to build a united barrier against the 'enemy plots'.

"Unity and cooperation between Muslim states will thwart the enemy plot to sow discord between Muslims and spread hegemony over them," President Ahmadinejad said in a meeting with President of Djibouti Ismail Omar Guelleh on Tuesday.

President Ahmadinejad added that the tyranny of superpowers is at the root of regional conflicts, urging close relations among Muslim countries in face of foreign efforts to break their spirit of solidarity.

Ismail Omar Guelleh, for his part, hailed Iran's huge leap forward in scientific achievements and called the country 'self-sufficient' in modern technology.

The remarks by Djibouti's president came after Iran on February 3 placed its very own indigenous telecommunications satellite Omid (Hope) into orbit. Omid is designed to transmit data via two frequency bands and eight antennas to an Iranian space station.

At the end of the talks, the foreign ministers of both countries signed five memorandums of understanding on economic cooperation.

President Ahmadinejad arrived in Djibouti at the top of a high-ranking delegation early on Tuesday.

He is now in Kenya on the second leg of his tour to Africa.

President Ahmadinejad and his Kenyan counterpart are expected to begin talks on the bilateral issues and the areas of cooperation during his stay in the country.

SF/AR/DT

Source: Ahmadinejad urges Muslim unity against enemy

 

[A1Kaid]

Iran to Saudis: Don't forsake Muslim unity


Mon, 16 Mar 2009 07:14:32 GMT





Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki (L) speaking to Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah at the Royal Palace, Riyadh, March 15


Iran's foreign minister calls on Saudi officials to encourage unity among Muslims amid current tension between the two regional powers.

Manouchehr Mottaki, who embarked on a two-day visit to Riyadh on Sunday, made the remark in a meeting with Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah.

During the meeting, King Abdullah thanked Tehran for its role in promoting the Islamic and Arab cause.

Mottaki's comments come just days after Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal caused outrage in Tehran by suggesting that Arab countries should unify and face up to what he called 'the Iranian challenge.'

"In order to cement Arab reconciliation we need a common vision for issues that concern Arab security, especially the Arab-Israeli struggle and how to deal with the Iranian challenge," Prince Faisal said.

In response, Iranian officials urged the Sunni-Arab power not to detach itself from the 'reality' in recognizing regional challenges.

Earlier in his visit, Mottaki also met with Saudi counterpart Prince Saud al-Faisal who, in a change of tune, blamed the former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hossein for the problems that the Middle East faces today.

Saud al-Faisal said Saddam had cleared the way for foreign military presence in the region with his incorrect policies, pointing out that subsequent difficulties could only be overcome if regional countries take up a unified stance.

He added that Riyadh was pleased to see Iran utilize its resources for the resolution of regional challenges and assisting Muslim states.

MJ/JG/DT


Source: Iran to Saudis: Don't forsake Muslim unity

 

[Developereo]

I don't want to be a party-pooper, but I don't know how much to trust Ahmedinijad. How much does he actually mean it? and how much is just public relations?

If he is so anti-Israel, why does he do business with India, which has extensive military cooperation with Israel?

 

[A1Kaid]

I don't want to be a party-pooper, but I don't know how much to trust Ahmedinijad. How much does he actually mean it? and how much is just public relations?

If he is so anti-Israel, why does he do business with India, which has extensive military cooperation with Israel?

Currently I'm sure it comes down to national interest, for several decades especially in the past 8-years the US and Europe have been trying to isolate Iran so Iran needs to conduct some sort of business with other countries, and unfortunately they have a friendly diplomatic ties with India.

Though, through the formation of this confederation Muslim countries would rely less on countries hostile to Islam and Muslims and would become more 'self sufficient' this allows us to pursue our own interest.

Hence we could break the ties with nations that are truly against brother Muslim nations.

Though Iran is not the only nation that has friendly diplomatic ties with the enemies of Islam. Pakistan for several decades has cooperated with the US and today has friendly and 'strategic ties' with US, thats just the truth. So just as you pointed out Iran's friendly diplomatic and trade ties with India, Iranians can point out Pakistan's strategic and diplomatic ties with the US, which also happens to bolster Israel.


What we must do is form the confederation become self sufficient and pursue the Islamic/Muslim goals and causes.

 

[araz]

Bhutto was experience politician of international level but lacking in religious knowledge .Bhutto convinced Yahya khan not to invite Sk. Mujeeb who had majority seats ,so he has played role in breaking of Pakistan.

Iran present regime is main hardle in this confederation.

Better idea is restoration of khalafat in all muslim countries then only international comunity will listen our voice.

Bhai
Taking your idea further if we were to declare Khilafat who do you think would be Khalifa? Do you think Maulana fazlur Rehman, or Qazi hussain Ahmed or Mian elder Shareef are suitable for the job? What do you think will happen to this nation when the initial zeal is shed and the realities of this action become apparent to the public? What do you think will happen to the Shia community of pakistan. How will they respond?
In reality it is easy to say these things but when you sit down and sort the nitty gritty out you find really major differences. The Prophet took 23 yrs of hard labour and the strength of his personality to transform the Arabs into a nation of Islam. Do you think we are any better than the ***** Quraish of mekkah.
I dont even know where to start from, but if you have this idea think it through and tell us how you will transform this ***** society into an Islamic one.
WaSalam
Araz

 

[A1Kaid]

I don't want to be a party-pooper, but I don't know how much to trust Ahmedinijad. How much does he actually mean it? and how much is just public relations?

If he is so anti-Israel, why does he do business with India, which has extensive military cooperation with Israel?

"How much does he actually mean it? and how much is just public relations?"-Developereo

Ever heard of Hezbollah? Remember Lebanon, Summer of 2006 c.e.? The epic historical battle between Hezbollah fighters against Israeli military. Iran is supporting Hamas and Hezbollah, they have provided training, money, weaponry, and other military equipment to Hezbollah. Hezbollah brilliantly resisted against Israel and fought the IDF head to head.


Iran also joined Syria in bolstering and supporting Hezbollah in it's war with Israel.

I hope that answers your question.

 

[araz]

I think it would be better for nations that have borders like Pakistan-Iran-Turkey to join together first and let the arab nations make there own union which in time can merge with the Pakistan-Iran-Turkey union.

I think there are serious ideological and strategic differences between the three nations which will pose a lot of problems. Initially pakistan will be pressurized into reneging on this contract by the Americans because of Iran's involvement. Secondly, Iran will have problems because of the Shia Sunni nexus. Thirdly ,the international pressures on turkey will prevent it from a venture of this sort.
Fourthly, if we look at a union, what will be the stance of our neighbours on it. Evenour "Friends" might look down upon us in view of threats of extension of religious extremism.
Then there are issues of how trade will progress. What will we export and import. Will it impact what we produce and what happens where countries compete in the same market. Who will withdraw and who will ensuire that we stick to the bargain.
I think a slow progress on this isuue is the thing to do, to allow people and governments to settle down and not feel threatened. This is the first step. Second one would be to open a trade corridor and reach an agreement on how progress will be made.
I dont think this is as easy as it looks. Muslimns have a tendency to be short sighted whereas the WEST HAS LONG TERM POLICIES WHICH IT PERSUES DILIGENTLY.We need to see through the mist and tace a mutually acceptable course.
Araz

 

[A1Kaid]

Lebanon would be good, not least because it would bring in Arabs and remove any perception of an anti-Arab agenda.

Eventually, I would love to see India and Bangaldesh join the confederation. It would solve the Kashmir problem in a very nice way.

No this is a fundamentally a bad idea. India cannot be allowed to join the confederation, how many plots how many wars against you by India does it take for you to finally come to the conclusion you can never trust them. Hindustan is an enemy of Islam. Also this would ruin the purpose of the confederation "Islamic Unity". Please stay focus on the Muslim and Islamic causes that happen to contradict and go against all the causes and aspirations of the Kaffir world.

Bangladesh, it is difficult to include them because they have no regional border with neither of the 3 senior nations, so it would be very difficult for them to gain the benefits of this confederation as the 3 senior nations. It would be best for Bangladesh to apply for observer status and simply cooperate with the confederation- no rail road connection, no possible motorway or such. Eventually we could talk of it joining the confederation but not in the nearby future (under some circumstance).

 

[Omar1984]

Do you think a confederation with Iran is possible especially knowing Iran's discrimination towards Sunnis and Pakistan is mostly Sunni.

Also Turkey is secular, Pakistan is not secular...however we have excellent relations with Turkey and no problems with Iran.

This train link from Pakistan to Turkey via Iran was meant for trade, business, and more people-to-people contact, not for a confederation but we know eventually all Muslim regions will become one nation under Imam Madhi.

 

[r3alist]

this idea is very appealing however i think we need to provide a stronger cultural basis so as to lay a better foundation for more partnership, remember that the shared european christian identity is what makes the eu strong.

it is for this reason i see a limited future.

turkey is a pro-western, pro-israel nation democracy

iran is a shia theocracy

pakistan is a weak corrupt US sunni satellite



so its plain to see each nation is pushing in different directions and at many juntures we are diametrically opposes to one another, therefore the turks or even the iranian people may not be so keen for one reason or another.


this is ofcourse not a good sign for the future, right now we are united by the threat our shared enemies pose but lets take it in baby steps, economic and cultural trade are great starts, let us help one another prosper.

 

[r3alist]

I think there are serious ideological and strategic differences between the three nations which will pose a lot of problems. Initially pakistan will be pressurized into reneging on this contract by the Americans because of Iran's involvement. Secondly, Iran will have problems because of the Shia Sunni nexus. Thirdly ,the international pressures on turkey will prevent it from a venture of this sort.
Fourthly, if we look at a union, what will be the stance of our neighbours on it. Evenour "Friends" might look down upon us in view of threats of extension of religious extremism.
Then there are issues of how trade will progress. What will we export and import. Will it impact what we produce and what happens where countries compete in the same market. Who will withdraw and who will ensuire that we stick to the bargain.
I think a slow progress on this isuue is the thing to do, to allow people and governments to settle down and not feel threatened. This is the first step. Second one would be to open a trade corridor and reach an agreement on how progress will be made.
I dont think this is as easy as it looks. Muslimns have a tendency to be short sighted whereas the WEST HAS LONG TERM POLICIES WHICH IT PERSUES DILIGENTLY.We need to see through the mist and tace a mutually acceptable course.
Araz

i agree with this.

this is why we need baby steps but this is basically going in the right direction for pakistan imo.

however there are many hurdles, another one is irans close relationship to india, i cannot see them wishing to upset india a great deal, nor as you say will turkey want to upset the west too much.

the sco alerted the west big time, however china and russia are massive strong countries therefore the west could not do much to destablise it.

other than the west; india, the arab countries and russia will be opposed to this becoming too strong, thus we must be careful not to drive other people to our enemies and create a competing bloc by isolating and alienating other nations.

 

[Omar1984]

pakistan is a weak corrupt US sunni satellite

Pakistan is not weak, the government of Pakistan maybe corrupt but the country is not weak.

Pakistan has one of the largest and most powerful armies in the world and is the 7th nuclear power, if Pakistan was weak then India would've taken over Pakistan a long time ago. Remember Indira Gandhi saying that she will throw the two-nation theory down the Indian Ocean, and remember the Indian General in 1965 Indo-Pak war saying that he will have his next drink in Lahore and then invaded Lahore in 1965 and how PAF defeated them, and the indian general's wish couldn't come true.

Pakistan is not weak.