These are very sane suggestions. Judging by what you've said, it seems you and I are on the same page about what we'd like to achieve.
Peace above all, with as little of a cost as possible. And at the same time maintain relations with all, and help build relations if the time should come with all parties and help them build relations with each other.
I've seen the wrong motivation in this debate too, the wrong pro-interventionist motivation is purely to uphold relations, to please the GCC and to act upon understated threats, or to involve ourselves simply because of us seem to have weird complexes when it comes to Arabs. The wrong motivation for staying out as much as possible, is the anti-GCC approach, most of our liberals, yours truly included might not see some aspects of our affairs with these countries as too good a thing. The idea that we should chose between Iran and the Saudis is also false.
Now, the proper motivation in my mind is as stated above; peace, easy and cheap, painless, while still maintaining if not improving relations.
I think it would not be a bad or unreasonable thing to send troops to Saudi territory, away from any fighting, no fighting role, no aid to the war effort besides 'peacekeeping', symbolic placement of troops, maintaining some sort of idea of security of the Saudi state without getting ourselves involved in the war effort. Not even such simple a thing as logistical support.
When considering the Pak army's role in KSA, and their armed forces, many of our men current and former have been involved in training there among other roles, so a symbolic deployment of a small force should not be looked at with as much hostility.
However, I would like to see Pakistan maintain the image of neutrality, with this we should be looking for what little ties we have with Iran and their affiliates to help come to a peaceful revolution. And with troop deployment and over stated commitment to the Saudis might compromise any such position Pakistan may be willing to pursue.
Now here I have to start dealing with ground realities of the war itself, whether or not we extend such symbolic gestures.
The GCC will be fighting an insurgency in foreign land, they have the money for it and the capacity in terms of fuel. However, what they do not have is the numbers for any large scale deployment, I do not see effective deployment of numbers following the bombing even with combined armies of those involved. These armies are also not mature in this field, they have not fought much at all, and they certainly have not seen anything like combating an insurgency which is a different beast. The Houthis are not to be underestimated, their numbers are very convincing.
The numbers they can field are not convincing for their role. What have we in Pakistan learnt for the war here, and the war just next to us? To combat an insurgency like this you need to have enough combat troops for combat roles deployed to maintain a very healthy ratio for the size of the area they are tasked to deal with, and a very healthy ratio for the size of the foe they are tasked to take on. I may add here, that the hard part of this not winning territory, and pushing them back a few months from now, no that's easy. Holding, and making a lasting presence is an impossible task, I can say with confidence that IF the Houthis have real local support, IF they are playing the sectarian game, and if the Saudis play that game too... If that happens, expect years of war and years of deployment. Again conditions along with casualties in general that I do not believe the GCC militarises can sustain.
If the war takes a sectarian turn, which it undeniably did, long, long ago. This was will be far uglier, Iraq should be a fine example. And under this condition, I do not see even our intervention or even US intervention any good, this will make the war unwinnable.
With that in mind, I am dead-set against any combat roles inside Yemen for our boys, not even active support.
I agree with the rest, efforts to cool the situation and look after humanitarian interests is both right and within our interests.
We can't pretend relations with these countries is not important to us. It is important to us, and some degree of involvement, even if it's as neutral as possible, with the overall aim of peace, acceptable and agreeable for most if not all, is not a bad way to go.
This is however, me being optimistic. The chances of finding peaceful resolutions of this sort in the Middle East are not likely at all.
