Geopolitics of GCC+ region

[kalu_miah]

My earlier prediction was that GCC+ will remain and integrate with regional unions in Eurasian land mass. But considering the continuing influence of Arab Nationalism, I think the following is a more likely scenario:

- Asia will integrate in two areas, East and South East Asia (ASEAN+), Central and West Asia (Eurasia+)
- GCC+ will not integrate with Central and West Asia
- instead GCC+ will integrate with Maghreb region in North Africa under Arab League
- Arab League will integrate with Sub-saharan countries in a combined African Union-GCC+
- Sub-saharan countries have following regional efforts:
African Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the Arab Maghreb Union (UMA)
the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)
the Community of Sahel-Saharan States (CEN-SAD)
the East African Community (EAC)
the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS)
the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC)

Iraq will be partitioned along Shia, Sunni and Kurdish population centers. Only Sunni part will become part of GCC+ while Shia and Kurdish part will become independent and remain with other regional unions in Eurasian landmass, together with Iran and Turkey.

Simiarly Syria will be partitioned along Kurdish and Arab lines. Kurdish part will join independent Kurdistan. The Arab part will become an integral part of GCC+. Alawite Latakia may become independent and remain with Eurasia+.

So the current conflict in the region can be looked at as a struggle to define a border between two great continental group of nations, Africa-GCC+ and Eurasia+.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180767-geopolitics-eurasia-region-2.html#post3916234

 

[kalu_miah]

GCC need to rethink their strategy in Syria. Spreading intolerant Salafi extremism in Arab and Muslim world is the main issue that need to be reconsidered.

Once in Afghan theatre GCC and US promoted and used this ideology to defeat Soviets. But the result was not good, not for Afghanistan, Pakistan or the US, which had to suffer blowback and engage in GWOT to defeat these forces which turned against the US/West. Now, justifiably the US/West have reservations to commit the same mistake twice.

Qaradawi calling for Sunni unity is a positive step, but what people like him need to understand is that Shia unity is a reality today, because of strategic steps Iranians took for decades to reach the result they have today. And other than Hezbollah killing US soldiers in Lebanese soil, they never engaged in indiscriminate terrorism against the West in Western soil, which the likes of OBL and Zawahiri engaged in and still do, as long as they are alive that is. Sunni's need to give up on Salafi extremist nonsense, start with GFC idea to reach a consensus and then need to invest in each other to empower their ranks and reach unity:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...slamic-extremism-global-fiqh-council-gfc.html

Also, the other points to consider for GCC are following:

- Eurasia+ region has its own dynamics, where China ally's with Russia and Iran, so both Turkey and Pakistan has to be careful about any steps they take to side with GCC, since their future national interest is intimately tied with Eurasia+
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180767-geopolitics-eurasia-region-3.html
- both Turkey and Pakistan have significant Shia or Shia-leaning minority (Alevi's in Turkey), so any overt support or involvement in Syria war may destabilize these countries
- Turkey also has a strong secular minority who are against Islamism, they also do not want to have anything to do with Salafism or Salafi led Islamism
- ASEAN+ region has about 400 million Muslims (Indonesia, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Brunei where they are majority). There is little Shia presence here. They are mostly allied with US/West and share's US/West allergy of intolerant Salafi extremism
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180755-geopolitics-asean-region.html
- Africa has about 400-500 million Muslims, mostly Sunni, but here also people do not like Salafism, although it made some in roads in Somalia, Mali and Nigeria and caused a lot of grief there
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180774-geopolitics-african-union.html

So GCC in their long term struggle against a united Shia force under Qom, may be able to find alliances with Sunni populations, mainly in ASEAN+ and Africa, but not much in Eurasia+, in my opinion. And of course Africa includes mostly Sunni Arab north Africa, where Egypt is the key heavy weight country. But this unity has to be under a tolerant Sunni ideology regardless of Madhab, this unity cannot be reached under intolerant Salafi extremism.

 

[kalu_miah]

How Obama crossed his own line on Syria after months of debate | Reuters

This article clearly shows that Obama was following a wrong strategy in Syria and finally came to terms with the reality there. His other policies and strategy in Afghanistan (the surge) and in Pakistan (drone attacks) shows that he has a very superficial understanding of geopolitics, despite all the experts on international affairs (many of whom are not much better) he has access to.

 

[kalu_miah]

Asia pivot step one: ease Gulf worries

 

[kalu_miah]

At the beginning of the Syrian spring, when Assad has not yet commenced on his killing spree, there was an opportunity to negotiate a partition of Syria, where Christians, Alawites and Kurds could possibly get small state-lets, as protectorates of Turkey and thus create a coastal corridor where even whole or parts of Shiite and Christian parts of Lebanon could come under Turkish protection. But by taking up the sword, both Syrian and Lebanese minorities may have committed suicide and buried that possibility forever.

For the future, the Syrian majority Sunni's need to keep a door open for the minorities, so the conflict can be ended sooner than later. When their back is against the wall, the Alawites, the Christians and the Hezbollah will fight to death. What is needed is a solid promise for them to live as dignified minorities and only the criminals who took part in war crimes to be punished in a proper due process, rather than summary justice and revenge killings. Difficult as it may sound, this I believe will minimize the chances of a fighting to death scenario and will be helpful for an early fall and surrender of the Assad regime.

 

[kalu_miah]

cross posted from another thread:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/middle...etter-signed-76-lawmakers-21.html#post4610125

What about Saudi Arabia meddling in Pakistan and controlling the politics there?

The Saudis are long accustomed to having a significant role in Pakistan's affairs. A 2007 cable recounts a boast of the Saudi ambassador to the U.S., Adel al-Jubeir, who is reportedly a close confidant of King Abdullah: "We in Saudi Arabia are not observers in Pakistan, we are participants."

Read more: WikiLeaks Reveals Saudi Arabia's Role in Pakistani Affairs - TIME


What about Saudi Arabia interfering in Afghanistan ( a Persian country) in the 1980's?

The Taliban is an Islamic fundamentalist political movement in Afghanistan. It spread into Afghanistan and formed a government, ruling as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from September 1996 until December 2001, with Kandahar as the capital. However, it gained diplomatic recognition from only three states: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

Taliban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good questions. First of all you need to understand my complete world view and thought process, before making shallow judgement like I am ideological. I have given some links in previous posts, you can go through them to get a glimpse.

What I believe is good for people in these regions are regional integration of greater GCC region in GCC+ (and Arab League in the future) and greater Eurasia region in Eurasia+. Any actions by a state that is hampering these integration processes, I would consider those actions as negative.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180771-geopolitics-gcc-region.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180767-geopolitics-eurasia-region.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/164048-kalu_miahs-new-world-order-road-map-future.html

For centuries under Ottoman, Iraq was an integral part of the Arab world and Sunni's were dominant there. Kingdom of Iraq and then Bath party rule was a continuation of that. If Iraq was integrated with greater GCC and eventually in an Arab League, which is majority Sunni, then Shia majority Iraqi's would not get the chance to get the upper hand.

But before this integration could happen, the theocracy came to power in Iran in 1979 and then decided to take advantage of the fault line in Iraqi demographics of Shia majority. Saddam tried to preempt it, the result is Iraq-Iran war and then he was foolish enough to threaten the Gulf Monarchs, invading Kuwait, inviting the US led first Gulf war. He was still considered a threat by Neocons and they took advantage of the 9/11 incident and launched 2nd Gulf war to remove him and thus handing one of the greatest geopolitical victory to Iran in a silver platter. Now Iraq is ruled by the Shia majority, as it should be in any democracy.

What is the long term result of this fiasco? These actions triggered by the theocracy of Iran and then completed by USA invasion of Iraq in 2003, brings Shia majority to power in Iraq. But Iraq happens to be a country that is 75% Arab (Shia and Sunni):
Demographics of Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iraqi Arabs 75%, Kurds 17%, Turkmen 3%, Assyrians 2%, Persians 2%,
Other 1% [3] (Armenians , Chechens, Circassians, Egyptians, Palestinians, Shabaks).

So it is natural that they will stay with Arab League and perhaps will become a part of it in the future. But with these events since 1979, the future of Iraq is now in limbo. I believe one of two things will happen because of the destabilization since 1979:

1. Iraq will partition in 3 parts, the Shia part will become a satellite state of Iran, the Kurdish part will become a satellite state of Turkey and the Sunni part will become a satellite state of GCC or greater GCC which in part is a smaller part of greater Arab League

2. But partitioning countries are no joke, a better alternative is for Iraq to stay united and continue with its original path of integration with Arab League or parts of it (GCC), this is the path I recommend for Iraq, but unfortunate it has become very difficult as Iraqi Shia's now will fear to integrate with a majority Sunni Arab League and may choose to go with No. 1

This is the crux of the problem that the Iranian theocracy have created with unexpected help (blunder of idiots in state department) from neocons/zionists.

Now please compare that to KSA activities in Sunni majority countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan. KSA went there as a helper to the main driver USA, to prevent Soviet expansion and drive towards southern sea ports. I think KSA's concern was partly due to Iran's activities in these countries as well as to stop spreading of "god-less" communism in these domains, which is anathema to all Muslims, Shia and Sunni. Yes it created havoc for few decades, but now that chapter is almost over. Communism and Soviet Union are both dead.

Now, if and only if, the theocracy in Iran decides to stop their export of Shia extremism, then I believe the reaction from other sources to counter these efforts will reduce, sectarianism based on extremism will reduce and it will become easier for Eurasian economic integration, which is good for Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and former soviet countries. The ball is in your court my dear sister.

 

[kalu_miah]

Relevant threads:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/middle-east-africa/273947-oic-military-industrial-complex-oicmic.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-far-east/275741-could-japan-developing-nuclear-weapons.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangladesh-defence/275937-japanese-plan-indian-ocean-bangladesh.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-far-east/276839-japan-s-diplomatic-agenda-asia-pacific.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/middle-east-africa/276175-japanese-south-korean-fighter-planes.html

 

[kalu_miah]

Cross posted from another thread:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/arab-d...hief-bandar-bin-sultan-insults-qataris-2.html

I think it is possible to make changes in small ways, without rocking the boat too much. We don't need to go for big unions initially, that may sound threatening to US and others.

The way forward is to work on joint projects and develop a common military hardware specification and platform.

The problem for us is that most Muslim countries are either too small or even we are big in population, we have negligible resources.

You saw that I made a very specific proposal about 5th gen. fighter project. This could be a first step. GCC countries could get together and make a decision to invest lets say 20 billion in this joint 5th gen. fighter project, with Japan, Turkey and South Korea as tech partners, whereas Indonesia and GCC states will share financing as well as buy a number of these planes:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/middle...outh-korean-fighter-planes-7.html#post4754494

And then behind the scenes, we could start working on ASEAN+ idea:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180755-geopolitics-asean-region.html
Perhaps GCC+ ideas will be ready when we have made some progress on ASEAN+. All diplomatic work could be done within the framework of bilateral relations or changes in ASEAN membership etc.

All elements are there to get it done. If I am in touch with the right person, I could share ideas to proceed. For a thousand mile journey, there is always the first step that has to be taken.

Unity is a good sounding word, but it does not mean much, unless it brings concrete benefits. That is why I mentioned concrete projects, where all sides can benefit, such as the 5th gen. fighter project. And unity should be for not just Muslim countries, we need unity of small nations of the world.

I do not think Shia and Sunni will unite, at least not Iran. Iran has backing of Russia and China. At this juncture of history you can work only between Muslim and other nations that are under Western umbrella or at least friendly with the West. So Iraq is a possibility. Iran is a pariah state under Western sanctions, so they are out of question. All nations I mentioned are in the Western camp:

- Japan, South Korea - has technology and industrial base and has ATD-X and KAI-KFX project
- Turkey - inferior to above, but still has minimum tech and industrial base and the highest in this regard among Muslim countries, thinking of spending $120 billion total for TAI-TFX project
- Indonesia - biggest Muslim country, medium economy and has some defense budget, already promised to support 20% of KAI-KFX project
- GCC states has Sovereign Wealth Fund worth around $2 trillion and they are ready market for about 400 fighters

If GCC states approach the 4 countries above with a proposal to bring the 3 (ATD-X, KFX and TFX) separate projects into one common project, on condition that Japan rewrites its constitution removing export restriction of weapon, then I think we have win-win among all these countries. Will the US want to put road block, sure. But when so many of US allies want to do a common shared project and its not something illegal, it is free trade after all, then I doubt they can stop it, if there is public and govt. support from the countries involved.

Both Russia and China are important for Muslims, no question. Specially once US led NATO looses their looming cold war with China, which will happen in 2-4 decades.

But before that point, essentially most of us are in the US led NATO camp and we should make the most of it, transferring and developing as much indigenous technology as possible. Japan and South Korea are also in US camp, mainly because they are threatened by China and by the little Chinese pet poodle or pit bull, North Korea. What is special about Japan and South Korea is that they have highly developed industrial base, even much more advanced than China or Russia.

So right now before us there is this opportunity to bring all these countries together combining ATD-X, TFX and KFX projects, make it into a single project with fighters of two different price levels, thus save money and at the same time develop a common standard for many small nations of the world. Similar projects can be looked at for Tanks, Howitzers, APC etc. If many of these small nations can have the same military hardware, then it will be easier for these nations to create new Asian security alliances like NATO.

As for Bangladesh, may be we will buy a few dozen of the cheaper version of the plane ($50 million a piece) and some associated UCAV's. The main thing we would be interested in is a new alliance bloc called ASEAN+ (ASEAN+Japan+South Korea+North Korea+Bangladesh+Sri Lanka+PNG+East Timor), under US Asia pivot plan, so many of these countries can be efficiently managed by Japan and Korean personnel. This Japan led independent power bloc with large 400 million Muslim population (Indonesia+Malaysia+Brunei+Bangladesh) can easily become more independent of China and also provide security guarantee for GCC states and thus reduce the need for dependence on the USA. This will then help GCC to integrate more and become like a single state from Iraq to Yemen and also help Arab states in Maghreb to integrate their roads, railways and economies.

Pakistan is very close to China and shares many technical partnership with China, so I am not sure if they would like to participate in these projects, jeopardizing their good relations with China.

 

[Asian.Century]

Iran and Pakistan are not part of GCC or Middle east, but Pakistan was made part of Greater Middle east by US Central Command.