Pakistan and Saudi Arabia-UAE dynamics

[HAIDER]

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia-UAE dynamics
The Saudi-UAE combine is also ostensibly wary of the “Erdogan-effect” on Pakistan


Inam Ul HaqueDecember 16, 2020

The writer is a retired major general and has an interest in International Relations and Political Sociology. He can be reached at tayyarinam@hotmail.com and tweets @20_Inam



Alot has happened, at least in the perceptual domain, since August 27, 2020, when I wrote “The imperatives of Pak-Saudi relations”, published in this space. And perceptions are critical to any relationship. Then… the interdependent nature of our historic and deep-rooted ties was emphasised. However, in the past six months, there have been some defining developments that would continue to underpin Pak-Saudi bilateral ties as long as Mohammed Bin Salman (MBS) holds the reins of the kingdom.
First development concerns Saudi financial package. The $6.2 billion package included $3 billion in cash assistance (with 3.2% interest payable); and $3.2 billion in deferred payment for annual oil and gas supply. The package was for one year with a roll-over option for three years. The kingdom has demanded its money ($3 billion) ahead of the schedule. The oil facility stands suspended.
Pakistan repaid $1 billion to the kingdom in May this year after securing an equal amount in loan from China. And now China has again agreed to provide $1.5 billion, enabling Pakistan to repay the remaining Saudi debt. Pakistan was to retire $1 billion this week. The remaining $1 billion is due in January 2021. The way this issue has been handled, is not pretty.
The second issue concerns worker visas. Though the Saudi Ambassador did clarify last week that the kingdom was deporting all workers — irrespective of nationality — who did not have valid documents; Pakistanis would be disproportionately affected. And if you combine the UAE’s recent denial of visit visas to tourists from some 13 mostly Muslim majority nations including Pakistan, the move creates perceptual misunderstandings.
The third development is the six-day UAE (December 9-10) and KSA (December 13-14) visit by Gen Manoj Mukund Naravane, the Indian Army Chief; the first such visit by an Indian army chief. Gen Naravane’s visit took place immediately after the Indian External Affairs Minister, S Jaishankar’s trips to UAE and Bahrain.
Understandably, India imports 18% of its crude oil requirements from the kingdom, which is India’s fourth-largest trading partner after China, the US and Japan. Both UAE and Saudi Arabia consider India as a major energy consumer and are building a massive $42 billion petrochemical plant in Maharashtra. The Gulf region hosts around 8.5 million Indian workers, with more than 2.7 million in Saudi Arabia alone. Almost 30% of UAE’s total population comprises Indians.
Assertive diplomacy by PM Modi has altered perceptions to an extent where his overtly anti-Muslim policies raise no eyebrows in the Gulf. The Modi government has actively wooed the kingdom, UAE, Oman, Bahrain, and Kuwait. After assuming office in 2014, Modi has visited the GCC countries eight times; UAE thrice and Saudi Arabia twice.
In October 2019, during his Saudi visit, both countries decided to establish the Strategic Partnership Council (SPC); India being the fourth country having strategic partnership with the kingdom after the UK, France, and China. This fits well with the kingdom’s “Vision-2030” roadmap to diversify its economy and better utilise the Khaleeji or Gulf capital, rather than keeping it in Western banks. The kingdom and UAE feel that India is better placed to economically help them given her size, resources and industrial potential.
Militarily, Saudi Arabia and India have formed a Joint Committee on Defence Cooperation (JCDC) with delegation-level visits since 2018. The Royal Saudi Armed Forces officers are to train at Indian defence training institutes. Joint exercises have commenced alongside port calls and plans for joint production of spare parts for naval and land systems.
With UAE, India has a Joint Defence Cooperation Committee (JDCC). Regular joint exercises, visit exchanges, port calls and talks on defence manufacturing and space exploration are underway. India, UAE navies conducted a joint exercise, ‘Gulf Star I’ off the UAE coast in 2018. Their air forces have conducted joint exercises like ‘Desert Eagle II’ at the Al Dhafra Air Base in Abu Dhabi. UAE has shown interest in the Indian military equipment like surface-to-air Akash missile and anti-ship BrahMos cruise missile, besides investment in India’s defense sector such as unmanned platforms, shipbuilding, armoured vehicles, munitions and small arms.
The trio actively collaborates on counterterrorism, intelligence-sharing and coordination.
The continued Saudi/UAE bonhomie with India is construed as hedging against Pakistan. And the “perceived” chasm is linked to Saudi/UAE resentment of Pakistan’s stand-offish Iran policy. Both also accuse Islamabad which — despite liberal financial assistance by Riyadh — did not keep its pledge to “protect Saudi territory” by not militarily joining the Saudi war in Yemen. Details were covered in my article, “The Saudi pivot, Pakistan and Kashmir — is there a chasm?” published in this newspaper on August 12 this year.
The Saudi-UAE combine is also ostensibly wary of the “Erdogan-effect” on Pakistan. After assuming power in 2002, Recep Tayyip Erdogan has visited Pakistan four times. There is growing cultural, defence and diplomatic cooperation between Pakistan and Turkey.
In my August 26 article, I optimistically wrote; “Who knows, an Indo-Saudi warming up may augment Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir.” FM Qureshi’s statement in Beijing after the second round of China-Pakistan Foreign Ministers’ Strategic Dialogue (August 20-21) was construed as a pressure tactic for the Saudi/UAE-dominated OIC to admonish India on Kashmir.
Consequently, the declaration after the 47th Session of the Council of Foreign Ministers at Niamey, Niger (November 27-28, 2020) reiterated “… the OIC’s principled position on Jammu and Kashmir dispute”, calling for peaceful resolution according to the relevant UNSC resolutions. The outcome document in a comprehensive and strongly-worded resolution, included almost all points that Pakistan has been emphasising vis-à-vis Kashmir.
So the strands of Saudi policy gleaned from the above facts smack of a ‘carrot and stick approach’ wherein Saudi Arabia under its Crown Prince — who is in a hurry to redefine the regional order — simultaneously hedges against Pakistan and inclines to pro-Pakistan dynamics.
Though the historic constants of Pak-Saudi bilateralism — like religious affinity, Pakistan being the kingdom’s strategic depth, interdependence, military ties, etc — are in place, these are on hold due to a changed Saudi threat perception. Iran has replaced Israel in the Saudi/UAE threat perception and Israel brings India to the equation. India for its part would like to reduce its oil imports from Iran under the prevailing situation; and given the series of Israeli recognitions, the Saudi-UAE combine would like to rope in India that is closer to Israel.
A Saudi Arabia not sure of its place in the Biden administration is naturally frustrated. Loss of US reliability under Trump and Biden’s stated tough stance leaves the kingdom to look for alternatives.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 17th, 2020.

 

[BATMAN]

When more than 10billlion$ comes as remittance from GCC. Constructing lies against such strategic allies amounts to treason. Considering GCC was helping Pakistan on Kashmir issue relentlessly, specially convincing Trump. While Pakistan continue to support Indian candidate. calling such rulers donkey is insult of donkey.

un diplomatic jibes against KSA by the ruling clergy were as well criticized by opposition leader in Pakistan, but later regime retracted from their statements but unrecoverable damage has been done.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

When more than 10billlion$ comes as remittance from GCC. Constructing lies against such strategic allies amounts to treason. Considering GCC was helping Pakistan on Kashmir issue relentlessly, specially convincing Trump. While Pakistan continue to support Indian candidate. calling such rulers donkey is insult of donkey.

un diplomatic jibes against KSA by the ruling clergy were as well criticized by opposition leader in Pakistan.^, but later regime retracted from their statements but unrecoverable damage has been done.

What GCC countries supporting kashmir issue but tell me when they supported kashmir issue???

 

[El Sidd]

Kulbhashan Yadev network strikes again

 

[Dual Wielder]

What GCC countries supporting kashmir issue but tell me when they supported kashmir issue???

Kashmir is expendable for him, something that he'll gladly sell to please his desert overlords.. thats why he throws a fit all the time when Pak state is trying to follow a sovereign trajectory, for him he rather see Pakistan be used as cannon fodder for Arab despots.

 

[El Sidd]

Kashmir is expendable for him, something that he'll gladly sell to please his desert overlords.. thats why he throws a fit all the time when Pak state is trying to follow a sovereign trajectory, for him he rather see Pakistan be used as cannon fodder for Arab despots.

Why do elements loyal to Iran in Kashmir refuse to sync their efforts with Pakistan?

 

[Stealth_fighter]

These Saudis and UAE ‘S have lost their mind just to save their chairs. They are bringing the Jews and Hindus ( those are two groups that hates Muslims to death) to the holy land . Well they have their plans and Allah has his plans . And he is the provider, Not GCC, not Iran neither USA. Woe to those who cries oh millions are working . Before gulf counties were rich Pakistanis were eating grass ? Have some faith in Allah.

 

[Lincoln]

These Saudis and UAE ‘S have lost their mind just to save their chairs. They are bringing the Jews and Hindus ( those are two groups that hates Muslims to death) to the holy land . Well they have their plans and Allah has his plans . And he is the provider, Not GCC, not Iran neither USA. Woe to those who cries oh millions are working . Before gulf counties were rich Pakistanis were eating grass ? Have some faith in Allah.

Arabia is the holy land? Are you nuts?

 

[khansaheeb]

Tyranny and the Tyrants: lessons unlearned

Human dignity and the realization of human potential require a world free of tyranny. It is a broad and common challenge for the humanity to marginalize tyranny in the world.

www.islamicity.org

Dec 30, 2020 | 15 Jumada Al-Awwal 1442 AH

• Tyranny and the Tyrants: lessons unlearned
  BY: MOHAMMAD OMAR FAROOQ SOURCE: IVIEWS JUL 19, 2003 20 COMMENTS
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The saying goes "history of the world is the world's court of justice."
  Is it true?
  The tyranny of the Red bears in the former Soviet Union has ended. The Taliban grip choking the Afghani people has come loose. The genocidal regime of Pol Pot in Cambodia was thrown out. The Shah of Iran, a puppet dictator planted by the United States, was dethroned. Recently, the menacing statue of Saddam Hussein, the butcher of Baghdad, fell to the ground quite unceremoniously; one more tyrant is gone, along with his symbols.
  These events occurred right before our eyes. As these tyrants and their tyranny find their place in the annals of history, they seem to consistently repeat a common lesson of history, as in the words of George Bernard Shaw: "We learn from history that we learn nothing from history"
  Learning is power. But those who seem to be at the helms of power have little learning, from both the past and the present. Hence, power seems most commonly a source of delusion and a veritable tool of abuse against others, instead of serving as a springboard for positive pursuits.
  Whether it is the world's court of justice or not, history does record rather consistently that tyranny and abusive powers don't last. It is just as true for individual tyrants as it is for tyrannical regimes.
  Empirically speaking, all the empires of the past that were based on tyranny or the abuse of power, subverting the common bond of humanity, have fallen from their heights - sometimes to their nadir or became extinct.
  Egypt is still here, but only with the mark of the Pyramid-high pomp and arrogance left by the Pharaohs, to bask in the old glory. Rome is still as prominent as one of the European cities. As recently as the last century, the ugly face of tyranny resurfaced under Mussolini's fascism, but the Roman Empire, one of the most expansive, aggressive and overpowering ones in history, lives only in the antiquated historical ruins or monuments. Great Britain, the only country that calls itself "Great", is still a world power, but nothing like the overreaching empire, across which a while back in time the sun never set.
  One can argue that some moral determinism or force may have been at work. But that might be an optimistic view; people cannot count on such moral determinism to take care of those power-hungry ones who do not learn from history. Those who wish to leave such matters to the "world court of justice," i.e., history, do not need to bother. Yet those who believe that people have the power to change or to make a difference, have to be proactive.
  As Saddam's regime was undone in Iraq, one must not forget that there are many regimes and governments at the helm of power in their respective countries that are comparably tyrannical, depriving their people of liberty, prosperity, and human dignity. Many of them are understandably nervous, facing the potential dual wrath from their own people on one hand and the liberator (?) of this century led by the Bush regime, on another.
  Whether the tyrannical, unIslamic and unrepresentative rulers are in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt or Pakistan, they know that they are sitting on catbird seats. Tyranny in these societies has a strong internal root, based on the theological trap that people are supposed to obey whoever is in power and that power is given by God. Such dysfunctional notions have taken firm root in the orthodox Islamic theology, legal discourse, and the psyche of common people. The Qur'an, of course, rejects any fatalistic and passive outlook or position in this regard.
  Seeking change does not mean seeking or resorting to violence, but proactive effort to bring about positive change at all levels, individual and collective, is at the core of the message of the Qur'an. While the Qur'an takes the tyrants and abusers of power to task and repudiates their legitimacy and power, it also emboldens and empowers those who think that they are weak and powerless.
  However, the fall of a tyrant, as in the case of Saddam Hussein, does not confirm the end of tyranny either in Iraq or among its neighbors. While the real reason for which America invaded Iraq without any international mandate may be unclear, the reasons for which it did not invade are not so unclear. Democratization or true liberation of Iraq is not one of those reasons. A similar approach has not been taken in a SINGLE country or region except for in Europe, as American Marshall Plan helped rebuild Europe and Japan and firmly implanted democracy after the World War II.
  In Vietnam, America got involved in a war of its own making. In Iran, contravening all moral and legal norms, it toppled a constitutionally elected government and installed its own puppet regime. In Afghanistan it used the Afghan people to kick out the former Soviet forces and then abandoned the same folks amidst ruins, only to return later to further level the country. In Pakistan, it stood by a genocidal regime in 1971 and even sent its 7th Fleet in support, as that regime pulled off a genocide of millions of people in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and force-converted 10 million people into refugees, seeking shelter in India.
  If there is a single, overtly denuded manifestation of hypocrisy in the US foreign policy, it is its lopsided engagement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, causing further and sustained suffering, alienation, and radicalization of the Palestinian people. Expecting any genuine democracy, other than a possible puppet regime in a democratic cloak in Iraq, would defy the long-standing and consistent relevant record of the US. Thus, departure of tyrants, especially former bedfellows of America, may not mean a complete deliverance from tyranny--in Iraq or anywhere else.
  The world is well aware that Saddam Hussain, one of the worst dictators of our time, has been a buddy of USA, when USA helped and used Iraq in the war against Iran. Saddam and his regime were no different at that time, except one factor: that is, the US at that time needed to use the Bathist dictator of Iraq. Now, the consideration has changed, and America has made an example out of the removal of him and his repressive regime. The message: a similar fate may await other tyrants if they don't tow the line of the greater powers. Of course, the role of superpowers has nothing to do with tyranny!
  Would the other tyrants in the region evaluate the unlearned lessons of history? It would be nice to have the history's most common lesson proven wrong, but it is very unlikely. Tyrants and regimes don't change personalities. In case of the contemporary tyrants and regimes of tyranny, there is an additional complicating factor. These are not independent tyrants. Most of them are installed, facilitated, or protected by the greater powers of our time. When the interest of these greater powers would dictate, such tyrants would go, as it happened in case of the regime in Iraq.
  Moreover, there is a further sinister dimension. It is expected and desired that the forces proclaiming democracy, justice and human rights should be sincerely and actively working toward spreading the same to the rest of the world. That does not seem to be the case. Whether the role of France in Algeria or that of the USA around the world, these democratic countries have a consistent pattern of conduct based more on narrow, misdirected national interest than on any principle that they supposedly uphold for their own nations. Thus, as anomalous as it may appear, USA seems to have been naturally comfortable with the autocratic regimes in the Middle East, Asia, Africa or Central/Latin America. This makes doubly difficult the challenge for people of many of these countries to overcome the tyrannical systems and environments.
  Yet, history is full of human achievements in terms of mankind's ability to bring about positive changes while facing significant odds. People in the Muslim world as well as elsewhere must pursue such positive changes. "Verily never will God change the condition of a people until they change it themselves (with their own souls)..." [13/ar-Raad/11] In seeking such changes, people can't count on history as the "court" to take care of tyranny and the tyrants. Unfortunately, given the contemporary global power structure that regards Islam as a threat to it and its interests, the bigger powers of our time are not interested in democracy, especially in the Muslim world, since they perceive that the democratic process would facilitate the emergence of those to power who are committed to Islam.
  
  Yet, for Muslims, at least, seeking positive changes is both a human and religious quest - for their own betterment and hopefully for the betterment of the humanity. To achieve this, several factors are important.
  First, even though throughout the history, many notable Islamic scholars and jurisprudents had repudiated tyranny, the practical undertone of the classical and orthodox Islamic theology and jurisprudence has been an accommodating attitude toward tyranny and the tyrants. Muwayia was legitimized. Then, even Yazid was legitimized. After that, theology and jurisprudence kept adjusting in tandem to accommodate almost anyone who was able to grab the power. This was inconsistent with what Islam stands for.
  Based on the vision, ideals and principles laid down by the Qur'an and on the struggle as exemplified in the life of the Prophet Muhammad and all other prophets before, tyranny must be categorically repudiated and tyrants must be regarded as illegitimate and illegal. In classical Islamic discourses, fearing violence and anarchy, such repudiation of the established authorities - even when it involved tyrants - has been broadly discouraged, or even disapproved. However, this is a gross misunderstanding regarding the issue. Repudiating and challenging tyranny and tyrants do not necessarily have to involve violence and the result does not have to be anarchy. The Prophet's methodology of repudiation and challenge against the existing power structure of his time did not involve violence on the part of Muslims. Without having our head and heart clear - that to Muslims, tyranny is intolerable like all other harams (prohibited) - we can't expect the desired change. The norms and ideals that Muslims should seek are peace and justice for all. "Let there be no hostility except against those who practice tyranny or oppression." [2/al-Baqara/193] As this verse indicates, there should not be any tolerance for tyranny. Making peace with tyranny is self-defeating. However, intolerance toward tyranny does not and should not necessarily mean violence. The pursuit of change has to be in a creative, constructive, systematic and determined manner.
  Secondly, Muslims should neither cause any tyranny nor allow themselves to be tyrannized. Toward that end, Muslims need to work against tyranny and tyrants for the freedom of their own as well as of others.
  When we treat this issue as a matter of principle, a broad common ground can be found with the rest of the humanity, much of which also suffers from tyranny. Human dignity and the realization of human potential require a world free of tyranny. It is a broad and common challenge for the humanity to marginalize tyranny in the world. However, effectively meeting such a challenge requires that we all intellectually and spiritually reorient ourselves to stand up for justice and freedom.
  Courtesy: The Message International (monthly)
  
  
  
  Category: Life & Society, Middle East
  Topics: History, Iraq, Saddam HusseinViews: 6284
  
  
  
  

 

[TNT]

Saudi /UAE policy with Pakistan changed after nawaz govt denied military assistance openly through parliament and embarrassed them. I think Pakistan should have agreed to limited military assistance through our navy. There was no harm and we could have benefited alot.

 

[El Sidd]

Saudi /UAE policy with Pakistan changed after nawaz govt denied military assistance openly through parliament and embarrassed them. I think Pakistan should have agreed to limited military assistance through our navy. There was no harm and we could have benefited alot.

Nawaz government was told by the establishment to take the matter to the parliament where it would have an excuse of greater national consensus while everybody knows Pakistan never has a functional parliament.

I hope this government keeps up her promise of not getting involved in foreign wars read Iran here.

 

[fitpOsitive]

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia-UAE dynamics
The Saudi-UAE combine is also ostensibly wary of the “Erdogan-effect” on Pakistan


Inam Ul HaqueDecember 16, 2020

The writer is a retired major general and has an interest in International Relations and Political Sociology. He can be reached at tayyarinam@hotmail.com and tweets @20_Inam



Alot has happened, at least in the perceptual domain, since August 27, 2020, when I wrote “The imperatives of Pak-Saudi relations”, published in this space. And perceptions are critical to any relationship. Then… the interdependent nature of our historic and deep-rooted ties was emphasised. However, in the past six months, there have been some defining developments that would continue to underpin Pak-Saudi bilateral ties as long as Mohammed Bin Salman (MBS) holds the reins of the kingdom.
First development concerns Saudi financial package. The $6.2 billion package included $3 billion in cash assistance (with 3.2% interest payable); and $3.2 billion in deferred payment for annual oil and gas supply. The package was for one year with a roll-over option for three years. The kingdom has demanded its money ($3 billion) ahead of the schedule. The oil facility stands suspended.
Pakistan repaid $1 billion to the kingdom in May this year after securing an equal amount in loan from China. And now China has again agreed to provide $1.5 billion, enabling Pakistan to repay the remaining Saudi debt. Pakistan was to retire $1 billion this week. The remaining $1 billion is due in January 2021. The way this issue has been handled, is not pretty.
The second issue concerns worker visas. Though the Saudi Ambassador did clarify last week that the kingdom was deporting all workers — irrespective of nationality — who did not have valid documents; Pakistanis would be disproportionately affected. And if you combine the UAE’s recent denial of visit visas to tourists from some 13 mostly Muslim majority nations including Pakistan, the move creates perceptual misunderstandings.
The third development is the six-day UAE (December 9-10) and KSA (December 13-14) visit by Gen Manoj Mukund Naravane, the Indian Army Chief; the first such visit by an Indian army chief. Gen Naravane’s visit took place immediately after the Indian External Affairs Minister, S Jaishankar’s trips to UAE and Bahrain.
Understandably, India imports 18% of its crude oil requirements from the kingdom, which is India’s fourth-largest trading partner after China, the US and Japan. Both UAE and Saudi Arabia consider India as a major energy consumer and are building a massive $42 billion petrochemical plant in Maharashtra. The Gulf region hosts around 8.5 million Indian workers, with more than 2.7 million in Saudi Arabia alone. Almost 30% of UAE’s total population comprises Indians.
Assertive diplomacy by PM Modi has altered perceptions to an extent where his overtly anti-Muslim policies raise no eyebrows in the Gulf. The Modi government has actively wooed the kingdom, UAE, Oman, Bahrain, and Kuwait. After assuming office in 2014, Modi has visited the GCC countries eight times; UAE thrice and Saudi Arabia twice.
In October 2019, during his Saudi visit, both countries decided to establish the Strategic Partnership Council (SPC); India being the fourth country having strategic partnership with the kingdom after the UK, France, and China. This fits well with the kingdom’s “Vision-2030” roadmap to diversify its economy and better utilise the Khaleeji or Gulf capital, rather than keeping it in Western banks. The kingdom and UAE feel that India is better placed to economically help them given her size, resources and industrial potential.
Militarily, Saudi Arabia and India have formed a Joint Committee on Defence Cooperation (JCDC) with delegation-level visits since 2018. The Royal Saudi Armed Forces officers are to train at Indian defence training institutes. Joint exercises have commenced alongside port calls and plans for joint production of spare parts for naval and land systems.
With UAE, India has a Joint Defence Cooperation Committee (JDCC). Regular joint exercises, visit exchanges, port calls and talks on defence manufacturing and space exploration are underway. India, UAE navies conducted a joint exercise, ‘Gulf Star I’ off the UAE coast in 2018. Their air forces have conducted joint exercises like ‘Desert Eagle II’ at the Al Dhafra Air Base in Abu Dhabi. UAE has shown interest in the Indian military equipment like surface-to-air Akash missile and anti-ship BrahMos cruise missile, besides investment in India’s defense sector such as unmanned platforms, shipbuilding, armoured vehicles, munitions and small arms.
The trio actively collaborates on counterterrorism, intelligence-sharing and coordination.
The continued Saudi/UAE bonhomie with India is construed as hedging against Pakistan. And the “perceived” chasm is linked to Saudi/UAE resentment of Pakistan’s stand-offish Iran policy. Both also accuse Islamabad which — despite liberal financial assistance by Riyadh — did not keep its pledge to “protect Saudi territory” by not militarily joining the Saudi war in Yemen. Details were covered in my article, “The Saudi pivot, Pakistan and Kashmir — is there a chasm?” published in this newspaper on August 12 this year.
The Saudi-UAE combine is also ostensibly wary of the “Erdogan-effect” on Pakistan. After assuming power in 2002, Recep Tayyip Erdogan has visited Pakistan four times. There is growing cultural, defence and diplomatic cooperation between Pakistan and Turkey.
In my August 26 article, I optimistically wrote; “Who knows, an Indo-Saudi warming up may augment Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir.” FM Qureshi’s statement in Beijing after the second round of China-Pakistan Foreign Ministers’ Strategic Dialogue (August 20-21) was construed as a pressure tactic for the Saudi/UAE-dominated OIC to admonish India on Kashmir.
Consequently, the declaration after the 47th Session of the Council of Foreign Ministers at Niamey, Niger (November 27-28, 2020) reiterated “… the OIC’s principled position on Jammu and Kashmir dispute”, calling for peaceful resolution according to the relevant UNSC resolutions. The outcome document in a comprehensive and strongly-worded resolution, included almost all points that Pakistan has been emphasising vis-à-vis Kashmir.
So the strands of Saudi policy gleaned from the above facts smack of a ‘carrot and stick approach’ wherein Saudi Arabia under its Crown Prince — who is in a hurry to redefine the regional order — simultaneously hedges against Pakistan and inclines to pro-Pakistan dynamics.
Though the historic constants of Pak-Saudi bilateralism — like religious affinity, Pakistan being the kingdom’s strategic depth, interdependence, military ties, etc — are in place, these are on hold due to a changed Saudi threat perception. Iran has replaced Israel in the Saudi/UAE threat perception and Israel brings India to the equation. India for its part would like to reduce its oil imports from Iran under the prevailing situation; and given the series of Israeli recognitions, the Saudi-UAE combine would like to rope in India that is closer to Israel.
A Saudi Arabia not sure of its place in the Biden administration is naturally frustrated. Loss of US reliability under Trump and Biden’s stated tough stance leaves the kingdom to look for alternatives.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 17th, 2020.

Muhammad bin Salman is the only guy in Saudia who now hates Pakistan.
Everyone else is as friend as in past.
Pakistan must do something here. We can't let an all weather friend like that..

 

[El Sidd]

Muhammad bin Salman is the only guy in Saudia who now hates Pakistan.

Is that why he keeps Pakistani friends closer to him than others?

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Saudis and UAE are on a collision course as we speak.. not because of pakistan or iran but because of Trumps loss and burden of islamic world.
They have developed major differences on yemen where UAE backed STC is undermining Saudis backed Yemeni govt. Also saudis have backtracked from recognising Yahudi state. Recent qatar-saudi rapprochement and exchange of messages with Turkey on key matters are a sign of it.. As for UAE they have no choice, with a crumbling economy and a rising Pakistani/Chinese alternate port it seriously needs assurances which it gets from yahood at a cost of its diminishing stature. Apart from the crumbling economy, Beirut incident and a series of fires across gcc was the biggest scare for UAE to be the trailblazer..

 

[fitpOsitive]

Is that why he keeps Pakistani friends closer to him than others?

For example.