Albatross
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,161
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Pakistan is a strange country. I say this not in a negative sense, but because I'm simply baffled. Almost 67 years have passed since its geographical inception on 14 August 1947. To date, the country is still going through a wave of internal turmoil.
Factually speaking, Pakistan is still the only nuclear-armed Muslim state in the world. It is both a source of power and subsequently, equally greater responsibility. It is this robust defence and security structure of Pakistan which lends credence to its influential position in regional affairs, particularly in the MENA and South Asian zones.
In the perspective of Muslim/Islamic states, Pakistan has enjoyed cordial and oft-times turbulent relations with all, especially ideological archrivals Iran and Saudi Arabia. Successive governments in Pakistan, irrespective of their specific predominant leanings, have made sure they do not disrupt the equilibrium of ties with these two countries. It is for this reason several academics in the field of international relations have dubbed Pakistan as a country which has the power to balance affairs between these disputing states by acting as a sort of "third party mediator".
However, the situation changed especially because of the so-called "Arab Spring". The toppling of regimes previously considered legitimate by segments of people in MENA paved the way for a free-for-all loot bazar in which Saudi Arabia and Iran took turns to establish their ideological dominance, both overtly and covertly. We have seen in the case of Syria how Riyadh and Tehran both have waged their wars on foreign soil. This is the modus operandi of these countries who ironically accuse "foreign elements" trying to sabotage their own peace and stability. The only comment which one can make on this is, "As you sow, so shall you reap!".
The "awakening" movements took place elsewhere as well, including Libya, Tunisia and Yemen. Egypt has managed to control this transformation courtesy of its powerful military.
In Pakistan, although the ouster of Morsi did trigger a nationwide resentment visible in the form of protests, etc. mostly by a mainstream politico-religious party, it never really instigated a particular sectarian community. This is because Sunnis and Shias in Pakistan both were mostly in favor of Morsi and more so angry towards a "dictator" (referring to Field Marshal Abdel Fattah el-Sisi). This is primarily because a majority of Pakistanis still resent the dictatorships which took over in their own country. Moreover, Iran and Saudi Arabia both supported Morsi in principle until Saudi Arabia got a whiff of the fact that Morsi was still a mere puppet for the Muslim Brotherhood which Riyadh sees as a threat (it's ally Qatar believes otherwise).
But anyhow, that phase came and passed by without must disruption. However, Syria's case is totally different: It is an Arab country, yes, but one with an Alawite (Shia) government led by Bashar al-Assad with an opposition comprising Sunnis and Wahhabis. Something similar is taking place in Sunni-led Bahrain where the Shias are revolting against the Sunni regime in Manama. In both cases, Arab Gulf states and Iran are battling out their ideologies to take control over pieces of land.
Pakistan has always been demonized for not allaying concerns of Arab Gulf states and Iran. Perhaps no other country has been this mishandled than Pakistan, not even Lebanon. Pakistan's social structure comprises of powerful, educated and influential Sunnis, Wahhabis and Shias, besides people of other schools of thought and religions/beliefs. What Pakistan has failed to properly establish is its national identity. It is indeed proclaimed through speeches and documents but the reality is very grim. Fact is, because of this identity vacuum, one which could provide a unifying force for the populace, the only factor which Pakistanis adhere to next is a uniquely perplexing web of politico-socio-economic-sectarian beliefs.
This is why there are two predominant, opposing geopolitical camps in Pakistan: One that is pro-Gulf and another that is pro-Iran. The debate has been raging for hours on end on domestic media about why the mysterious aid was given by an unnamed Arab country to Pakistan ($1.5 billion). The pro-Iran camp in Pakistan is head over heels not only on this particular issue, but also on the surprise visit of the King of Bahrain. Similarly, the pro-Gulf lobby in Pakistan expressed resentment over Iran's growing relations with Pakistan, especially regarding the IP Gas Pipeline deal.
Pakistan has emphasized time and again that it will never take sides on the Syrian crisis, and rightly so. Analysts consider this another Foreign Office bluff, but I believe the diplomatic corps is fully aware of the fact that if any specific policy favoring either the Arab or Iranian camp is promoted or adopted, then it will have massive ramifications back home. Considering the already-grave internal security situation, Islamabad is playing its card with utmost care.
What has particularly caught my attention is a recent statement by the Foreign Minister of Bahrain, Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed bin Mohammad al-Khalifa, who said, “Since Pakistan is an influential country, we believe it can play a key role in improving bilateral ties between Iran and Gulf countries, including Bahrain". He also added that Bahrain desires a 'political solution' to the Syrian crisis and wants Pakistan's help in resolving the issue in accordance with the Geneva process.
This is a welcome statement and reveals that the GCC countries are possibly betting on utilizing the diplomatic expertise of Islamabad to settle out disputes with Tehran, especially on the Syrian and Bahraini/Yemeni fronts. Tehran presently enjoys cordial ties with Oman, quite a neutral Arab state under the headship of Sultan Qaboos, a monarch who has kept himself well aloof of regional disputes. I believe that with Pakistan, the country of Oman can also work out differences between Gulf states and Iran.
Anyhow, coming back to Pakistan, the dilemma of this country is that its mainstream analysts are causing unnecessary division in the Pakistani society through the print and electronic media.
If I am a Sunni or Wahhabi, I will naturally incline towards an anti-Iran bias and similarly, if I am a Shia, I will maintain an anti-Arab bias. This mode of thinking needs to be eliminated once and for all, most urgently in Pakistan. We are a country that, despite the tremendous odds, is one of the most influential and powerful Muslim states both diplomatically and militarily. Politico-socio-economic issues will be resolved one day soon and that can only be ensured if we maintain a mature and friendly posture towards all states which concern us directly or indirectly. Hence, be it Arab Gulf states or Iran, Pakistan needs to play the role of a big brother.
Recommendation
My personal suggestion, though one that will certainly raise many eyebrows, is to have an advisory committee operating for the government which consists of policy analysts with equal representation of Sunni, Shia and Wahhabi scholars. These analysts will analyze relations with Turkey, Iran, Arab Gulf states, etc. based on group-wise understanding, deduce commonly-agreed recommendations and principles then share them with the government in charge. In short, this group will be a sort of 'National Islamic Committee for Foreign Affairs'.
In my view, this is the most plausible means of including all influential sectarian stakeholders and taking their collective advice on the most effective do's and don'ts of dealing with Islamic/Muslim countries in particular and regional countries in general.
From the Director's Desk: Pakistan's precarious geopolitical standing | Terminal X
Factually speaking, Pakistan is still the only nuclear-armed Muslim state in the world. It is both a source of power and subsequently, equally greater responsibility. It is this robust defence and security structure of Pakistan which lends credence to its influential position in regional affairs, particularly in the MENA and South Asian zones.
In the perspective of Muslim/Islamic states, Pakistan has enjoyed cordial and oft-times turbulent relations with all, especially ideological archrivals Iran and Saudi Arabia. Successive governments in Pakistan, irrespective of their specific predominant leanings, have made sure they do not disrupt the equilibrium of ties with these two countries. It is for this reason several academics in the field of international relations have dubbed Pakistan as a country which has the power to balance affairs between these disputing states by acting as a sort of "third party mediator".
However, the situation changed especially because of the so-called "Arab Spring". The toppling of regimes previously considered legitimate by segments of people in MENA paved the way for a free-for-all loot bazar in which Saudi Arabia and Iran took turns to establish their ideological dominance, both overtly and covertly. We have seen in the case of Syria how Riyadh and Tehran both have waged their wars on foreign soil. This is the modus operandi of these countries who ironically accuse "foreign elements" trying to sabotage their own peace and stability. The only comment which one can make on this is, "As you sow, so shall you reap!".
The "awakening" movements took place elsewhere as well, including Libya, Tunisia and Yemen. Egypt has managed to control this transformation courtesy of its powerful military.
In Pakistan, although the ouster of Morsi did trigger a nationwide resentment visible in the form of protests, etc. mostly by a mainstream politico-religious party, it never really instigated a particular sectarian community. This is because Sunnis and Shias in Pakistan both were mostly in favor of Morsi and more so angry towards a "dictator" (referring to Field Marshal Abdel Fattah el-Sisi). This is primarily because a majority of Pakistanis still resent the dictatorships which took over in their own country. Moreover, Iran and Saudi Arabia both supported Morsi in principle until Saudi Arabia got a whiff of the fact that Morsi was still a mere puppet for the Muslim Brotherhood which Riyadh sees as a threat (it's ally Qatar believes otherwise).
But anyhow, that phase came and passed by without must disruption. However, Syria's case is totally different: It is an Arab country, yes, but one with an Alawite (Shia) government led by Bashar al-Assad with an opposition comprising Sunnis and Wahhabis. Something similar is taking place in Sunni-led Bahrain where the Shias are revolting against the Sunni regime in Manama. In both cases, Arab Gulf states and Iran are battling out their ideologies to take control over pieces of land.
Pakistan has always been demonized for not allaying concerns of Arab Gulf states and Iran. Perhaps no other country has been this mishandled than Pakistan, not even Lebanon. Pakistan's social structure comprises of powerful, educated and influential Sunnis, Wahhabis and Shias, besides people of other schools of thought and religions/beliefs. What Pakistan has failed to properly establish is its national identity. It is indeed proclaimed through speeches and documents but the reality is very grim. Fact is, because of this identity vacuum, one which could provide a unifying force for the populace, the only factor which Pakistanis adhere to next is a uniquely perplexing web of politico-socio-economic-sectarian beliefs.
This is why there are two predominant, opposing geopolitical camps in Pakistan: One that is pro-Gulf and another that is pro-Iran. The debate has been raging for hours on end on domestic media about why the mysterious aid was given by an unnamed Arab country to Pakistan ($1.5 billion). The pro-Iran camp in Pakistan is head over heels not only on this particular issue, but also on the surprise visit of the King of Bahrain. Similarly, the pro-Gulf lobby in Pakistan expressed resentment over Iran's growing relations with Pakistan, especially regarding the IP Gas Pipeline deal.
Pakistan has emphasized time and again that it will never take sides on the Syrian crisis, and rightly so. Analysts consider this another Foreign Office bluff, but I believe the diplomatic corps is fully aware of the fact that if any specific policy favoring either the Arab or Iranian camp is promoted or adopted, then it will have massive ramifications back home. Considering the already-grave internal security situation, Islamabad is playing its card with utmost care.
What has particularly caught my attention is a recent statement by the Foreign Minister of Bahrain, Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed bin Mohammad al-Khalifa, who said, “Since Pakistan is an influential country, we believe it can play a key role in improving bilateral ties between Iran and Gulf countries, including Bahrain". He also added that Bahrain desires a 'political solution' to the Syrian crisis and wants Pakistan's help in resolving the issue in accordance with the Geneva process.
This is a welcome statement and reveals that the GCC countries are possibly betting on utilizing the diplomatic expertise of Islamabad to settle out disputes with Tehran, especially on the Syrian and Bahraini/Yemeni fronts. Tehran presently enjoys cordial ties with Oman, quite a neutral Arab state under the headship of Sultan Qaboos, a monarch who has kept himself well aloof of regional disputes. I believe that with Pakistan, the country of Oman can also work out differences between Gulf states and Iran.
Anyhow, coming back to Pakistan, the dilemma of this country is that its mainstream analysts are causing unnecessary division in the Pakistani society through the print and electronic media.
If I am a Sunni or Wahhabi, I will naturally incline towards an anti-Iran bias and similarly, if I am a Shia, I will maintain an anti-Arab bias. This mode of thinking needs to be eliminated once and for all, most urgently in Pakistan. We are a country that, despite the tremendous odds, is one of the most influential and powerful Muslim states both diplomatically and militarily. Politico-socio-economic issues will be resolved one day soon and that can only be ensured if we maintain a mature and friendly posture towards all states which concern us directly or indirectly. Hence, be it Arab Gulf states or Iran, Pakistan needs to play the role of a big brother.
Recommendation
My personal suggestion, though one that will certainly raise many eyebrows, is to have an advisory committee operating for the government which consists of policy analysts with equal representation of Sunni, Shia and Wahhabi scholars. These analysts will analyze relations with Turkey, Iran, Arab Gulf states, etc. based on group-wise understanding, deduce commonly-agreed recommendations and principles then share them with the government in charge. In short, this group will be a sort of 'National Islamic Committee for Foreign Affairs'.
In my view, this is the most plausible means of including all influential sectarian stakeholders and taking their collective advice on the most effective do's and don'ts of dealing with Islamic/Muslim countries in particular and regional countries in general.
From the Director's Desk: Pakistan's precarious geopolitical standing | Terminal X
