What's new

Saudi arabia and attitudes towards non-arab muslims.

r3alist

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
2,534
Reaction score
0
as the most important muslim nation and epicentre of islam should s.arabia not be more vocal about the well being of muslims all around the world?

do they not have a special responsibility to be a voice for all muslims?

to a large extent i think so.

but i see different.


someone correct me if i am wrong, but did the saudi's really do anything about babri masjid?

did they openly condemn india? did they kick their indian embassador out of saudi?

what did they do?

same with gujrat.


my feeling is that they are indifferent or would rather not annoy the nation that has allowed the offence to happen (for econoimic, politcal or other reasons), both are completely unacceptable imo.

if something of the enormity of the babri masjid incident does not compel other muslims and in particular the saudi's to speak out and act, then muslims of the sub-continent seriously need to re-examine our attitude towards the saudi's and the exact nature of their relationship


so i start this thread to ask some probing and uncomfortable questions about saudi attitudes.

please share your views.



any indian trolling about indian muslims this and that or other unrelated discussion will be regarded as off topic by me, mods please consider this
 
.
as the most important muslim nation and epicentre of islam should s.arabia not be more vocal about the well being of muslims all around the world?

do they not have a special responsibility to be a voice for all muslims?

to a large extent i think so.

but i see different.


someone correct me if i am wrong, but did the saudi's really do anything about babri masjid?

did they openly condemn india? did they kick their indian embassador out of saudi?

what did they do?

same with gujrat.


my feeling is that they are indifferent or would rather not annoy the nation that has allowed the offence to happen (for econoimic, politcal or other reasons), both are completely unacceptable imo.

if something of the enormity of the babri masjid incident does not compel other muslims and in particular the saudi's to speak out and act, then muslims of the sub-continent seriously need to re-examine our attitude towards the saudi's and the exact nature of their relationship


so i start this thread to ask some probing and uncomfortable questions about saudi attitudes.

please share your views.



any indian trolling about indian muslims this and that or other unrelated discussion will be regarded as off topic by me, mods please consider this

Sorry about your warning

But for the sole reason that Saudi understand the meaning of "Internal Affairs of a nation"
 
.
coalitions forces played havoc in Iraq against civilians.... wht did saudi did.....sifar....I think not a single word uttered by them.......and it is not true for Saudi only... this is true for whole gulf region....Saudi citizens themselves written on some of there blogs..... tht there respective govt. is doing nothing on the current influx of foregines and the kind of cultural intolerence they are showing towards Islamic state.
 
.
Regional power rivalry

Monday, September 21, 2009
Talat Masood

Currently, the Obama administration is undertaking a major review of its ****** policy and seeking Congressional approval for a substantial increase in troop strength in Afghanistan to counter the growing power of Taliban. Congress is likely to agree, but after a tough battle as there is growing skepticism about the war in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, “Friends of Pakistan” meeting is being held in New York this week which is being chaired by President Obama and several heads of state and governments from European, West Asian and Muslim countries including President Sarkozi and Prime Minister Gordon Brown are attending. This demonstrates the worldwide interest in the stability of Pakistan due to its extreme strategic importance. The meeting is to reaffirm their governments’ commitment to support Pakistan in its efforts at overcoming the huge challenge that it is facing in combating militancy, tiding over economic difficulties and improving governance.

Notwithstanding US and world interest in our security and stability, there is a strong belief that major powers have other goals in the region. After the occupation of Afghanistan, Pentagon has developed close military relations with the Central Asian states and has bases in Kyrgyzstan. Before 9/11, United States was present in only two Muslim countries, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, since then it has spread its tentacles in several Muslim countries. There is a growing perception that US after stabilising Afghanistan could use the cover of security to dominate the hydro-carbon and mineral-rich Central Asia, giving rise to rivalry between major powers.

Obama’s regional approach also aims at “reshaping the strategic calculus of India, Pakistan and hence the entire South Asian security system.” At its core, the strategy aims at Pakistan reorienting its posture towards its western borders.

Russia’s interest lies in protecting its neighbourhood and is wary of US and NATO’s presence in its soft underbelly. Russian and United States interests however converge in combating religiously motivated militancy in Caucasus and Central Asian states. Insurgency in Chechnya and Dagestan could aggravate if Taliban are able to expand their influence. Washington also realises that it needs Russian cooperation in dealing with Afghanistan. During President Obama’s recent visit to Moscow, United States and Russia signed an agreement whereby Moscow has allowed over-flights to US aircraft to carry logistic supplies of US and NATO troops to Afghanistan. This provides flexibility to Pentagon as Pakistan’s land route remains under frequent attack. In this way US dependence and involvement with Russia in the region is on the increase. As pointed out by Henry Kissinger in a recent article that Obama administration is taking a multilateral approach to bring stability to the region. In return Moscow is likely to demand a role in the reconstruction phase of Afghanistan that so far has been denied to it. There is also a renewed interest on the part of Moscow to engage Pakistan and Afghan governments. A four-nation summit of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Russia took place this year under the aegis of Moscow to examine possibilities of cooperation in energy, transport, trade and economic matters.

Beijing supports Washington’s objective in fighting radical Islamic forces. There is great concern in China of the separatist movement in the province of Xingjian and is taking measures to prevent militants or arms from being smuggled across Sino-Pakistan border. Nonetheless, Beijing is apprehensive of US and NATO’s long-term objectives and is uncomfortable with their growing and pervasive influence in Pakistan.

China and United States are likely to compete in the region for transit rights, commercial ventures and offshore/inshore energy projects. China’s energy requirements are growing exponentially with its rising economic power. It is deeply interested in Central Asia’s rich mineral reserves and oil and gas deposits that could lead to major power rivalry.

India has increased its presence in Afghanistan in a big way with a major investment of over 1.2 billion dollars in infrastructural projects. New Delhi has developed considerable political influence in Afghanistan and has full support of US in increasing its presence. Indian and United States interests converge in fighting Islamic radicalism, containing China and checkmating influence of Iran.

Unless there is marked improvement in Indo-Pak relations New Delhi would continue to support the nationalist insurgency in Balochistan. And would like Pakistan Army to remain engaged in FATA, somewhat similar to what the Americans are wanting, although for different reasons. India’s interest would be hugely compromised with the resurgence of Taliban in Afghanistan. In the long term it will be equally damaging for Pakistan as our Taliban will be motivated and gain strength.

United States uses its presence in Afghanistan to put pressure on Iran. The presence of a large US military presence on Iran’s eastern flank is a pressure tactic and a reminder that Washington can act militarily if the uranium enrichment programme is perceived to be heading towards a weapons programme. In response Iran has developed its own clientele in the adjoining province of Herat and has developed a close relationship with tribes that are ethnically well disposed. Despite the antagonistic relationship Washington and Tehran see the Taliban as a common enemy.

Saudi Arabia too has vital interests in Pakistan and to a lesser extent in Afghanistan. Riyadh is now a strong partner with US and the western world in the fight against Islamic militants and Al Qaeda remains a common threat.

With Pakistan, Saudi Arabia enjoys a strategic relationship that is mutually beneficial, interdependent and nuanced. Saudis are concerned at the growing influence of Al Qaeda in Pakistan and want to countervail Iranian influence. Interestingly, both Saudis and Pakistanis have an alliance with the US and Washington uses Saudis to influence Pakistan and at times nudges its Arab ally to financially assist Pakistan. In the past Saudis have been generally dealing with the Taliban through Pakistan but of late have been dealing directly with them as well. Reason for current Saudi’s involvement is that US and NATO countries trust them and consider the regime as useful interlocutors.

Pakistan should formulate national policies that protect its vital interests in this highly complex and layered interplay of regional and global forces.


The writer is a retired lieutenant-general. Email: talat@comsats.net.pk
 
.
as the most important muslim nation and epicentre of islam should s.arabia not be more vocal about the well being of muslims all around the world?

do they not have a special responsibility to be a voice for all muslims?

to a large extent i think so.

but i see different.


someone correct me if i am wrong, but did the saudi's really do anything about babri masjid?

did they openly condemn india? did they kick their indian embassador out of saudi?

what did they do?

same with gujrat.


my feeling is that they are indifferent or would rather not annoy the nation that has allowed the offence to happen (for econoimic, politcal or other reasons), both are completely unacceptable imo.

if something of the enormity of the babri masjid incident does not compel other muslims and in particular the saudi's to speak out and act, then muslims of the sub-continent seriously need to re-examine our attitude towards the saudi's and the exact nature of their relationship


so i start this thread to ask some probing and uncomfortable questions about saudi attitudes.

please share your views.



any indian trolling about indian muslims this and that or other unrelated discussion will be regarded as off topic by me, mods please consider this

Friend, use your head not your heart. It affects you most in Pakistan, because no matter what India does is wrong in your eyes. You may hate the fact that you originated from India, but thats the truth, and no matter how many times you bathe to get rid of this fact, it will still not go away. Like it is written, there are muslims in various percentages all over the world , everytime there is a disagreement between muslims, dont expect Saudi or any other muslim country to intefere, ultimately it would work against the muslims themselves. This is what diplomacy is all about, all angles are considered before any action is taken, dont think the Saudis didnt take that to heart. By the way. You go on about muslims and Saudi, do you know how you Pakistanis being muslims are treated in these muslim worlds. My friend , it would break your heart.
 
.
If we hear arab leaders over the media they use words like arab unity or in palestine its about Israeli and arabs.. or middleeast peace process ! they never use the term muslims !
 
.
If we hear arab leaders over the media they use words like arab unity or in palestine its about Israeli and arabs.. or middleeast peace process ! they never use the term muslims !

You are so right my friend, in fact the Indian and Pakistanis are so much more connected as compared to your High Class muslim hosts, they treat you guys with such disdain. I know when I was there how many times I stood up for your guys. Its the elite that may benefit, but not the poor guy who works daily for his wages to support his family back at home. It is really " HARAM" and it heartbreaking
 
.
Come on Guys, Let it out - Why are you so restrained.

This is a great topic introduced by r3alist, and much too late in the day.
 
.
they treat you guys with such disdain. I know when I was there how many times I stood up for your guys. Its the elite that may benefit, but not the poor guy who works daily for his wages to support his family back at home. It is really " HARAM" and it heartbreaking

i think they treat indian guys even worst ..! i think its more aout race to them rather than religion however interesting to hear that you stood up ... dude why dont u share with us who did u stood against ,where & why!!?
 
.
People of Mecca were even mean to our beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

I dont think you should worry too much about attitude of some Saudis.

Allah sees all.
 
.
Saudi Arab is an artificial traitor state established on the betrayal of the Khalifah.
 
.
People of Mecca were even mean to our beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

I dont think you should worry too much about attitude of some Saudis.

Allah sees all.


so do you suggest that we ignore the actions and thoughts of the arabs in the present and continue to pledge allegiance to one that does not exist whilst the saudi's plot otherwise?


i do not believe the suadi's have the genuinie best interests of world muslims at heart.

the strategy of these guys is to keep us pakistani's and their own arabs in a blinding wahabi haze, i think these guys are terrified of any criticism and too many pakistani's believe in an islamic brotherly myth


what are these guys true to?

and what does it mean for us?

lets be open here..
 
.
i think they treat indian guys even worst ..! i think its more aout race to them rather than religion however interesting to hear that you stood up ... dude why dont u share with us who did u stood against ,where & why!!?

They surprisingly do not treat Indians worse, I dont know about Saudi because I havent been there ,but UAE. Once as we had one of our high profile job and just because one worker wore salwar khameez, the cid pounced upon him (not literally) and were sending him off without even asking him, thats when I had to intervene and say that this guy had proper documents etc and then they let him go
 
. .
The relevant part of post #1 is the fact that in my opinion ppl from KSA in particular & Arabs in general do not consider muslims from other nations at par with themselves.

This is something I have observed closely while interacting with ppl from KSA . It surprised me to see the way muslims from India, PK, BD, Indonesia, Malaysia etc were treated ( often as menials & riff raff).

There appears to be a schism between the Arabs & the rest of the muslim world. One considering themselves ' more equal' than the other.

It did bother me to see simple workers from S Asia being treated as second class muslims by the ' custodians' of Islamic Heritage. They were paid differently and given tasks Arabs were disinclined to perform.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom