The Saudi war in Iraq and lessons for Pakistan

[third eye]

The Saudi war in Iraq and lessons for Pakistan

The situation in Iraq should give pause to our ‘strategic’ deep thinkers. The group that calls itself the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which is also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, has taken Mosul and, as a result, the future of the nation state formerly known as Iraq is now in doubt. It is a situation that will likely escalate into a full-blown Shia-Sunni conflict in the Middle East.

Will Iraq disintegrate? The thing with nation states, as these were formed in the 20th century, is that they had attempted to draw borders around diverse people. This is truer of certain states more than others, especially Iraq, but to some extent also states like Turkey and Pakistan. A lot will depend on whether the autonomous Iraqi Kurdish region will now choose to take advantage of the current Shia-Sunni war and go its independent way or stand with the central government in its hour of need. Statesmanship demands that Kurdish leaders maintain the status quo and stick it out. If there has to be a move for Kurdish independence, it cannot be at this time. The idea of an autonomous Kurdistan within Iraq can be a model for many countries around the world but a separate Kurdistan will only serve to create similar impulses in other countries.

In the digital age, the demise of the very idea of the nation state has been brought about by the globalisation of ancient religious feuds. Saudi Arabia, which has for long seen itself as the vanguard of Wahabi-Sunni Islam, has been alarmed since the early days of the Iraq War by Iran’s growing influence in Iraq and indeed states like Bahrain. Facing its own Shia problem, Saudi Arabia is now moving to counter this ‘pernicious’ influence by creating Sunni fiefdoms all around the Islamic world. Saudification of Sunni Islam worldwide in any event has been a long-standing project of the Kingdom, which has poured in huge sums of money into religious madrassas (seminaries) and mosques all around the world. The US’s shortsighted policy in Syria and its colossal miscalculation of what the Arab Spring meant for the larger Middle East has directly contributed to this scenario. It is a case of the Arab Spring chickens coming home to roost.

The problem that this situation poses may have ancient origins but the problem itself is a very modern one: how does religion interact with established markers of modernity? Muslim modernism, which now is a century and a half old, sought to reconcile Islam with modern ideas by arguing for ijtihad (independent reasoning). Ultimately though, especially after the end of the Cold War, it was global Islamic revivalism that won the day. Muslim modernism was shunned as being intellectually shallow and, in some ways, apologetic. In comparison, the revivalist Islamic groups and the federated global jihad are unapologetic about what they want: world domination and an end to all creeds other than their own narrow-minded interpretation of Islam.

A common thread between all Saudi-funded Islamist militants, be they in Nigeria, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan, is their desire to create an ‘Islamic caliphate’. The names they use — for example the Levant or more locally Khorasan — are an implicit rejection of the existing nation states in these regions. This implicit rejection is not always recognised for what it is and sometimes is an objective shared by the ruling elites. Erdogan for example seems to fantasise about resuscitating the Ottoman Empire, encouraging his followers to refer to him as ‘Sultan’. Policymakers in Pakistan’s establishment have long had the fantasy of a Pakistan extending all the way into Central Asia, united by Islam and Pakistan’s army. What these would-be Islamic Napoleons forget is that they are playing with a fire they cannot possibly hope to control.

These violent Islamist insurgencies everywhere will attempt to overthrow civil institutions and governments. Erdogan at the end of the day owes his legitimacy to the constitutional electoral process that elected him. If the cynical great gamers of the Pakistani establishment feel that they would be able to bring the Taliban and the Islamists under their control, it is a calculation that will cost them dearly. The time to reach out to Kabul and pledge complete unconditional cooperation is now. Pakistan is in perpetual search for a non-hostile actor in Afghan politics but somehow it fails to consider the possibility that the non-hostile actor may be the elected government of that country and not the Taliban. The reason for this analysis paralysis on the part of

Pakistan’s security establishment is that they are still caught up in the Cold War era and are unable to realise that the investment we made 30 years ago has now become a cost centre.
If Iran gets involved in Iraq, and it has already sent troops in some parts of the country, Pakistan will risk getting sucked into that predominantly sectarian conflict. That is the last thing Pakistan can afford to do given that it is home to the second largest Shia population in the world. Pakistan’s leadership should stand decisively out of this war and concentrate on putting its own house in order. The first step would be to tell the Saudis to stop meddling in our affairs. We should not countenance even a single dirham from that country that may force us to take sides in the coming conflict.

 

[Kompromat]

With Nawaz Sharif a brain slave of the House of Saud at the helm, good luck with that Pakistan.

If we do not keep our noses out of this, we are going to burn like Iraq and Syria. This is a racist war Pakistan must not be a part of. We are not Arabs nor Persians.

Let them kill each other.They learned nothing from the Iraq Iran war leading to a million deaths. They'll perhaps kill another million.

For Pakistan, its stay out or die! - We must bolster our internal security, look away and wait till Arabs and Persians have gotten tired of butchering each other to prove 'who's the superior race'.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

The Saudi war in Iraq and lessons for Pakistan



In the digital age, the demise of the very idea of the nation state has been brought about by the globalisation of ancient religious feuds. Saudi Arabia, which has for long seen itself as the vanguard of Wahabi-Sunni Islam, has been alarmed since the early days of the Iraq War by Iran’s growing influence in Iraq and indeed states like Bahrain. Facing its own Shia problem, Saudi Arabia is now moving to counter this ‘pernicious’ influence by creating Sunni fiefdoms all around the Islamic world. Saudification of Sunni Islam worldwide in any event has been a long-standing project of the Kingdom, which has poured in huge sums of money into religious madrassas (seminaries) and mosques all around the world. The US’s shortsighted policy in Syria and its colossal miscalculation of what the Arab Spring meant for the larger Middle East has directly contributed to this scenario. It is a case of the Arab Spring chickens coming home to roost.


A common thread between all Saudi-funded Islamist militants, be they in Nigeria, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan, is their desire to create an ‘Islamic caliphate’. The names they use — for example the Levant or more locally Khorasan — are an implicit rejection of the existing nation states in these regions. This implicit rejection is not always recognised for what it is and sometimes is an objective shared by the ruling elites.

These violent Islamist insurgencies everywhere will attempt to overthrow civil institutions and governments. That is the last thing Pakistan can afford to do given that it is home to the second largest Shia population in the world. Pakistan’s leadership should stand decisively out of this war and concentrate on putting its own house in order. The first step would be to tell the Saudis to stop meddling in our affairs.

You've summed it up nicely. However, the violent conflict between shia and sunni is actually a war being driven by the salafi militants, who have also targeted Sunnis in Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and elsewhere.

As you rightly point out, the goal of the Salafi-Wahhabi movement is to establish a salafi caliphate cutting across the middle east, south and central asia. Saudi funding for salafi jihadis around the globe carries real impact. At times, the Saudis overtly interfere in places like Syria, and in other instances they activate supposedly non state channels to fund proxies like Al Qaeda/TTP/LeJ in our back yard, ISIL in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, Shabab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria and so on. At the end of the day, it is the ruling Salafi establishment in Saudi orchestrating these diabolical insurgencies with a view to establishing salafi fiefdoms, promoting their violently intolerant ideology.

Until affected nation states, including the US and Pakistan, recognize the root of the problem and do something about it, Saudi will continue wreaking chaos through its salafi foot soldiers around the world.

 

[Reza Ali]

Naree Taqbeer Allah hu Akber.

 

[RAMPAGE]

Naree Taqbeer Allah hu Akber.

You okay buddy ???

 

[Arabian Legend]

Its looks like Mr Yasser Hamdani is neither confused rather ignorance of the ME geopolitical crisis currently storming the region. I don't see any connection of Saudi Arabia to the situation in Iraq nor I see how that would impact on Pakistan both internally and externally.

The ISIS is independent terrorist organization with its own political objectives wandering in levant and Iraq as a result of the international body failure in dealing with the current status quo.

Its funny that the author either as I said ignorance or deliberately neglecting that fact that the ISIS has been listed as a terrorist organization by the Saudis long ago.

Its even funnier the baseless claim of Mr Hamdani that Saudi Arabia is meddling in Pakistan's internal affairs given that fact that both Pakistan's government and military establishment share same political views of that of the KSA.

You've summed it up nicely. However, the violent conflict between shia and sunni is actually a war being driven by the salafi militants, who have also targeted Sunnis in Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and elsewhere.

As you rightly point out, the goal of the Salafi-Wahhabi movement is to establish a salafi caliphate cutting across the middle east, south and central asia. Saudi funding for salafi jihadis around the globe carries real impact. At times, the Saudis overtly interfere in places like Syria, and in other instances they activate supposedly non state channels to fund proxies like Al Qaeda/TTP/LeJ in our back yard, ISIL in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, Shabab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria and so on. At the end of the day, it is the ruling Salafi establishment in Saudi orchestrating these diabolical insurgencies with a view to establishing salafi fiefdoms, promoting their violently intolerant ideology.

Until affected nation states, including the US and Pakistan, recognize the root of the problem and do something about it, Saudi will continue wreaking chaos through its salafi foot soldiers around the world.

You are one confused person. If Saudi Arabia funds what you have mentioned it would have done wonders already. The ISIS in Syria are in clash with the FSA whom the Saudi have been supporting for the past three years.

 

[MastanKhan]

Its looks like Mr Yasser Hamdani is neither confused rather ignorance of the ME geopolitical crisis currently storming the region. I don't see any connection of Saudi Arabia to the situation in Iraq nor I see how that would impact on Pakistan both internally and externally.

The ISIS is independent terrorist organization with its own political objectives wandering in levant and Iraq as a result of the international body failure in dealing with the current status quo.

Its funny that the author either as I said ignorance or deliberately neglecting that fact that the ISIS has been listed as a terrorist organization by the Saudis long ago.

Its even funnier the baseless claim of Mr Hamdani that Saudi Arabia is meddling in Pakistan's internal affairs given that fact that both Pakistan's government and military establishment share same political views of that of the KSA.



You are one confused person. If Saudi Arabia funds what you have mentioned it would have done wonders already. The ISIS in Syria are in clash with the FSA whom the Saudi have been supporting for the past three years.

Saudia has always meddled in pakistan's internal affairs. The saudi sponsored funding to terrorist groups in pakistan is a big concern for pakistanis---.

 

[Arabian Legend]

Saudia has always meddled in pakistan's internal affairs. The saudi sponsored funding to terrorist groups in pakistan is a big concern for pakistanis---.

Lets assume so for the sake of argument, should you and Mr Hamdani ask the Saudis not to do so or act firmly against any form of intervention?

 

[OCguy]

Until affected nation states, including the US and Pakistan, recognize the root of the problem and do something about it, Saudi will continue wreaking chaos through its salafi foot soldiers around the world.

Many people do recognize the root of the problem, but due to fossil fuels, my country gives the Saudis a pass.

It is currently the most puzzling foreign relationship that I can think of for the US. The Saudi government has no more love for the US than the Iranian's. I think that the post-Soviet proliferation of radical Wahhabism in Afghanistan, funded by the Kingdom, may only be a taste of what is to come as far as the US-SA alliance backfiring for America.

 

[slapshot]

Naree Taqbeer Allah hu Akber.

Kia hoa bahi saray forum par naray martay phir rhay ho... phatnay lagay ho kia? Ya kisi nay SMS par qasam dee hay k 100 bar nara lago?

 

[Kompromat]

@Arabian Legend | Intervention or no intervention, when you sneeze we catch the cold. In a pan Middle east Shia Sunni war if Pakistan takes a side (any side), we are doomed. ISIS is most likely funded by the American Military Industrial Complex which also has trained it through mercenary organizations secretly in Jordanian camps. Their goal is to drag the US and all regional countries into a sectarian war while they sell weapons to all sides.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

Many people do recognize the root of the problem, but due to fossil fuels, my country gives the Saudis a pass.

It is currently the most puzzling foreign relationship that I can think of for the US. The Saudi government has no more love for the US than the Iranian's. I think that the post-Soviet proliferation of radical Wahhabism in Afghanistan, funded by the Kingdom, may only be a taste of what is to come as far as the US-SA alliance backfiring for America.

Excellent point. Its time the US and Pakistan re-adjust their worldview of the saudi-led salafi jihadi movement . The goal of this "Saudi-led adventure' is not just to mitigate shia influence, but to also capture resource-rich regions as part of its expansionist agenda of setting up a salafi caliphate. Unfortunately, the Saudi establishment has not learnt from its past mistakes and continues to foster a power-hungry agenda using radical salafi militants as its proxy foot soldiers. The chickens will come home to roost soon in one form or another.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

Josh Rogin

The extremist group that is threatening the existence of the Iraqi state was built and grown for years with the help of elite donors from American supposed allies in the Persian Gulf region. There, the threat of Iran, Assad, and the Sunni-Shiite sectarian war trumps the U.S. goal of stability and moderation in the region.

As ISIS takes over town after town in Iraq, they are acquiring money and supplies including American made vehicles, arms, and ammunition. The group reportedly scored $430 million this week when they looted the main bank in Mosul. They reportedly now have a stream of steady income sources, including from selling oil in the Northern Syrian regions they control, sometimes directly to the Assad regime.

But in the years they were getting started, a key component of ISIS’s support came from wealthy individuals in the Arab Gulf States of Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Sometimes the support came with the tacit nod of approval from those regimes; often, it took advantage of poor money laundering protections in those states, according to officials, experts, and leaders of the Syrian opposition, which is fighting ISIS as well as the regime.

“Everybody knows the money is going through Kuwait and that it’s coming from the Arab Gulf,” said Andrew Tabler, senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “Kuwait’s banking system and its money changers have long been a huge problem because they are a major conduit for money to extremist groups in Syria and now Iraq.”

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has been publicly accusing Saudi Arabia and Qatar of funding ISIS for months. Several reports have detailed how private Gulf funding to various Syrian rebel groups has splintered the Syrian opposition and paved the way for the rise of groups like ISIS and others.

“The U.S. has made the case as strongly as they can to regional countries, including Kuwait. But ultimately when you take a hands off, leading from behind approach to things, people don’t take you seriously and they take matters into their own hands.”

Gulf donors support ISIS, the Syrian branch of al Qaeda called the al Nusrah Front, and other Islamic groups fighting on the ground in Syria because they feel an obligation to protect Sunnis suffering under the atrocities of the Assad regime. Many of these backers don’t trust or like the American backed moderate opposition, which the West has refused to provide significant arms to.

“ISIS is part of the Sunni forces that are fighting Shia forces in this regional sectarian conflict. They are in an existential battle with both the (Iranian aligned) Maliki government and the Assad regime,” said Tabler. “The U.S. has made the case as strongly as they can to regional countries, including Kuwait. But ultimately when you take a hands off, leading from behind approach to things, people don’t take you seriously and they take matters into their own hands.”

Donors in Kuwait, the Sunni majority Kingdom on Iraq’s border, have taken advantage of Kuwait’s weak financial rules to channel hundreds of millions of dollars to a host of Syrian rebel brigades, according to a December 2013 report by The Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank that receives some funding from the Qatari government.

“Over the last two and a half years, Kuwait has emerged as a financing and organizational hub for charities and individuals supporting Syria’s myriad rebel groups,” the report said. “Today, there is evidence that Kuwaiti donors have backed rebels who have committed atrocities and who are either directly linked to al-Qa’ida or cooperate with its affiliated brigades on the ground.”

Kuwaiti donors collect funds from donors in other Arab Gulf countries and the money often travels through Turkey or Jordan before reaching its Syrian destination, the report said. The governments of Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have passed laws to curb the flow of illicit funds, but many donors still operate out in the open. The Brookings paper argues the U.S. government needs to do more.

“The U.S. Treasury is aware of this activity and has expressed concern about this flow of private financing. But Western diplomats’ and officials’ general response has been a collective shrug,” the report states.

When confronted with the problem, Gulf leaders often justify allowing their Salafi constituents to fund Syrian extremist groups by pointing back to what they see as a failed U.S. policy in Syria and a loss of credibility after President Obama reneged on his pledge to strike Assad after the regime used chemical weapons.

That’s what Prince Bandar bin Sultan, head of Saudi intelligence since 2012 and former Saudi ambassador in Washington, reportedly told Secretary of State John Kerry when Kerry pressed him on Saudi financing of extremist groups earlier this year. Saudi Arabia has retaken a leadership role in past months guiding help to the Syrian armed rebels, displacing Qatar, which was seen as supporting some of the worst of the worst organizations on the ground.

The rise of ISIS, a group that officially broke with al Qaeda core last year, is devastating for the moderate Syrian opposition, which is now fighting a war on two fronts, severely outmanned and outgunned by both extremist groups and the regime.

But the Syrian moderate opposition is also wary of confronting the Arab Gulf states about their support for extremist groups. The rebels are still competing for those governments’ favor and they are dependent on other types of support from Arab Gulf countries.

 

[ajpirzada]

i partly disagree with the title. Its Saudi Arabia which should learn some lesson from pakistan. When you fund the extremist forces, they'll come back to haunt you one day. Will Saudi regime want ISIS in their own homeland? if not then they shouldnt be wishing the same for some other country - what to talk about funding them.

 

[Usama78]

I can consider your worries about Pakistan..... The point here is Pakistan has some special ties with Turkey, KSA and several other important muslim countries in Asia. Everyone has their own interests. I don't care about about what Saudis plan or whoever plans what. I'll only talk about Pakistan Army, "the Pakistani Establishment" We surely don't have a safe eastern border and our Military doesn't want the same in on the West. We want it to be a safe Border. We will always be with those who share similar objectives like ours in Afghanistan. Going back to 70's. We fought alone alone with afghanis from 73-79 with Russians and from 79-88 along with US-KSA. This was because we wanted Soviets out of Afghanistan cuz they were not safe for us. Fromm 94-2001 We supported Talibs under Molah Omer, why? Cuz they were safe for us. After US intervention we had to support US. Although, We are badly blamed for U.S failure in Afghanistan. I don't really know if we back-stabbed US or not. But if we did, Its cuz our Military realized U.S intervention in Afghanistan was not safe for us just like Soviets.


What I want to say by all that story is that, Pakistan would only interfere if their is something good coming for it. Else, It won't. So, the lessons you want to show us from Iraq and Syria are useless..... We may only interfere as a formality to come up for some peaceful talks between different groups fighting in Arab countries and Iran....


You may consider the fact that Pakistan and its army only interfered in palestinian war against Israel a few times.....