To avoid straining ties with Iran: Pakistan may quit Saudi-led Muslim military alliance

[FalconsForPeace]

Pakistan is reconsidering its position on the so-called 41-nation Islamic military alliance, led by Saudi Arabia, to avoid straining its relationship with neighboring Iran, according to Pakistan media reports. The military alliance was to be commanded by General Raheel Sharif, the former commander-in-chief of Pakistan army who retired from the Pak army last year.

Its decision comes after statements by Saudi authorities at the Arab Islamic-US summit in Riyadh on 20-21 May suggested that the military alliance was meant primarily to counter Iran, the media report said adding that the Riyadh summit focused on isolating Iran — which was kept out of the summit.

The officials argued that the Pakistan government in-principle agreed to be a part of the initiative if its sole purpose was to fight terrorism. It was believed that the government had joined the alliance when in April it allowed General Sharif to leave Pakistan to lead the alliance.

But the officials said a final decision will be made once the terms of reference (ToRs) of the alliance are finalized. The ToRs would be finalized during a meeting of the defense ministers of the participating countries in Saudi Arabia soon.

Pakistan, according to the officials, would recommend that the military alliance should have a clear objective, that is to fight terrorism. Any deviation from this goal, they added, will not only undermine the alliance but lead to more divisions in the Muslim world. "We are very clear that we will join this alliance only to fight terrorism," the officials emphasized.

Defense minister Khawaja Asif on the floor of the National Assembly has said that Pakistan would withdraw from the alliance if it turns out to be sectarian in nature.

Pakistani lawmakers have said that they do not want their country to be part of any sectarian alliance as it also goes against the country's constitution.

Pakistan's two main opposition parties — Tehreek-i-Insaf and Pakistan People's Party — have been calling for maintaining "neutrality" in the Arab-Iran rivalry. But given the longstanding strategic ties with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan is unlikely to completely withdraw from the alliance.

Iran has expressed its reservations regarding the appointment of the former army chief, retired Gen Raheel Sharif, as head of the Saudi-led 41-nation so-called Islamic military alliance, saying it is not 'satisfied' with the coalition.

Iran expresses concern
"We are concerned about this issue... that it may impact the unity of Islamic countries," Iran's Ambassador to Pakistan Mehdi Honardoost was quoted as saying.

Iran's state-run IRNA news agency quoted Honardoost as saying that Pakistan had contacted Iranian officials before issuing the no-objection certificate (NOC) to Gen Sharif to lead the Saudi alliance. "But that does not indicate that Iran is satisfied with this decision or it has accepted the same," the envoy said.

The ambassador proposed that all important Islamic countries come together to form a "coalition of peace" in order to resolve their issues "rather [than] forming a controversial military alliance".

A controversial appointment
The appointment of General Sharif as the leader of the military alliance sparked debate over how the move will impact Pakistan's foreign policy, and whether it was fully sanctioned by parliament.

Pakistan had initially found itself in the crosshairs of Middle Eastern politics as Saudi Arabia named it as part of its newly formed military alliance of Muslim countries meant to combat terrorism, without first getting its consent, the daily Dawn reported.

However, after initial ambiguity, the government had confirmed its participation in the alliance, but had said that the scope of its participation would be defined after Riyadh shared the details of the coalition it was assembling.

General Sharif last March accompanied the prime minister to Raad al Shamaal, the first military exercises of the alliance in which Pakistani troops also participated.

The Saudi government had surprised
The Saudi government had surprised many countries by announcing that it had forged a coalition for coordinating and supporting military operations against terrorism in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt and Afghanistan. Iran was absent from the states named as participants.

Last April, Saudi Religious Affairs Minister Sheikh Saleh bin Abdul Aziz described the Pakistan-Saudi Arabia military alliance a “victory of Islam” and its main objective is “renaissance of Islam”.

Addressing a well-attended public meeting on the first day of centenary celebrations of the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (F) in Pakistan , Sheikh Saleh bin Abdul Aziz said that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia would jointly take on the enemies of Islam and the holy places in Saudi Arabia.

According to Tribune Express, in order to avoid any strain with Iran, Pakistan pushed for mediation between Tehran and Riyadh. Islamabad even mooted the idea of inclusion of Iran in the alliance.

However, all those efforts could not succeed since Saudi Arabia and Iran have serious differences on regional disputes particularly the current hotspots in Middle East.

But given longstanding strategic relationship with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan is unlikely to completely withdraw from the alliance. Nevertheless, its participation would only remain confined to counter-terrorism efforts, the Tribune report said.

The 41-nation armed coalition was initially proposed as a platform for security cooperation among Muslim countries and included provisions for training, equipment and troops, and the involvement of religious scholars for devising a counter-terrorism narrative.

Senator Syed Dilawar Abbas
Pakistan Muslim League Quaid (PML-Q) Senior Vice President Senator Syed Dilawar Abbas has said that former army chief General Raheel Sharif should quit the Saudi-led force’s command as it will not prove useful for Pakistan in the prevailing situation.

He said that Iran is a brotherly Islamic country and above all our immediate neighbor, who always supported Pakistan in time of need. We can’t afford to let our friends get upset for the sake of others, he added. He said that the United States had always played a key role in division of Muslims for securing its own interests in the region. He also condemned US President Donald Trump’s remarks that Iran is sponsoring terrorism in the region.

Senator Abbas said that the coalition was not an Islamic army but a Saudi-led alliance. If Saudi Arabia wants to safeguard the rights of Muslim world then all should have included all Islamic states in the force. Why some countries are part of the army while highly important Muslim states, including Iran, Syria and others, have not been included in it, he questioned.

He said that it clearly indicates that Saudi Arabia had their own interests and as a nuclear Islamic State, Pakistan must clearly inform the Saudis that we cannot become part of American hidden agenda against any Muslim state. Why should we become stooges of the United States, he added.

The Nation
In a comment on the current controversy, a Pakistani newspaper the Nation, asked: Did the fact that the coalition was first announced in December 2015 – ninth months into Saudi military intervention in Yemen and a month before the execution of Shia cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr – also not give Islamabad an idea who this alliance would be aligned against?

One would’ve been prompted to even hint that this belated suggestion of a potential back-peddling, if not complete retraction, is a reaction to the snub at the summit where Trump and King Salman collectively humiliated Pakistan by first not allowing the premier to speak and then by even refusing to include him in any publicized meetings or photo-ops.

Commenting on Pakistan's stance that it will join this alliance “only to fight terrorism,” the Nation said that the term ‘terrorism’ is loaded, or aligned with state policies.

"A Kashmiri freedom fighter who picks up the gun is a terrorist for India. A separatist militant in Balochistan is a terrorist for Pakistan. A mujahid can be a terrorist or strategic asset depending on whether s/he is waging war for the military establishment or against it. So maybe it’s a good idea to modalities of terrorism as well, before we agree to defend Saudi Arabia against terrorists," the paper said adding:

"A country that has unequivocally upheld that ‘atheists are terrorists’, clearly doesn’t even need an individual to take up arms for them to be lumped into the bin of terrorism. It also underscores that terrorism for the kingdom of Saudi Arabia is primarily based on ideological affiliations. And there are no prizes was guessing the one ideology that Wahabbism is antagonistic to even more than non-belief."

Abdus Sattar Ghazali is the Chief Editor of the Journal of America (www.journalofamerica.net) email: asghazali2011 (@) gmail.com

http://www.milligazette.com/news/15...command-of-saudi-led-muslim-military-alliance

 

[Super Falcon]

Pakistan should quit this stupidity we are the military muscle of Islamic world and KSA cannot treat us like Bangladesh

If we get out islamic military Allience has no guts to fight terrorim and KSA already puts it entire decision making under itself which is non negotiable

 

[Drongo]

It's a good position, refreshing to see another state refusing to gang up against Iran which just provokes further insecurity.

 

[Skies]

Would be a great decision. And it is a sign that you can think and go independently.

 

[Imran Khan]

stay away from ME fire .

 

[CriticalThought]

Here is the thing. Iranian backed terrorism at the hand of Syrian government forces, Hezbollah, and Shia militias in Syria is one of the darkest chapters of human history and exactly equal to the barbarism shown by ISIS. Except Iran is chums with Russia so no one dates to call a spade a spade in this case.

But the template to counter this barbarism in Syria is the Afghan jihad against Russia: covert, effective, and hugely destabilizing for Russia. And just a Russia crumbled, so will Iran against guerilla warfare.

We never went for full scale war against Russia. We need not do that for Iran either. There are many ways to skin a cat. But the Saudis need to see the reality and learn to trust those Muslim nations who have practical experience with such situations.

@Sharif al-Hijaz

 

[Great Sachin]

Situation is bad...you are gonna annoy at least one side

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

The issue is complex and black&white thinking can be counterproductive.

Pak State needs to finally put Pak Interests first and far most.

What does Pak get out of this alliance and at what price?

What is Iran willing to do to stand by Pak and not just be another area where indians can spread their terror in Pak? When will it join CPEC fully and not just lip service?

When will GCC put money in CPEC to prove their brotherly intentions?


Whoever buys massive Pak Defence Systems (JF-17, Al-Khalid, Anza etc.) and employs millions of Paks thus helping Pak economically is well deserving of Pak help.

If both parties i.e Iran and GCC just want Pak to be subservient and sing their tunes.. then Pak should choose Self Respect and bow out gracefully.

Let is burn and then some more... then can Pak enter this theatre on its own terms.

How can Pak be the pre-eminent military power with second strike capability and still act in subservient manner?

Time to break the beggar's bowl and put all energies into CPEC and what follows it.

Have a Strategic Patience of 10+ years and see how others begin to respect you.
China and Turkey are the two countries which need Paks full attention.

I say if both GCC and Iran want to 'squeez' Pak then let it burn all the way.

Pak State and Pak People come first, second and last. All else is illusion!

 

[El Sidd]

Let the Persians and Arabs fight it out and enjoy the fireworks. We can always enjoy the war booty after the chaos.
Neither I-ran nor A-rabs will be the winners of this conflict.
Looming civil war in the ME and economic collapse Pakistan should stay away from both the trouble makers.

Just keep a strict eye on the dumb deaf and blind both these countries have raised in Pakistan and everything is gonna be fine.

Having said all that, keeping in mind all the chest thumping from both the sides, the straits of Hormuz is too critical for the world. So therefore there is little chance of direct conflict in the ME at this moment in time. But you never know, there are enough fanatics running around in power circles of the two said countries.

 

[litman]

ideally pak should immediately withdraw from this saudi alliance led by ameer ul momineen janab donald j trump and his deputy the zionist KSA regime but it is not that simple due to many reasons.
a. pak leadership i.e nawaz sharif has personal relations with saudi princes and he cant afford to piss them off.
b. saudi alliance will give us lots of wealth which will go to the pockets of the elite and we have always been beggars.
c. by joining this alliance we will be in the forces of "dajjal" hence we will get military equipment and aid. otherwise our condition will be slightly better then north korea.
d. pak is dependent on arabs for oil supply and aid from arab countries which we wont get if we stay away from this alliance.
e. the saudis can religiously blackmail the innocent pakistani masses in the name of holy sites. they can create lot of extremism in pak if we dont join them. the recent event of imam Kaaba coming to pakistan and addressing the public along with hypocrites like mullah diesel and achakazae was a step in this direction. i dont mean any disrespect towards imam kaaba but all the sane analysts think that that visit had a political aim behind it. we may see suicide blasts all over the country. the saudi version of islam has become part and parcel of our society unfortunately since the time of zia ul haq. we have already paid for it and we will pay for it in future as well.
f. if pak goes away from the alliance we will see more terrorist attacks aimed to create more rift between pak and iran and they are being carried out already.
g. iran is not on the right side of the fence. being anti US, anti israel, anti saudia they are liable to sanctions and they cant help us in dollars and riyals which we always need.
h. the relations of iran with india and her role in terrorism in baluchistan has huge negative effect on iran -pak relations and iran cant be fully trusted.
i. it is highly unlikely that if we go away from the saudi alliance it will help us in joining russian block. putin has just said that russia will never leave india. so we will be isolated
now as a muslim we should have guidance from Quran and hadith. in this difficult time the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad SAW that the dajjal will have two rivers with him. one will appear to be of fire and the other one will appear to be of cold water but the one that will appear to be of fire will actually be cold water and vice versa. this hadith has metaphorical meanings . it means that the things which will attract us will actually burn us in this world and the next . in my opinion the saudi alliance is the river of dajjal which appears to be cold water and once we will enter into it we will burn ourselves.
according to another hadith there will be a time when the best items for a muslim will be his sheep which he will take to mountains and live there in order to save his faith. what it means? does it points towards isolation ? i think yes. there will be some who disagree and say that it is cowardice. but Quran mentions about "ashab e kahaf" who escaped to a cave to save their faith. muslims did hijrah to madina and habsha to save their faith and lives. so isloation at this time to save the faith and islamic principles is something recommended so we should not fear of political isolation if we do not join the alliance. if someone thinks that by this hadith we should go in caves is a very very shallow interpretation of hadith
Quran says that if two group of muslim fight then you should first try to make them friends and still if they dont quit fighting then fight against the oppressor till he stops his aggression. in the surrent situation the KSA regime is clearly the oppressor by doing terrorism in yemen, syria and if we support it we will be supporting the oppressor.
the hadith about najd which is quote many times also teaches us what to do in this situation.
so we are in a difficult time . my post is neither for liberals for whom the words of Quran and hadith mean nothing more then to be recited on someone's death nor it is for extremists who think that every thing written in arabic is words from Quran and follow them blindly.
but as our history shows pak has always sided with the one who has the carrot and stick we will go with the saudi alliance and islamic principles mean nothing in this "islamic "republic of pakistan because going according to the teachings of Quran needs a lot of faith, understanding, loyalty and spirit of sacrifice which majority of the pakistani muslims seriously lack. we all want to live like a pharoah and want rewards like Musa A.S.