What's new

Why Saudi Arabia and Iran are desperately trying to court Imran Khan

I have been to Iran a couple of times now, to various cities as well, from Tehran (where you encounter the liberal-moderate folk) all the way to Qom and Mashad (the conservative areas). Let me tell you that what you see on mainstream media to what the reality is are two different things. It's almost the exact same perception people have in the West towards Pakistan i.e that Pakistan is a taliban-esque burqa wearing non-developed ghetto country all over such as tv shows like Homeland, try to tell people here of how modernized many cities in Pakistan are like Lahore, Karachi Islamabad etc with regards to infrastructure and social life and people won't believe you. Same way in Iran, despite what they show you in the media, most people from the upper class to the lower are supportive of their government. They are quite a developed country as well, engineering and infrastructure wise. The only thing that is tough there right now is the economy and inflation which is mostly the fault of sanctions slapped on them over the last couple of decades for not bowing down to the West.

So yes in terms of investment Iran cannot offer as much as Saudi can, but strategic wise it can a lot. The under-construction Iran-Pakistan-China gasline has huge benefits to us, and something the US is very against and pressuring Pak to abandon. And with Iran's very close ties to Russia it can only benefit Pak more by strengthening it's own ties with Russia. I do know Saudis have invested billions into Pak infrastructure, but it has come with a price as well, from trying to involve us in their Yemen war as well as their investing into thousands of madrassahs we can do without as that is where a lot of sectarian violence and unfortunately stemmed from. Definitely we should not choose one over the other and try to ensure a neutral-collaborative approach.

This is the fault of their own government. They isolate their people and their country. Who do they have a positive relationship with? Their governments are nearly as mismanaged as ours. They do nothing to build cultural or diplomatic ties between people next door. Long term who is at loss for this policy? It's not Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. Even in Iraq the shia clerics they tried to use as puppets now stand independently. The mullahs over played the sectarian card.
 
.
This is the fault of their own government. They isolate their people and their country. Who do they have a positive relationship with? Their governments are nearly as mismanaged as ours. They do nothing to build cultural or diplomatic ties between people next door. Long term who is at loss for this policy? It's not Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. Even in Iraq the shia clerics they tried to use as puppets now stand independently. The mullahs over played the sectarian card.

Well yes and no to some extent, I would agree that their little to no relationship with Pakistan was their own fault, maybe perhaps because they had a wrong perception that we were a salafist regime like Saudi Arabia due to our close ties with ksa and the whole taliban-afghan govt issue in the 90's. Hopefully that perception is changing now.

As for their other relationships, they are not as isolated as you say, they have deep strong ties with Syria and positive relationships with China and Russia, it's their military and financial support for hezbollah in Lebanon that has earned them the cross-hairs of Israel and the US and therefore lots of sanctions (which they say is because of their nuclear work but we know why they are really there).

Now recently they have been developing their chabahar port and offered EQUAL business opportunity to both India and Pakistan for it's use, India has already accepted, Pakistan should do so as well I believe. We are being pressured by US and Saudi not to and that would be a mistake, refraining from this would be a bad idea as it would deepen Iranian-Indian ties only, we need to maintain an equal presence there. There is no reason why we cant make use of that port AND develop out own Gwadar port. Hopefully the new Pak administration approaches this Saudi-Iran situation openly and not choose one over the other.
 
.
I just think that the Muslim world will not have peace till Iran finds peace.

Cheers, Doc
That detective, is the right question but the wrong answer. Its not about Iran but the old cold war power plays. Iran is keeping the Russian interest in the region.
The Iranians on the other hand see a need to separate their identity from the Arabs, Shia Islam is the perfect vehicle even though it is essentially a political dispute centered in Arabia itself- the religious interpretation differences are essentially not a contentious issue when looked at through a core religious perspective.

This is Persia asserting itself and will always be. Rather the whole Sunni-Shia dispute is a political vessel disguised as a religious one. Very few Sunnis would disagree with different interpretations (Fiqh) and so wouldn’t Shia, but the contention is a disguised divisive narrative about personalities who lived 1500 years ago and their thoughts and emotions- that is then used as the base for conflict.
However, religious justification for political and power moves isn’t new, from the inquisition to the Sauds with Abdul Wahab for this religious justification.

At the end language is higher than religion in unity, only the smartest recognize it and is better if recognized now by people in the subcontinent than later.

Well yes and no to some extent, I would agree that their little to no relationship with Pakistan was their own fault, maybe perhaps because they had a wrong perception that we were a salafist regime like Saudi Arabia due to our close ties with ksa and the whole taliban-afghan govt issue in the 90's. Hopefully that perception is changing now.

As for their other relationships, they are not as isolated as you say, they have deep strong ties with Syria and positive relationships with China and Russia, it's their military and financial support for hezbollah in Lebanon that has earned them the cross-hairs of Israel and the US and therefore lots of sanctions (which they say is because of their nuclear work but we know why they are really there).

Now recently they have been developing their chabahar port and offered EQUAL business opportunity to both India and Pakistan for it's use, India has already accepted, Pakistan should do so as well I believe. We are being pressured by US and Saudi not to and that would be a mistake, refraining from this would be a bad idea as it would deepen Iranian-Indian ties only, we need to maintain an equal presence there. There is no reason why we cant make use of that port AND develop out own Gwadar port. Hopefully the new Pak administration approaches this Saudi-Iran situation openly and not choose one over the other.
Iran had a choice after the Iran Iraq war to avoid being sectarian and reach out to their neighbors. However they will say they were reacting to Arab aggression and the Arabs will blame Russia and so on.
What matters is today, and today Chahbahar is a competitor to Gwadar for shipments to central Asia including Afghanistan.
 
.
Because IK is “great leader” who is “dear” to his subjects.
 
.
I don't understand why we stay neutral, Iran offers us nothing.
 
.
Why Saudi Arabia and Iran are desperately trying to court Imran Khan
#Diplomacy
For the first time in their modern relations, neither Iran nor Saudi Arabia have a political pawn in Islamabad that they can manipulate

000_1998FQ.jpg


Kamal Alam

Thursday 27 September 2018 12:50 UTC
Thursday 27 September 2018 12:57 UTC
redditwhatsapp googleplus 1607
Topics:
Diplomacy
Tags:
Pakistan; Saudi Arabia; Iran; Imran Khan; Sunni-Shiite relations
Show comments
Since the election of Imran Khan as Pakistan's 22nd prime minister, there has been a near frantic diplomatic shuttling between Tehran, Riyadh and Islamabad. That the Saudis and Iranians are interested in Pakistan is nothing new. Both Tehran and Riyadh have engaged in decades-long rivalry to influence Pakistan.

However, the urgency in both capitals to court the new Pakistani leader comes at a time when - for the first time in the history of their relations - neither Iran nor Saudi Arabia have a political pawn in Islamabad that they can manipulate.

Pakistan's army under the current chief of army staff, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, who was appointed in 2016, has made sure Pakistan continues its support of the GCC countries but without prejudicing its relationship with Iran.

The Bajwa Doctrine
Last November, General Bajwa became the first Pakistani army chief to undertake an official visit to Iran in more than 30 years. The visit was described by Iranian media as historic.

Previously, former army chiefs, like General Raheel Sharif and General Pervez Musharraf, had travelled to Tehran but not on an official military visit. The Pakistani military has always held the cards when it comes to Pakistan's strategic foreign policy.

General Bajwa has managed to mend ties with Iran during his two years at the helm. He also brought the UAE back into Pakistan's favour. Before Bajwa, relations between UAE and Pakistan had been very cool due to the latter's refusal to send troops to Yemen as part of the war effort led by Saudi Arabia.

While General Bajwa has made it clear to the Saudis that Pakistan's army shall defend Saudi Arabia from any outside aggression, he, nonetheless, maintained a neutral stand over the Qatar crisis when both Saudi Arabia and UAE, along with Bahrain and Egypt, imposed a blockade on Qatar in June 2017.

The Bajwa Doctrine in the Middle East, has meant that Pakistan’s military can be an equal help to regional powers, without taking sides and also provide an avenue for mediation where needed

This also meant that General Bajwa made the Saudis aware that the Pakistan Army will not take sides in the Gulf crisis, despite heavy pressure from the Saudis on Pakistan to take part in the blockade against Qatar. Instead, and in a clear message to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan has increased its tradevolume with Qatar since the blockade.

The Qataris are also seeking assistance from the Pakistan Army for the security of the FIFA World Cup due in 2022 in Doha. Under General Bajwa, the Pakistan Army has sought to provide more than just boots on the ground. It also sought to provideQatar with its latest fighter jet, the JF-17, jointly produced with China.



000_U16DW.jpg
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani meets with Pakistan Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa (L) in Tehran on 6 November, 2017 (AFP)
So, the Bajwa Doctrine in the Middle East has meant that Pakistan’s military can be an equal help to regional powers, without taking sides, and also provide an avenue for mediation where needed.

In his first major foreign policy speech, Khan said that he would like Pakistan to play a leading role in mediating between Riyadh and Tehran to bring about conflict resolution in the Middle East.

No foreign patrons or alliances
The Saudis had viewed the former prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, as their puppet, while they perceived his predecessor, Asif Ali Zardari, as Iran's puppet. With the coming of Khan, the four decade-long hold of the two-party system has been broken and - unlike the Bhuttos, Zardaris and Sharifs - he has no foreign patron or alliances.

Khan has set a precedent by refusing a Saudi request to pardon Nawaz Sharif and send him to Riyadh.

At the same time, following the Pakistan Army's playbook, Khan has reached out to Iran, and has held public meetings with the Iranian ambassador to reassure Tehran that Pakistan and Iran are brothers. The Iranian foreign minister, Javed Zarif, was the first foreign dignitary to pay Khan a visit.

Khan also accepted an invitation for a state visit to Tehran. Last month, he met with the leading Shia religious leaders of Pakistan to assure them of a balance in relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran. He said that Pakistan was on Iran's side against the American sanctions and pressure on Tehran.

Shortly after Khan took power, the Saudis sanctioned a loan to Pakistan via the Islamic Development Bank. They were also quick to dispatch their minister of information with a direct invitation to visit Riyadh. The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, made a promise of heavy investments in Pakistan.

A fractured Middle East
Bruce Riedel, a former adviser to former US President Barack Obama and a CIA veteran, has been a regular observer of the Pakistan-Saudi-American axis. He has been arguing for over a decade now that the Saudis view Pakistan as pivot for their own security – there is simply no way the Saudis can afford to lose Pakistan as a strategic partner.

This compliments a remarkable insight into Pakistan by the former head of Saudi Intelligence, Prince Turki bin Faisal, whereby he said with confidence that the Pakistani Army was the ultimate decision maker, and that Pakistani politicians "should get their act together". Perhaps now, the politicians have gotten their act together which is making the Saudis nervous.

Pakistan now has a civilian leader who is on the same page with the military, thereby making it harder for both Saudi Arabia and Iran to blackmail Islamabad, simply through financial incentives of free barrels of oil or a pipeline through the desert.

This is a key reason why both Saudi and Iran are seeking to court Imran Khan's favour.

READ MORE ►

Pakistan's dilemma: Can Imran Khan afford to tilt towards Iran?

Underlining Khan's neutrality - of course - is the performance of the Pakistani military in its own war on terror. It is a widely acknowledged fact that the Pakistan Army has clearly won its battle against the terrorist insurgents that once ran havoc in the north west of Pakistan. For the first time in over a decade, the Pakistani military is able to look beyond its borders as a result of the operations on the Afghan frontier.

Simultaneously successful defence pacts with Russia, Turkey and China have made Pakistan far more confident than it was in the 1990s or the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Pakistan has also played a part in helping the Iraqi military defeat Islamic State (IS) group. In a rare public statement, Baghdad thanked Pakistan for its assistance in fighting terrorism in Iraq.

In Syria, Pakistan has kept a strongly neutral stance, making it perhaps the only major Organisation of Islamic Conference that has not taken sides in the war, while at the same time being militarily allied with all major intervening states, i.e. Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

This successful triangulation means the mad rush and revolving door of Saudi and Iranian diplomats in Islamabad will continue as both countries seek Pakistan’s military and diplomatic support to mediate in the myriad of conflicts raging across the region.

- Kamal Alam is a visiting fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). He specialises in contemporary military history of the Arab world and Pakistan. He is a fellow for Syrian affairs at the Institute for Statecraft, and is a visiting lecturer at several military staff colleges across the Middle East, Pakistan and the UK.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/colum...-s-desperate-attempt-court-pakistan-376570330

'
'
'
'
'
trump-saudi-arabia lost   brothers.jpg



title of knighthood by a monarch,

let the armageddon begin
 
.
Iranians and Arabs have always tried to subjugate our Governments (under the disguise of brotherly relations) by putting a capacity-lock on Pakistan's interests. For instance, BLA has been reported to have fled the Balochistan area for Iranian border towns. We already know that Arabs were financing TTP at one point in time.

The current shift in mood is primarily because of the massive public participation in Pakistan General Elections 2018. These two states (Iran & SA) and their cronies at their very least recognize the strength of public votes and their elected leader. An alien-vision in the neighborhood where dirty politics and enriched elites tend to remain dominant on a very passive and conditionally enslaved populace. Khan for them is an outsider with millions of voters rallying behind him; A strength and quality unattainable using oil and gas riches.

Criminals flee to all sorts of borders and countries wherever they can hide or escape enforcement officers so terrorists fleeing across to Iran , Afghanistan or India would be normal and expected. Issue only arises if they are given official patronage by those countries. There is no evidence that Iran has given patronage to anti-Pakistan terrorists. We have evidence that Afghanistan and India have.

" For instance, BLA has been reported to have fled the Balochistan area for Iranian border towns. "
 
Last edited:
.
That detective, is the right question but the wrong answer. Its not about Iran but the old cold war power plays. Iran is keeping the Russian interest in the region.
The Iranians on the other hand see a need to separate their identity from the Arabs, Shia Islam is the perfect vehicle even though it is essentially a political dispute centered in Arabia itself- the religious interpretation differences are essentially not a contentious issue when looked at through a core religious perspective.

This is Persia asserting itself and will always be. Rather the whole Sunni-Shia dispute is a political vessel disguised as a religious one. Very few Sunnis would disagree with different interpretations (Fiqh) and so wouldn’t Shia, but the contention is a disguised divisive narrative about personalities who lived 1500 years ago and their thoughts and emotions- that is then used as the base for conflict.
However, religious justification for political and power moves isn’t new, from the inquisition to the Sauds with Abdul Wahab for this religious justification.

At the end language is higher than religion in unity, only the smartest recognize it and is better if recognized now by people in the subcontinent than later.


Iran had a choice after the Iran Iraq war to avoid being sectarian and reach out to their neighbors. However they will say they were reacting to Arab aggression and the Arabs will blame Russia and so on.
What matters is today, and today Chahbahar is a competitor to Gwadar for shipments to central Asia including Afghanistan.

@I.R.A

Please read this.

This is not me ...

Cheers, Doc
 
.
That detective, is the right question but the wrong answer. Its not about Iran but the old cold war power plays. Iran is keeping the Russian interest in the region.
The Iranians on the other hand see a need to separate their identity from the Arabs, Shia Islam is the perfect vehicle even though it is essentially a political dispute centered in Arabia itself- the religious interpretation differences are essentially not a contentious issue when looked at through a core religious perspective.

This is Persia asserting itself and will always be. Rather the whole Sunni-Shia dispute is a political vessel disguised as a religious one. Very few Sunnis would disagree with different interpretations (Fiqh) and so wouldn’t Shia, but the contention is a disguised divisive narrative about personalities who lived 1500 years ago and their thoughts and emotions- that is then used as the base for conflict.
However, religious justification for political and power moves isn’t new, from the inquisition to the Sauds with Abdul Wahab for this religious justification.

At the end language is higher than religion in unity, only the smartest recognize it and is better if recognized now by people in the subcontinent than later.


Iran had a choice after the Iran Iraq war to avoid being sectarian and reach out to their neighbors. However they will say they were reacting to Arab aggression and the Arabs will blame Russia and so on.
What matters is today, and today Chahbahar is a competitor to Gwadar for shipments to central Asia including Afghanistan.
In short , Iran is and will be our enemy , on all front , religion , political , economical , Military , Security .Because that serves Iran's interest best . It is only us behaving like cry babies not looking after our interests . As I famously said , We have more Iran lover in Pakistan then Iran ...
 
.
@I.R.A

Please read this.

This is not me ...

Cheers, Doc
It doesn’t matter who it is, current hatred, religious bigotry and misunderstandings aside.. as I told Joe before regarding the current leadership of India- are issues like Kashmir so important 50 years from now? Are we so adamant to let what is essential a water source define alliances 50 years from now when the world resources and climate will be at a critical juncture and military might will play much more vociferously?
Would you then rather have someone speaking to you in English and seeing you eating foods alien to them as an ally or someone who shares food and language seperared by a steel fence and nothing more fighting all those that will come for your crop giving lands?
 
.
We already know that Arabs were financing TTP

:woot:
We means officials of defence.pk?

Why Saudi Arabia and Iran are desperately trying to court Imran Khan
#Diplomacy
For the first time in their modern relations, neither Iran nor Saudi Arabia have a political pawn in Islamabad that they can manipulate

000_1998FQ.jpg


Kamal Alam

Thursday 27 September 2018 12:50 UTC
Thursday 27 September 2018 12:57 UTC
redditwhatsapp googleplus 1607
Topics:
Diplomacy
Tags:
Pakistan; Saudi Arabia; Iran; Imran Khan; Sunni-Shiite relations
Show comments
Since the election of Imran Khan as Pakistan's 22nd prime minister, there has been a near frantic diplomatic shuttling between Tehran, Riyadh and Islamabad. That the Saudis and Iranians are interested in Pakistan is nothing new. Both Tehran and Riyadh have engaged in decades-long rivalry to influence Pakistan.

However, the urgency in both capitals to court the new Pakistani leader comes at a time when - for the first time in the history of their relations - neither Iran nor Saudi Arabia have a political pawn in Islamabad that they can manipulate.

Pakistan's army under the current chief of army staff, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, who was appointed in 2016, has made sure Pakistan continues its support of the GCC countries but without prejudicing its relationship with Iran.

The Bajwa Doctrine
Last November, General Bajwa became the first Pakistani army chief to undertake an official visit to Iran in more than 30 years. The visit was described by Iranian media as historic.

Previously, former army chiefs, like General Raheel Sharif and General Pervez Musharraf, had travelled to Tehran but not on an official military visit. The Pakistani military has always held the cards when it comes to Pakistan's strategic foreign policy.

General Bajwa has managed to mend ties with Iran during his two years at the helm. He also brought the UAE back into Pakistan's favour. Before Bajwa, relations between UAE and Pakistan had been very cool due to the latter's refusal to send troops to Yemen as part of the war effort led by Saudi Arabia.

While General Bajwa has made it clear to the Saudis that Pakistan's army shall defend Saudi Arabia from any outside aggression, he, nonetheless, maintained a neutral stand over the Qatar crisis when both Saudi Arabia and UAE, along with Bahrain and Egypt, imposed a blockade on Qatar in June 2017.

The Bajwa Doctrine in the Middle East, has meant that Pakistan’s military can be an equal help to regional powers, without taking sides and also provide an avenue for mediation where needed

This also meant that General Bajwa made the Saudis aware that the Pakistan Army will not take sides in the Gulf crisis, despite heavy pressure from the Saudis on Pakistan to take part in the blockade against Qatar. Instead, and in a clear message to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan has increased its tradevolume with Qatar since the blockade.

The Qataris are also seeking assistance from the Pakistan Army for the security of the FIFA World Cup due in 2022 in Doha. Under General Bajwa, the Pakistan Army has sought to provide more than just boots on the ground. It also sought to provideQatar with its latest fighter jet, the JF-17, jointly produced with China.



000_U16DW.jpg
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani meets with Pakistan Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa (L) in Tehran on 6 November, 2017 (AFP)
So, the Bajwa Doctrine in the Middle East has meant that Pakistan’s military can be an equal help to regional powers, without taking sides, and also provide an avenue for mediation where needed.

In his first major foreign policy speech, Khan said that he would like Pakistan to play a leading role in mediating between Riyadh and Tehran to bring about conflict resolution in the Middle East.

No foreign patrons or alliances
The Saudis had viewed the former prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, as their puppet, while they perceived his predecessor, Asif Ali Zardari, as Iran's puppet. With the coming of Khan, the four decade-long hold of the two-party system has been broken and - unlike the Bhuttos, Zardaris and Sharifs - he has no foreign patron or alliances.

Khan has set a precedent by refusing a Saudi request to pardon Nawaz Sharif and send him to Riyadh.

At the same time, following the Pakistan Army's playbook, Khan has reached out to Iran, and has held public meetings with the Iranian ambassador to reassure Tehran that Pakistan and Iran are brothers. The Iranian foreign minister, Javed Zarif, was the first foreign dignitary to pay Khan a visit.

Khan also accepted an invitation for a state visit to Tehran. Last month, he met with the leading Shia religious leaders of Pakistan to assure them of a balance in relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran. He said that Pakistan was on Iran's side against the American sanctions and pressure on Tehran.

Shortly after Khan took power, the Saudis sanctioned a loan to Pakistan via the Islamic Development Bank. They were also quick to dispatch their minister of information with a direct invitation to visit Riyadh. The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, made a promise of heavy investments in Pakistan.

A fractured Middle East
Bruce Riedel, a former adviser to former US President Barack Obama and a CIA veteran, has been a regular observer of the Pakistan-Saudi-American axis. He has been arguing for over a decade now that the Saudis view Pakistan as pivot for their own security – there is simply no way the Saudis can afford to lose Pakistan as a strategic partner.

This compliments a remarkable insight into Pakistan by the former head of Saudi Intelligence, Prince Turki bin Faisal, whereby he said with confidence that the Pakistani Army was the ultimate decision maker, and that Pakistani politicians "should get their act together". Perhaps now, the politicians have gotten their act together which is making the Saudis nervous.

Pakistan now has a civilian leader who is on the same page with the military, thereby making it harder for both Saudi Arabia and Iran to blackmail Islamabad, simply through financial incentives of free barrels of oil or a pipeline through the desert.

This is a key reason why both Saudi and Iran are seeking to court Imran Khan's favour.

READ MORE ►

Pakistan's dilemma: Can Imran Khan afford to tilt towards Iran?

Underlining Khan's neutrality - of course - is the performance of the Pakistani military in its own war on terror. It is a widely acknowledged fact that the Pakistan Army has clearly won its battle against the terrorist insurgents that once ran havoc in the north west of Pakistan. For the first time in over a decade, the Pakistani military is able to look beyond its borders as a result of the operations on the Afghan frontier.

Simultaneously successful defence pacts with Russia, Turkey and China have made Pakistan far more confident than it was in the 1990s or the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Pakistan has also played a part in helping the Iraqi military defeat Islamic State (IS) group. In a rare public statement, Baghdad thanked Pakistan for its assistance in fighting terrorism in Iraq.

In Syria, Pakistan has kept a strongly neutral stance, making it perhaps the only major Organisation of Islamic Conference that has not taken sides in the war, while at the same time being militarily allied with all major intervening states, i.e. Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

This successful triangulation means the mad rush and revolving door of Saudi and Iranian diplomats in Islamabad will continue as both countries seek Pakistan’s military and diplomatic support to mediate in the myriad of conflicts raging across the region.

- Kamal Alam is a visiting fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). He specialises in contemporary military history of the Arab world and Pakistan. He is a fellow for Syrian affairs at the Institute for Statecraft, and is a visiting lecturer at several military staff colleges across the Middle East, Pakistan and the UK.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/colum...-s-desperate-attempt-court-pakistan-376570330


Just the guess work of Mr. Alam, based on one visit of Iranian FM followed by IK visit to Saudi Arabia.
Waste of time.
 
.
Countries like Pak and Turkey are the central powers of the Muslim world in all senses of the word!!! Look at their histories!!!! Hence, they keep the balance...
 
.
We should have balance policy but to be honest more tilted towards saudia for the sake of Pakistan interest. They are investing in our country and we should keep that in front of us country interest first. What Iran is investing?
But the countries that "invest" in Pakistan are essentially buying ownership rights to Pakistan. Look at China. CPEC is good for Pakistan's economy, but China is slowly owning Pakistan's economy. Good case in point is CHina owning 60% of Pakistan's stock exchange. Its not about price, its all about value. Saudis and Chinese give Pakistan money, but at what cost that Pakistan has to pay?

I don't understand why we stay neutral, Iran offers us nothing.
Really? For one you can get huge volumes of gas easily and you need it. And Iran currently isnt under international sanctions but you guys have not made any moves to fulfil that. Iran probably has technology and education to offer your population. Iran can even mediate between Pakistan and India.
 
.
In short , Iran is and will be our enemy , on all front , religion , political , economical , Military , Security .Because that serves Iran's interest best . It is only us behaving like cry babies not looking after our interests . As I famously said , We have more Iran lover in Pakistan then Iran ...

Do you know in all our non Islamic history, we never waged war once on India?

And the same from your side.

Just overlapping spheres of influence at the peripheries.

Cheers, Doc

But the countries that "invest" in Pakistan are essentially buying ownership rights to Pakistan. Look at China. CPEC is good for Pakistan's economy, but China is slowly owning Pakistan's economy. Good case in point is CHina owning 60% of Pakistan's stock exchange. Its not about price, its all about value. Saudis and Chinese give Pakistan money, but at what cost that Pakistan has to pay?


Really? For one you can get huge volumes of gas easily and you need it. And Iran currently isnt under international sanctions but you guys have not made any moves to fulfil that. Iran probably has technology and education to offer your population. Iran can even mediate between Pakistan and India.

You should NEVER mediate.

Leave the Turks to axe their feet ....

Cheers, Doc

It doesn’t matter who it is, current hatred, religious bigotry and misunderstandings aside.. as I told Joe before regarding the current leadership of India- are issues like Kashmir so important 50 years from now? Are we so adamant to let what is essential a water source define alliances 50 years from now when the world resources and climate will be at a critical juncture and military might will play much more vociferously?
Would you then rather have someone speaking to you in English and seeing you eating foods alien to them as an ally or someone who shares food and language seperared by a steel fence and nothing more fighting all those that will come for your crop giving lands?

I've always been with this line of reasoning.

But since partition became a reality, and the relationship fraught, India cannot risk you having any control over the water.

Simply put we trust ourselves to be better than you when it comes to it.

Cheers, Doc
 
.
@I.R.A

Please read this.

This is not me ...

Cheers, Doc


Please read the article word by word and shame your media that refuses to accept the change that happened in Pakistan ........... first thing.

Second ......... read again with full concentration .......... and tell your countrymen how impossible it is to isolate and ignore Pakistan. (funnily you consider Pakistan your own protector and still refuse to talk like children)

Third ......... the day Muslim world and Muslims accept the true and correct Islamic history ...... justifications for this ridiculous some 1000 years old religious division (which happens to be strictly in contradiction with Islam itself) would vanish. The day we successfully abolish Priesthood, fatwa shops, and personality worship ....... we will be back on track. And this is not me only, this same thing (to some extent) to revisit and correct the history was said by Muslim League founder Sir Sultan Muhammad Shah who happened to be Agha Khan III.

And to be really honest in conveying my thoughts ......... sunni shia etc..... all of them have been and are still following persian propaganda as their religion for too long. It is now useless to say this again that the people who wrote narrations and traditions for sunni were the same people writing it separately for shia.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom