With U.S. at Odds, Islamic Republics Iran and Pakistan Forge New Ties

[Maula Jatt]

Are you talking about a hypothetical scenario where US does not exist?

Nah even if we ignore sanctions, I am talking how it sounds like a weird dream of Persian nationalist than a practical thing

Sanctions can always change, it's not a constant
Other things I discussed are

 

[khansaheeb]

Are you talking about a mega state or just a EU type organization?- cause I am not understanding the issue here...

combine defense- thy have to compete with India while we have to compete with GCC so pretty much a very bad idea
all 3 countries have different levels of development where Iran is leading - so that's another issue

For economic connectivity Pakistan is working on connecting the economies of central Asia, Afghan, Pak and Iran with each other, economic advisor says he is planning on announcing something big on March of 2022 - where all of em will gather and sign agreements
rn they are working on it/ paperwork etc

I am talking about phased transition to one mega state where we are so socially, economically, judicially and militarily integrated that there would be no need for borders between the 3 countries. Just one supreme parliament proportionally elected by the people to represent them and local councils to allocate and control resources.

 

[Dalit]

Do those who favor ties with Iran over that with America consider the prospect of loosing trade privileges with US problematic? There is a strong anti-Iran sentiment in American congress. If this type of overt move from Pakistan is noticed in US, then Pakistan will loose access to its biggest trade market. The Saudi will also not be happy with moves.

Unfortunately, Iran has powerful enemies.

LOL When the Americans commit 1% of what China committed through CPEC investment come back to make the trade market threat. No one in Pakistan gives a shite at losing US trade access as long as regional connectivity easily subtitutes US/Western trade. The potential of regional trade easily outweighs US/Western trade considering it is blackmail free. What can the Americans possibly provide to Pakistan that comes remotely close to CPEC expanding to CAS, Iran, Russia?

As for the Saudis/GCC, they are also making choices which Pakistan disapproves. They will deal with the evolving realities.

Actually not much money. Money was washed by America and money is still in America. Afghanistan got nothing spent on it. Where are the hospitals, schools infrastructure etc????

The Americans are having to import a handful of Afghan refugees and that is enough of a death sentence. The Taliban are back in power and the Americans couldn't prevent that from happening. Every single US goal to dominate the region has simply fallen apart.

 

[Wood]

LOL When the Americans commit 1% of what China committed through CPEC investment come back to make the trade market threat. No one in Pakistan gives a shite at losing US trade access as long as regional connectivity easily subtitutes US/Western trade. The potential of regional trade easily outweighs US/Western trade considering it is blackmail free. What can the Americans possibly provide to Pakistan that comes remotely close to CPEC expanding to CAS, Iran, Russia?

As for the Saudis/GCC, they are also making choices which Pakistan disapproves. They will deal with the evolving realities.

CPEC is just a means to a goal. The goal would be to manufacture goods in the industrial corridor set up by CPEC. Which consumer market would buy these goods? China only imports luxury or upstream engineering goods that they cannot manufacture themselves. Even today, Pakistan's exports to China are mainly raw materials like cotton and copper. Pakistan does not use its cotton to manufacture textiles for China. However, Pakistan exports manufactured textiles to US.

Loosing market access to US, EU and GCC will make manufacturing investments unviable for any developing country.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Comparing the manufacturing prowess of developed economies with that developing countries does not make sense. Despite all free trade agreements with China, Pakistan's main exports to China are cotton and copper. But Pakistan is able to export manufactured textiles to US across seas more profitably. Why is it that Pakistan is not able to export the same manufactured goods to China?

Germany, Japan, China, Korea - most if not all of these countries got rich by exporting to US and other European countries. Only now are they able to trade high end engineering / luxury goods with each other. Developing South Asian countries are simply not at that stage of development yet.

British empire got rich exporting steam engines to everyone, US did similar from jets to refrigerators after WWII (though changed to exporting US$ later) to everyone, who said they rely on US/EU markets to become rich? Take Germany's pillar industry as an example, for their iconic brand Mercedes Benz largest markets were China, followed by Germany (home market), USA, Great Britain and South Korea rounding up top five, where is your "rely on exports to EU"? There are 26 nations in EU for Germany to export to, but combined Mercedes Benz sales is even smaller than a far-away South Korea, let alone China. Similarly trend applies to BMW, Audi, Maybach and such. If even Germany right in middle of EU can't rely on exports to her fellow EU states but rely on China, you expect other countries to rely on EU?

Mercedes-Benz Media

Exklusive Einblicke und individuelle Angebote: Erleben Sie mit Mercedes-Benz das Maximum aus digitaler Live-PR. Exclusive insights and individual offers: Experience the maximum of digital live PR with Mercedes-Benz.

media.daimler.com

 

[Wood]

British empire got rich exporting machines to everyone, US did the same after WWII (though changed to exporting Dollar later) to everyone, who said they rely on US/EU markets to become rich? Take Germany's pillar industry as an example, for their iconic brand Mercedes Benz largest markets were China, followed by Germany (home market), USA, Great Britain and South Korea rounding up top five, where is your "rely on exports to EU"? There are 26 nations in EU for Germany to export to, but combined Mercedes Benz sales is even smaller than a far-away South Korea, let alone China. Similarly trend applies to BMW, Audi, Maybach and such. If even Germany right in middle of EU can't rely on exports to her fellow EU states but rely on China, you expect other countries to rely on EU?

Mercedes-Benz Media

Exklusive Einblicke und individuelle Angebote: Erleben Sie mit Mercedes-Benz das Maximum aus digitaler Live-PR. Exclusive insights and individual offers: Experience the maximum of digital live PR with Mercedes-Benz.

media.daimler.com

Can you please stop with the straw man arguments?

Britain was a colonist. It got rich by looting the colonies. America got rich by manufacturing for the world wars. Both these countries had more available resources relative to their population size. Developing countries today do not have that option.

The luxury car brands that germany exports is not a thing that developing countries can make at the drop of a hat. This is another silly example. Stop coming at me with examples that do not apply for poor countries.

 

[aryobarzan]

In whatever side of this discussion you are here is what is happening:
Iran to finalize free trade deal with Pakistan until February: Minister
Sunday, 07 November 2021 6:12 PM [ Last Update: Sunday, 07 November 2021 7:38 PM ]

Iran says a long-anticipated free deal with Pakistan is expected to come into effect in three months.
Iran’s minister of trade Reza Fatemi Amin says a long-anticipated free trade agreement with Pakistan will come into effect in early 2022.
Fatemi Ami said on Sunday following a two-day meeting in Tehran with senior Pakistani officials that the two sides had agreed to accelerate discussions on tariffs and other issues in order to start to implement the free trade agreement.
“It has been agreed that hurdles and problems facing the free trade (agreement) between the two countries are removed within the next three months,” said Fatemi Amin.
The minister had said on Saturday that Iran and Pakistan had agreed to increase the value of annual trade by five times in the next two years to reach a target of $5 billion.

He made the comments after meeting Abdul Razak Dawood, the top commerce and investment adviser to the Pakistani prime minister who led his government’s delegation in the visit to Tehran.
Dawood said on Twitter on Sunday that he had managed to reach major agreements in Tehran including on launching a mechanism for bartering in Pakistani rice.
Iran and Pakistan had also agreed to launch border markets and increase their cooperation on customs issues, said Dawood after the conclusion of a ninth session of the joint trade committee between the two countries.
He said Iran had also agreed to allow increased access to Pakistan to a key road corridor that links the country to Turkey.
The official said that transportation through the Iranian corridor will be carried out under the TIR Convention, an international scheme that allows cargoes to travel from departure to destination without being opened up for customs checks.

 

[Meengla]

GCC/US/EU export markets are the most lucrative for the type of goods that these countries are able to manufacture at their stage of industrialization (relative to the rest of the world).

Yes.
You have it right in this thread. And Pakistani planners know well which side of the bread is buttered.

And per my understanding, Pakistan has been conveying to the West that Pakistan will not join any 'camp', not even the Chinese camp as long as Pakistan is not being asked to be made part of some anti-China alliance. Beyond that, sky is the limit for cooperation with America. Pakistan has been stressing 'geo-economics'; though that term might mean just a slogan but I think the understanding in Pakistan is that continued, futile focus on 'defense' matters cannot feed the rapidly growing population of Pakistan.

Major General Tariq Khan's interview (to Moeed Pirzada) as posted in this forum some months hinted toward that policy: Allow America to build a counter to CPEC, and even let Americans to build a port of their own in Pakistan. Wishful thinking, yes. But the faults dont' lie with the Chinese or the Pakistani policies. They lie in the divided, inconsistent, wasteful, incoherent foreign policy by America. Today's NY Times has the main article about how a lack of focus is making America lose the Cobalt mines in Congo to China despite decades of diplomacy and billions in investment. Notice how America lost its focus, especially after 9/11, while the Chinese have benefited from the blunders. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/21/world/us-china-energy.html

 

[Wood]

Yes.
You have it right in this thread. And Pakistani planners know well which side of the bread is buttered.

Thanks for siding with sanity. Developing countries of South Asia and Africa can only produce low value good at this stage of their development. These goods can only be exported to richer countries that do not produce them on their own and are not already saturated with cheaper alternatives from China. Even this market is a challenge for developing countries because it is hard to find a market that is not fully saturated by China.

The answer is obvious for anyone who is willing to not let their vision clouded with empty nationalism and pride.

Obama's TPP was a strategy to diversify the production of low value goods away from China. This would have helped US if it was implemented in the early part of this decade. But alas, domestic politics in US derailed it.

 

[Paul2]

A strong Ira-Pak can solve half of Pakistan's problems that we are facing currently- good relationship like we have with Turkey can be a real game changer for our economy, diplomacy, culture, and multiple other sectors- as they're neighbors who we share bonds for thousands of years

Iran, Pakistan, Turkey under one roof? Can't imagine how this will look like.

I can think of Saudi-Israeli-Egyptian military block more readily than this.

 

[Maula Jatt]

Iran, Pakistan, Turkey under one roof? Can't imagine how this will look like.

Nah just Ira-Pak as friendly countries
Turkey is a non-issue

GCC and US are a bigger issue

 

[Titanium100]

Nah just Ira-Pak as friendly countries
Turkey is a non-issue

GCC and US are a bigger issue

Why is Turkey exactly non-issue here? There is more benefit in Turkey than anyone else aside from China. They have incredible defense tech productions and Pakistan needs that steriods and juice Turkey is providing them. It is about progress in state building the two most important countries currently for Pakistan is China and Turkey respectively. Iran could be good for trade and regional ties it is useful as well but not as nearly as these two previously mentioned. pakistan needs edge in the military sphere and they readily provide that

 

[Maula Jatt]

Why is Turkey exactly non-issue here? There is more benefit in Turkey than anyone else aside from China. They have incredible defense tech productions and Pakistan needs that steriods and juice Turkey is providing them. It is about progress in state building the two most important countries currently for Pakistan is China and Turkey respectively. Iran could be good for trade and regional ties it is useful as well but not as nearly as these two previously mentioned. pakistan needs edge in the military sphere and they readily provide that

Turkey is a great friend and I am in no way shape or form asking anything that should affect our relationship with them - infact we should build on it

But I think what the poster was suggesting is that being friends with Iran and Turkey at the same time is not possible
I don't think- they don't have blood fued and are mature enough to not make it an issue

That's why I said it's a non-issue in terms of enhancing our relationship with Iran

Our issues on that front mainly arise from Gulf and US (both we rely heavily on for export destinations)

But first and foremost Pakistan needs atleast a trillion $ economy- every other edge will come on its own

Millitary prowess is the dog on a walk but owner is economy and I think you can get more economic benefits out of your neighbors than you can with your other partners - envisioning a sanctions free Iran
Besides building a friendly relationship with your neighbor is a good decision from a national security pov too

 

[Titanium100]

But first and foremost Pakistan needs atleast a trillion $ economy- every other edge will come on its own

Millitary prowess is the dog on a walk but owner is economy and I think you can get more economic benefits out of your neighbors than you can with your other partners - envisioning a sanctions free Iran
Besides building a friendly relationship with your neighbor is a good decision from a national security pov too

This is a major fallacy my brother.. Economy is good and all but it doesn't translate into military power and might. Take example Brazil it has huge economy but it is weaker than most states in Eurasia and MENA. Brazil is conventionally weaker than both Morocco and Algeria atleast 3 times over.. While population wise it is 5 times larger than Algeria.

Military power doesn't automatically translate into economy it can only have correlation with ambition. Example winning wars make states wealthier example the US was not wealthy pre-WW2 and everything changed after that the USD became world currency sometime in the 70s alongside OIL than it become petrodollar.

What Pakistan needs is power and decent economy that is functional like the current one but above all most what it needs is military power period. The economy will come with it eventually. This world order will eventually crash and be replaced by another one since newer powers has risen what pakistan needs is to position itself well for the next one and that can only came via sheer brute strength

 

[QWECXZ]

Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan should drop their economic borders and have one currency and act and trade as one community, which would have a combined population of about 380 million people. No customs, taxes or duty between them and strategic agreements for exports and imports and act and trade as a single entity; Combine their defense, education, research and development and one voice to the world.

Hard to materialize. Iran is hesitant to recognize Taliban, just like most countries in the world.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned, it seems that there are only two options: 1- Taliban (who pretends they have changed but we are not sure of that yet and we are seeing how things will develop in future), 2- A US-installed puppet regime that cannot get close to Iran and will be brainwashed to hate Iran. Both options are bad for Iran at the moment.

As for Pakistan, that's not likely either. For example, the Iran-Pakistan pipeline never materialized even though it was in the interest of Pakistan as well. Iran can actually bring that case to the UN court of arbitration but it is not doing so for geopolitical reasons at the moment. I honestly do not think this barter thing would work either. If history is any indication for predicting future, we have a better chance at developing our economic ties with Taliban than Pakistan in my opinion.

Id add couple of central Asian countries too like Tajikistan,Uzbekistan etc, it'll be a powerful group though upwards of trillion $ economy and potential of easily breaking 3$ trillion limit in a decade or 15 years if things work out perfectly

but I don't think this idea is very good for Iran- They don't up as the most dominant group here
This sounds more like a pipedream of a Persian nationalist trying to create Iranic council but so many problems with this one if you even begin to start thinking about it

In practical terms its a disaster

Why? What other country besides Iran can be the most dominant one among Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, etc.?
Even a heavily sanctioned Iran is still in a better form that all those countries in the list with more regional influence.

Ironically, a Persian nationalist would prefer to add countries like Republic of Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Kuwait and Iraq to the list. It's ironic, but true. Historically, we have more often wanted to increase our influence towards our western borders than our eastern borders.