Media discussion on VOA Urdu Radio Program ‘Round Table.’ The discussion revolves around President Obama’s speech on Tuesday, September 11, and the Russian proposal regarding Syrian chemical weapons.

Panel included:

– MJ Khan – Representative for Republican Party, US
– Arif Ansar – Chief Analyst, PoliTact, Washington DC
– Zafar Tahir – Representative for Democratic Party, US
– Manzar Waseem – Independent Analyst, UK

Analysis

The post The New American Approach And The Russian Proposal On Syria appeared first on Politact.

Pakistn’s President Asif Ali Zardari held a meeting with President Ahmedinejad who arrived in Islamabad on Feb 16 for a two-day trilateral summit. The two countries discussed ways towards augmenting political and economic cooperation and strengthen bilateral ties.

Meanwhile, President Asif Zardari has assured Iran that the country will not extend any support, including bases, to the US, if it decides to attack Iran.
“Pakistan and Iran need each other and no foreign pressure can hinder their ties,” Zardari said.

Referring to the IP project, he said Islamabad will not tolerate Washington’s stance and will not stand its dictation on whom it can and cannot trade with.
Iranian President said “They seek to create divisions and tensions among regional countries. They don’t want us to make progress.”

The multi-billion dollar Iranian gas pipeline project was also discussed with the delegates from both sides. Despite international sanctions against Iran, Pakistan has assured President Ahmedinejad of its commitment to the gas pipeline and electricity project. However, Pakistan has failed to provide any timetable for the completion of the projects. The two sides also discussed wide range of other issues including energy swap, barter trade agreements, removing tariff and non-tariff barriers and improved border coordination for facilitating businessmen from both countries.

Iran also wants to procure of 20,000 tones of wheat from Pakistan using currencies other than the dollar or gold for payments, as a way around the international sanctions. Iran is offering to increase bilateral trade to $10 billion from the present $1.5 billion.

The post Pakistan To Enhance Trade With Iran, Not To Support Any Attack Against It appeared first on Politact.

Context

The current turmoil in Syria is creating many divisions within the international community. Pakistan and India recently voted for a UN resolution against the Syrian regime, which Russia and China ultimately vetoed. It appears Pakistan is still trying to curry favor with the West, despite its ongoing support of Iran. How can Pakistan balance its negation of the Iranian sanctions with its vote for Syrian regime change?

Analysis

It is difficult to walk two sides of a narrative for very long. Eventually, you will have to pick a side. That time is imminent, although not quite here yet, for Pakistan. At the recent UN vote for a resolution on Syria, Pakistan stood by its longest foe India in voting for the resolution. This, despite both countries siding with Iran when the US imposed new sanctions at the beginning of the year.

A big factor for these countries is that the decision-making is no longer about abstract or rhetorical support. Both India and Pakistan have vested interest in Iran, vital to the survival of their economies and to the running of their states. In the past it has been relatively easy to say, “we condemn such and such a nation, for such and such actions” without directly impacting your country’s national interest. Nowadays, there is less room for such making statements without it having direct impact. Particularly, as it pertains to the shifting political ground of the Middle East. Token support or token condemnation seems to be going rapidly out of fashion.

As it stands now, things are not so dire that countries can’t play “Switzerland” at all. However, countries like India and Pakistan will almost certainly be pushed into making their foreign policy less schizophrenic. In a recent Indian Express article, Senior Fellow at the Center for Policy Research in Delhi C. Raja Mohan addresses India’s problematic approach to Middle Eastern politics:

“The problems for India’s Middle East policy emerged when the regional and internal contradictions began to acquire a salience all their own. If India was flummoxed by the shifting regional coalitions, it was utterly unprepared for internal strife in the Arab states and its external consequences.”

The rapid transformation of the region, where old, known “friendly dictators” were suddenly to be condemned for their years of human rights abuses has put countries like India on the spot. Pakistan also has had to navigate these waters, although on somewhat of a lesser tightrope than India, given that it has a more steady narrative regards its neighboring Arab countries, particularly its narrative on Israel.

Pakistan’s vote in favor of the Syrian resolution can be viewed in this context as a last-ditch attempt to curry favor with the West. It is an issue which Pakistan can more easily afford to side with the West on, as it has less direct impact than the Iranian issue.

However for Pakistan, there is also the issue of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. With a president who owns property in Dubai and chooses their medical facilities over those in his own country, Pakistan’s relationship with the Arabian Peninsula is crucial, to put it lightly. This could explain the vote on Syria at the UN as well.

The Arab League have been calling for intervention in Syria and for regime change, despite the findings of its own Observer Mission to Syria that the Syrian Government appeared ready to comply with the Mission’s requests, in one passage stating:

“It should be noted that the Syrian Minister of Defence, in a meeting with the Head of the Mission that took place on 5 January 2012, affirmed his readiness to accompany the Head of the Mission to all sites and cities designated by the latter and from which the Mission suspects that the military presence had not yet been withdrawn, with a view to issuing field orders and rectifying any violation immediately.”

The Mission report also stated that civilians adamantly oppose international intervention. More worrying still, the Mission also reported that:

“there is an armed entity that is not mentioned in the [Mission] protocol. This development on the ground can undoubtedly be attributed to the excessive use of force by Syrian Government forces in response to protests that occurred before the deployment of the Mission demanding the fall of the regime. In some zones, this armed entity reacted by attacking Syrian security forces and citizens, causing the Government to respond with further violence. In the end, innocent citizens pay the price for those actions with life and limb.”

The Head of the Mission, Muhammad Ahmad Mustafa Al-Dabi recommended that political dialogue is the solution in Syria, rather than intervention.

The Mission’s recommendations have been by and large ignored by the Arab League, who are leading the call for intervention in Syria. No doubt they also bring great pressure to bear on their friends like India and Pakistan to side with them on this issue.

However this puts Pakistan at odds with its great friend China. Saudi Arabia has slammed the vetoes by Russia and China at the UN as shaking the “confidence of the world in the United Nations” and that the move was “unfavorable.” How does Pakistan reconcile this? It may not have to immediately. The deciding straw may come in the form of an Israeli attack on Iran.

The Israelis have been upping the ante on Iran in the past week, pushing for direct action on its nuclear installations before the Iranians move into a further developed stage, where attack will not be able to neutralize the nuclear threat. Pakistan’s High Commissioner to Britain Wajid Shamsul Hasan told the UK’s Sun on Wednesday that in the event of such an attack, Pakistan would side with Iran, adding that it “wouldn’t like to be seen as part of Israel’s campaign against any country.” There is also the issue of Pakistan’s Shiite population to consider, which would certainly impact the decision to side with Iran.

However in another twist, a report surfaced in the UK Times that Saudi Arabia had an unspoken agreement to purchase nuclear weaponry from Pakistan in the event that Iran acquires nuclear weapons technology.

As Iran and Saudi Arabia are arguably the two biggest rivals in the Gulf and the larger Middle East, Pakistan is hedging its bets at present, however their ability to continue to do so has a short-lived use-by date, at best.

The post Deciphering The Position Of India, Pakistan On Syria appeared first on Politact.

Egypt started a massive military campaign against al-Qaeda and Beduin fighters on Sunday to restore peace in the Sinai Peninsula. The area has devolved into chaos after the revolution earlier this year. Around 1,000 troops and several hundred armored vehicles have reportedly taken up positions close to Rafah and El-Arish over the weekend.

Israeli officials said they had been informed of the operation, called Operation Eagle, and hoped that it would result in a crackdown on arms smuggling into Gaza. Reports indicate the flow of arms has increased significantly since the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak in February.

The post Egypt Launches Operation In Sinai To Restore Order appeared first on Politact.

Radical Iraqi Shi’te cleric Muqtada al-Sadr on Sunday warned that any American troops staying in Iraq for training purpose after the 2011 deadline will be treated as “oppressive occupier” that must be resisted with “military means”. A statement released from Sadr’s office described the government that allows US forces to stay in the country as a weak government even if it is for training purpose. Iraqi leaders last week had agreed to give a go ahead to Prime Minister al-Maliki to begin talks with the US about keeping some soldiers in Iraq after the deadline for just training the Iraqi armed forces.

The post Iraq: Sadr Warns Of Armed Resistance Against US If It Stays Beyond 2011 appeared first on Politact.

Context
Two militant groups in the Gaza strip said on Saturday they were ending a ceasefire with Israel that they had just announced one week ago. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, both based in Gaza, made the decision after a pre-dawn Israeli air attack that killed three Hamas fighters. A statement from Hamas said the three dead belonged to Al-Qassam Brigades, and the group vowed to avenge their death. Hamas also rejected Israel’s claims that the three men were planning to kidnap Israeli citizens in the Sinai Peninsula.

The post Gaza Militants End Ceasefire with Israel appeared first on Politact.

Context
Syrian forces have been deployed in the northern port city of Latakia, where a new wave of political unrest has left at least 12 people dead. Authorities blamed foreign powers for the fighting, but local residents said that pro-government mobs started the violence. Syrian officials on Sunday said that they would lift the 48-year old emergency rule after demonstrations were staged in six key cities on Friday. Syrian President Bashar Al Assad is due to make the announcement during his address to the public on Tuesday.

The post Twelve Killed In Syrian Violence appeared first on Politact.

Context
NATO will take over leadership from the US of patrolling the airspace over Libya; however, the military coalition is still at odds over who will take charge of aggressive air assaults on Qaddafi’s ground forces, American and NATO officials said on Thursday. As the military operation against Qaddafi’s troops entered its seventh day, the coalition won rare practical assistance from an Arab nation when the UAE said that it was ready to commit 12 jets- six Mirage and six F-16 fighter planes- to take part in the campaign to enforce the no-fly zone over Libya authorized by the UN Security Council last week.

The post UAE Commits Aircrafts to Enforce No-Fly Zone over Libya appeared first on Politact.

Context
The Gulf Cooperation Council forces from Saudi Arabia and the UAE moved into Bahrain on March 14 to assist the country deal with the growing unrest. Termed the ‘Peninsula Shield Force’, the Saudi government confirmed that they had been called in by Bahrain to help, while the UAE stated they had sent 500 policemen. The opposition alliance in Bahrain has responded by claiming it to be an act of war against the “unarmed people of Bahrain”. Meanwhile, the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has reportedly expressed “deep concern”. To interpret the media perceptions emanating from the region, the interests and perspectives of US, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Israel, need to be looked at.

Analysis

 
US Perspective

The statements emanating from the US official circles indicate that Saudi Arabia had not consulted with them before moving in to Bahrain, but at the same time, US declared it does not consider forces from Gulf countries entering Bahrain as an occupation force. Other mainstream American media sources have presented the GCC move as a joint US-Saudi manoeuvre to counter the growing clout of Iran in the region. And that Iran has few options to counter the US-Saudi move other than through covert means, and by creating problems in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Israeli Perspective

On the other hand, Israeli media has projected the gap widening between US government and rulers of the Gulf countries, particularly after the US handling of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. According to this interpretation, King Abdullah and other Gulf rulers no longer trust the Americans and are acting on their own. Israeli media has also highlighted with concern any sign’s of rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Furthermore, according to Israeli assessment, Iran will not take the Saudi move lying down and is bound to react. The country is also paying increased emphasis on Iranian and Syrian cooperation in the Middle East and Syrian supplying arms to Qaddafi to crush the rebels. Additionally, according to media reports on March 16, Israel intercepted a vessel carrying Iranian weapons meant for Gaza. Israel is also closely monitoring the Egyptian Army after Hosni Mubarak, and to see if continues to be steadfast in patrolling the border with Gaza.

GCC and Saudi Perspective
From the perspective of Gulf countries, as the disturbances grow in many countries of the region, it is only a matter of time before questions are raised about Libyan style interventions in their backyards. Although the Arab League and Gulf countries have supported the argument of employing no-fly zone over Libya, it’s largely due to their contempt for Qaddafi. The Gulf leaders recognize that Libya can also become a model and a precedent for foreign involvement in other gulf countries, where due to the region’s oil reserves, stakes are higher for global powers.

Iranian Perspective

On the other hand, Iran has in the past stayed away from directly blaming the Arab leaders and has instead blamed US and Israeli efforts to divide the Muslims. Iran has also given an Islamic colour to the unfolding unrest in the Middle East.

An Iranian Foreign Ministry official commenting on the GCC intervention in Bahrain stated:

“The U.S. support for military intervention is in clear contradiction with international regulations and the United Nations Charter. So, the Islamic Republic holds the United States responsible for dangerous consequences of such illegal attitude.”
 

The post Perspectives of Key Stakeholders on GCC’s Intervention in Bahrain appeared first on Politact.

Meanwhile Foreign Office in Pakistan rejected the rumors that Bahrain has asked for military assistance from Pakistan. About 70,000 Pakistani’s reside in Bahrain.

The post Bahrain Detains Opposition Leaders As Crackdown Intensifies appeared first on Politact.