Pakistan in the hot seat as general takes command of Saudi-led alliance
By James M. Dorsey
With no troops to command and a Riyadh-based skeleton staff,
General Raheel Sharif, Pakistan’s recently retired top commander, appeared to
slide into a cushy job as commander
of a 41-nation, Saudi-led military alliance created to fight terrorism.
In fact, the general’s new job is everything but
straightforward. He has taken on a task that is likely to require diplomatic
tap dancing if he is to succeed in putting flesh on the alliance’s skeleton and
ensure that his native Pakistan is not enmeshed in the bitter dispute between
Saudi Arabia, one of Pakistan’s closest allies, and Iran, the South Asian
state’s neighbour.
Complicating things for General Sharif is the fact that
Pakistan is home to the world’s largest Shiite Muslim minority, who account for
up to a quarter of its population. Pakistani
critics warned that General Sharif’s appointment risked involving Pakistan
not only in the Middle East’s seemingly intractable conflicts, but also in
Sunni-Shiite Muslim sectarian strife.
General Sharif’s appointment of what is officially the
Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism, dubbed the Muslim world’s NATO, promises
to give the group credibility it needs: a non-Arab commander from one of
the world’s most populous Muslim countries who commanded not only one of the
Muslim world’s largest militaries, but also one that possesses nuclear weapons.
Yet, General Sharif’s problems start with the alliance’s
name. The alliance, announced hastily by Saudi Arabia two years ago without
prior consultations with all of its alleged members, has yet to adopt a common
definition of what constitutes terrorism.
Members also have yet to reach agreement on what the
alliance’s priorities are: Iran, viewed by Saudi Arabia as the foremost threat,
or jihadist groups like the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. Many members, including
Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia, are moreover weary of being roped into Saudi
Arabia’s war in Yemen that has allowed Al
Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) to emerge stronger than ever.
Pakistan’s parliament rejected
in 2015 a Saudi request to contribute troops to the war in Yemen. More
recently, on the eve of General Sharif’s appointment, Pakistan agreed to send
10,000 combat troops to the Saudi side of the kingdom’s border with Yemen.
Pakistan has sought to deflect criticism that it was
ignoring parliament’s rejection by reaching out to Iran. General Raheel has
reportedly told his Saudi counterparts that he would seek to involve Iran in
the alliance. Similarly, General Sharif’s successor, General Qamar Javed Bajwa,
appeared to be hedging his bets by
declaring that “enhanced Pakistan-Iran military-to-military
cooperation will have a positive impact on regional peace and stability.”
Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir seemed to dispel any
notion of cooperation, let alone reconciliation with Iran in a speech
in February in which he charged that “Iran remains the biggest state sponsor of
terrorism in the world. Iran has as part of its constitution the principle of
exporting the revolution. Iran does not believe in the principle of
citizenship. It believes that the Shiite, the ‘dispossessed’, as Iran calls
them, all belong to Iran and not to their countries of origin. And this is
unacceptable for us in the kingdom, for our allies in the Gulf and for any
country in the world.”
Mr. Al-Jubeir stipulated that “until and unless Iran changes
its behaviour, and changes its outlook, and changes the principles upon which
the Iranian state is based, it will be very difficult to deal with a country
like this.”
However, it may, ironically, be the rise of President Donald
J. Trump that will provide substance to Pakistani efforts to capitalize on the
appointment of General Sharif and Pakistan’s dispatch of troops to bridge the
gap between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia has wholeheartedly endorsed Mr. Trump because
of his tough stance towards Iran and wants to be seen to be responding to the
president’s insistence that US allies shoulder more of the burden of their
defence. Iran has long called for talks with Saudi Arabia.
Recent overtures by Kuwait to mediate between the two regional
powers have raised hopes that an arrangement may be possible despite the
kingdom’s tough stance. Kuwaiti foreign minister Sabah Khalid Al Sabah
travelled to Tehran in January to discuss ways of initiating a dialogue between
Iran and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members, Saudi Arabia, Qatar,
Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman and the United Arab Emirates.
Iranian president Hassan Rohani responded weeks later with a
visit
to Kuwait and Oman. Oman has long had close relations with Iran, mediated
in various disputes involving the Islamic republic, and facilitated US-Iranian
negotiations that resulted two years ago in the nuclear agreement with Iran and
the lifting of international sanctions. Mr. Rohani also earlier this month sent
a letter to Kuwaiti Emir Sabah al-Ahmad Al Sabah regarding efforts to tone down
animosity with Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia and Iran recently reached agreement on the
participation of Iranian pilgrims in the haj, the Muslim pilgrimage to the holy
city of Mecca. The two countries failed to agree last year, preventing Iranian
Muslim from fulfilling what is a key religious obligation.
Mr. Al-Jubeir, moreover, made a surprise
visit last month to Iraq, widely seen as a gesture towards Iran. Led by a
predominantly Shiite Muslim government, Iraq is closely aligned with Iran. Iran
supports the government in its fight against the Islamic State (IS) and
sponsors powerful Shiite militias that fight alongside Iraqi troops. As a
result, relations between Saudi Arabia and Iraq have long been strained.
Writing
in Al-Monitor, former Iranian nuclear negotiator Seyed Hossein Mousavian
suggested that a 1988 United Nations Security Council resolution could serve as
a basis for a Saudi-Iranian arrangement. The resolution which in ended the
Iran-Iraq war in which Saudi Arabia co-funded the Iraqi effort to roll back the
Islamic revolution called for regional collective security arrangements. That
may be a tall order with Iran unlikely to back off its support for Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad, Lebanon’s Shiite Hezbollah militia, or the Houthis in Yemen.
“For a new era to dawn in Iranian-GCC relations, the two
sides have to be able to express their concerns to each other in a constructive
way and translate dialogue into tangible diplomatic gains. They can look to
Europe for examples on how to resolve historic rivalries and how the Peace of
Westphalia or systems such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe and the European Union came to be,” Mr. Mousavian said.
Dr. James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S.
Rajaratnam School of International Studies, co-director of the University of
Würzburg’s Institute for Fan Culture, and the author of The Turbulent World
of Middle East Soccer blog, a book with
the same title, Comparative Political Transitions
between Southeast Asia and the Middle East and North Africa, co-authored with Dr.
Teresita Cruz-Del Rosario and three forthcoming books, Shifting
Sands, Essays on Sports and Politics in the Middle East and North Africa as
well as Creating Frankenstein: The Saudi Export of Ultra-conservatism and China
and the Middle East: Venturing into the Maelstrom.
Comments
Post a Comment