Minding relations with Iran
We may never be able to please Washington but we can do more to persuade Iran to keep bilateral ties remain strong.
One lie which changed our world was that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979) resurrected the old czarist ambition to extend Russian domination to the warm waters of the Indian Ocean. Only Pakistan, we proclaimed, stood in Russia’s path. We were wrong, again. Soviet archives and interviews with erstwhile Soviet leaders show that dipping their toes in the warm waters of the Indian Ocean was the last thing on their minds.
While the Soviets finally woke up to their blunder in invading Afghanistan and left, we learnt nothing either from their example or our own mistakes. Even when the mujahideen were slaughtering each other in the civil war that followed the Soviet withdrawal in 1988, or when they in turn became the targets of the Taliban, there was no introspection on our part. Instead, we looked on unmoved and then our Bonapartists, believing they could control Afghanistan, backed the Taliban in their civil war in 1997.
Not surprisingly, therefore, yet another Bonaparte rushed heedlessly into the Afghan imbroglio, this time in response to American threats (2001) rather than blandishments. Hence, we find ourselves today, a decade later, in a more dangerous mess than the earlier one. The Afghan war has now enveloped Pakistan. The Taliban of yesterday are now our most affecting enemy.
There isn’t much one can expect from those who learn nothing from history. And another blunder seems to be in the making considering how adversely our current policies are impacting on our neighbours.
Consider our stance towards Iran. It’s no secret that Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf monarchies are mortally afraid that the Arab uprising may spread to their fiefdoms. On the other hand, Tehran has moved fast to fortify relations with Hezbollah and Hamas; drawn closer to the Iraqi Shias and forged contacts with the Houtis of Yemen who loath the Saudis.
In response, the GCC countries have warned off Iran and are intervening in Yemen to ensure that the unreliable Saleh’s departure will be followed by a regime that is no less anti-Iran; and just when it seemed that Bahrain’s monarch, a Saudi factotum, was in dire straits Riyadh rushed in troops to stave off a revolution.
For its part, Iran has lodged a strong protest on the recruitment of Pakistani ex-servicemen for serving in Bahrain’s security forces. Consequently our relations with Iran, which have never been warm since the Iranian revolution, could become decidedly chilly and may well turn hostile if Iranian protests are ignored. Were it so disposed there is much that Iran can do to hurt Pakistan. For a start, sectarian tensions and violence could rise in Pakistan.
Similarly, were Iran bloody-minded the situation in Afghanistan could also become far more complicated. Actually, without Tehran’s blessings no peace deal in Afghanistan would have even a remote chance of success. And it would be utter folly to turn yet another neighbour into a vengeful adversary considering that we already have serious differences with Afghanistan and India. Besides, it would endanger the stability of Balochistan, our key geostrategic asset.
It was, therefore, all the more disturbing to read, by way of WikiLeaks, that instead of accepting Iran’s very generous offer of concessional oil, Zardari refused to do so, preferring to ‘take his cue from the US’ on such matters. Soon thereafter, he was told by a stream of American visitors to Pakistan that he should spurn Iran’s offer; he was also warned against providing Iran a ‘foothold’ in Pakistan.
The framework agreement which Mr Zardari signed with President Ahmedinejad on May 24, 2008 to support the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project is also likely to be a non-starter.
As we blunder on, one thought arises. We may never be able to do enough to please Washington but surely we can do a bit more to persuade Iran that our bilateral ties remain strong — much as our people want them to be and as much as is profoundly in the interest of the security and stability of both countries as well as of the region as a whole.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 31st, 2011.
While the Soviets finally woke up to their blunder in invading Afghanistan and left, we learnt nothing either from their example or our own mistakes. Even when the mujahideen were slaughtering each other in the civil war that followed the Soviet withdrawal in 1988, or when they in turn became the targets of the Taliban, there was no introspection on our part. Instead, we looked on unmoved and then our Bonapartists, believing they could control Afghanistan, backed the Taliban in their civil war in 1997.
Not surprisingly, therefore, yet another Bonaparte rushed heedlessly into the Afghan imbroglio, this time in response to American threats (2001) rather than blandishments. Hence, we find ourselves today, a decade later, in a more dangerous mess than the earlier one. The Afghan war has now enveloped Pakistan. The Taliban of yesterday are now our most affecting enemy.
There isn’t much one can expect from those who learn nothing from history. And another blunder seems to be in the making considering how adversely our current policies are impacting on our neighbours.
Consider our stance towards Iran. It’s no secret that Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf monarchies are mortally afraid that the Arab uprising may spread to their fiefdoms. On the other hand, Tehran has moved fast to fortify relations with Hezbollah and Hamas; drawn closer to the Iraqi Shias and forged contacts with the Houtis of Yemen who loath the Saudis.
In response, the GCC countries have warned off Iran and are intervening in Yemen to ensure that the unreliable Saleh’s departure will be followed by a regime that is no less anti-Iran; and just when it seemed that Bahrain’s monarch, a Saudi factotum, was in dire straits Riyadh rushed in troops to stave off a revolution.
For its part, Iran has lodged a strong protest on the recruitment of Pakistani ex-servicemen for serving in Bahrain’s security forces. Consequently our relations with Iran, which have never been warm since the Iranian revolution, could become decidedly chilly and may well turn hostile if Iranian protests are ignored. Were it so disposed there is much that Iran can do to hurt Pakistan. For a start, sectarian tensions and violence could rise in Pakistan.
Similarly, were Iran bloody-minded the situation in Afghanistan could also become far more complicated. Actually, without Tehran’s blessings no peace deal in Afghanistan would have even a remote chance of success. And it would be utter folly to turn yet another neighbour into a vengeful adversary considering that we already have serious differences with Afghanistan and India. Besides, it would endanger the stability of Balochistan, our key geostrategic asset.
It was, therefore, all the more disturbing to read, by way of WikiLeaks, that instead of accepting Iran’s very generous offer of concessional oil, Zardari refused to do so, preferring to ‘take his cue from the US’ on such matters. Soon thereafter, he was told by a stream of American visitors to Pakistan that he should spurn Iran’s offer; he was also warned against providing Iran a ‘foothold’ in Pakistan.
The framework agreement which Mr Zardari signed with President Ahmedinejad on May 24, 2008 to support the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project is also likely to be a non-starter.
As we blunder on, one thought arises. We may never be able to do enough to please Washington but surely we can do a bit more to persuade Iran that our bilateral ties remain strong — much as our people want them to be and as much as is profoundly in the interest of the security and stability of both countries as well as of the region as a whole.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 31st, 2011.