English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Origin Of Saudi-Qatar Spat: What Lies In The Future

Published

on

Origin Of Saudi-Qatar Spat: What Lies In The Future

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

By Saeed Naqvi

The western media, which was shy of mentioning the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) as a threat to the Saudi regime, has now started describing it as a threat to Riyadh quite as potent as Shia Islam. This change is a major fall-out from the Saudi-Qatari spat.

Qatar, for quite some time, has patronized the MB, a powerful grass roots force in Egypt and Turkey. It is sufficiently powerful to keep King Abdullah of Jordan at sixes and sevens. Also, one must not forget the MB uprising in Hama, north west Syria, in 1982, which Bashar al Assad’s father, Hafez al Assad quelled with such brute power that the death toll exceeded10,000. In 2011 when Tayyip Erdogan took a more benign interest in Syrian affairs his advice to Assad was straightforward: accommodate the MB in the establishment.

Unbridled MB power is anathema to both Israel and Saudis. That is why Saudis placed $8 billion in Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s hand when he ousted the MB’s Mohamed Morsi. Today, Sisi’s job is on the line.

Israel has nightmares because it fears the MB weed in Egypt and elsewhere will link up with Hamas, another strong MB outfit. When the western media, protective of Israeli interests, list the “Shia axis” inimical to the Jewish state – Iran, Hezbollah, Syria – it mentions Hamas in the same breath without the essential qualification: Hamas is True Blue Sunni. The link up with Iran is political or ideological, not religious.

Saudi anxieties are more profound. Remember, from January 1980, the Saudis began to play down the monarchy and focus more on the King’s role as the “keeper of the holy shrines at Mecca and Medina”. This show of humility followed two events, one after the other, which shook the house of Saud.

The Iranian revolution which brought the Ayatollahs to power in Tehran in 1979 coincided more or less with the siege of the Mecca mosque by Juhayman al-Otaybi and hundreds of his supporters, demanding the overthrow of the House of Saud and an end to the “anti Islamic” monarchy in Saudi Arabia.

Taking advantage of these eruptions, the oil bearing Eastern province of Saudi Arabia, the Shia dominated Qatif and al Hasa region rose in rebellion in 1979 against Riyadh’s anti Shia sectarian bias and arbitrary arrests. The uprising lasted a week. Over 100 died in police action.

This regional uprising magnified itself a 100-fold in Saudi eyes because of the emergence of the Ayatollahs in Iran. This also became the source of anxiety to Bahrain where 70 per cent of the population is Shia and locked in a tussle for more rights from the Sunni rulers – the House of Khalifas.

While pointing at the Shia menace, Saudis seldom express their worries about Qatif and Bahrain where they sent their troops to quell the Arab Spring. Those issues could possibly invite a Human Rights scrutiny. Focus on Iran, Hezbollah, Alawite power in Syria is much more beneficial because this axis invokes Israel’s deepest anxieties. The western media is so much more sympathetic for this reason. If the past is any guide, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times should be on his way to Riyadh for yet another exclusive interview with the new Crown Prince.

That Qatar has relations with Iran is disliked in Riyadh, of course, but what causes much deeper anxieties is the material and moral support Qatar can provide to MB which represents all the tendencies that the Otaybi rebellion in 1979 represented.

Riyadh-Doha differences go back to the days when the aging Emir, was ousted by his son, Hamad bin Khalifa. The ousted Emir’s attempted counter coup failed but it had Saudi support.

Osama bin Laden’s war on the house of Saud had a declared reason: Saudis had accorded hospitality to the troops of the “infidel US”. Qatar took advantage of situation and hosted CENTCOM.

Then came another affront to Saudi pride: Al Jazeera TV. When the BBC shut down its Arabic service, trained TV hands became available in the market. At the time the BBC was also in search of funds for its World Service TV. BBC had been left behind by CNN which stole the limelight during Operation Desert Storm in 1992.

Saudi King Fahd’s cousin, Khalid bin Faisal al Saud’s Orbit Communications hired the BBC hands and launched a channel. But it lasted no more than 18 months because editorial freedom clashed with Saudi’s abiding restrictions on issues anchored to Sharia. Riyadh would not allow the new channel to telecast a documentary on public “beheadings”.

 That is when Qatar moved into the breach and launched Al Jazeera, first in Arabic. As BBC retirees like Sir David Frost became available, Al Jazeera English made rapid recruitments.

At a time when Osama bin Laden was a news source, Al Jazeera became the channel for all bin Laden interviews and audio statements. Coverage by BBC, CNN, Fox News of all the 9/11 wars acquired a uniformity which strained credibility. Al Jazeera livened up proceedings by bringing into focus “the other” perspective as well. This was not “cricket” for the authors of the new world order. Scholars like the late Fouad Ajami, supportive of George W Bush’s invasion of Iran and Afghanistan, wrote academic papers on Al Jazeera’s perfidy. Allied aircraft even bombed the channel’s offices in Kabul and Baghdad. All of this boosted Al Jazeera viewership sky high.

The late Saudi King Abdullah, much the most supple ruler in recent decades, mended fences with Qatar. We have to be together, otherwise the “spring” will blow away the region’s monarchies, he argued.

Moreover, CNN, BBC propaganda was not being believed in the region during the Syrian and Libyan operations. Al Jazeera’s priceless credibility was commandeered. Qatar succumbed. Both the operations, Syria and Libya have been a disaster from every angle. Additionally they have taken a toll of Al Jazeera’s credibility.

The present spat however has the potential of restoring Al Jazeera’s credibility should deft editorial hands take up the anti establishment position which was Al Jazeera’s forte and which it surrendered under the personal pressure of the late Saudi king.

The larger game now must impinge on Qatar, Iran and Russian gas reserves, the energy of the future. To keep the cohesion of this triangle or to break it must be the preoccupation of regional combatants now and in the foreseeable future.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Latest world news

Suicide bombing at Islamabad imambargah kills 69, over 160 injured

At least 69 people were killed after a suicide bomber detonated explosives at a Shia shrine in Islamabad’s Shehzad Town area, triggering a city-wide emergency.

Published

on

Suicide bombing at Islamabad Shrine

A suicide bombing at a Shia place of worship in Pakistan’s capital Islamabad left at least 69 people dead and more than 160 injured on Friday, according to media reports.

The explosion took place at Tarlai Imambargah, located in the Shehzad Town area, when a suicide bomber detonated explosives near the main gate of the shrine during afternoon hours.

Attacker stopped at entrance, officials say

Security officials were quoted as saying that the attacker was intercepted by guards at the entrance, preventing him from entering the main hall where worshippers had gathered. Despite this, the blast caused extensive damage to the gate and nearby structures.

Visuals from the scene showed shattered windows of surrounding buildings and debris scattered across the road following the explosion.

Emergency declared, injured shifted to hospitals

Following the blast, the Islamabad Inspector General of Police declared a city-wide emergency, as rescue and law enforcement teams rushed to the site amid fears of high casualties.

The injured were shifted to Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) and Polyclinic Hospital for treatment.

Prime minister condemns attack

Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif expressed deep grief over the attack and strongly condemned the bombing at the Shiite mosque in Islamabad.

In a statement, he said the incident was a tragic act of violence and offered condolences to the families of those killed. Official statements noted that dozens were injured in the attack, with treatment ongoing at city hospitals.

Previous attack referenced

The incident comes less than three months after a suicide blast outside a district and sessions court building in Islamabad on November 11, 2025, in which 12 people were killed and over 30 injured.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Suicide bombing at Islamabad shrine kills 10, over 20 injured

A suicide bombing at a Shia shrine in Islamabad’s Shehzad Town area killed at least 10 people and injured over 20, prompting a city-wide emergency.

Published

on

Suicide bombing at Islamabad Shrine

At least 10 people were killed and around 20 others sustained injuries after a suicide bomber detonated explosives at a Shia shrine in Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, on Friday afternoon.

The explosion took place at Tarlai Imambargah, located in the Shehzad Town area, when the attacker set off the device at the main entrance of the place of worship, where devotees had gathered.

Bomber stopped at entrance, say officials

Security officials said alert guards intercepted the attacker at the gate, preventing him from entering the main hall of the shrine. The timely action is believed to have reduced the scale of casualties inside the premises.

However, the blast caused significant damage to the gate structure. Visuals from the site showed shattered windows of nearby buildings and debris scattered across the road following the explosion.

Emergency declared across Islamabad

In the aftermath of the attack, the Islamabad Inspector General of Police declared a city-wide emergency. Rescue teams and law enforcement personnel rushed to the site amid concerns that the casualty count could rise.

The injured were shifted to Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) and Polyclinic Hospital for treatment.

Recent history of suicide attacks in the capital

The incident comes less than three months after a suicide bombing outside a district and sessions court building in Islamabad on November 11, 2025, which killed 12 people and injured more than 30 others, raising renewed concerns over security in the capital.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Bangladesh rushes to finalise US trade deal after India secures lower tariffs

Bangladesh is accelerating talks with the US to finalise a trade agreement after India secured lower tariffs, raising concerns over export competitiveness and transparency.

Published

on

Bangladesh is moving quickly to finalise a trade agreement with the United States after India concluded a deal with Washington that lowered tariffs on Indian goods to 18 per cent. The development has triggered concern in Dhaka that Bangladesh could lose market share in the US if it fails to secure comparable or better terms.

The US and Bangladesh are expected to sign the agreement on February 9, just three days before the country’s national election scheduled for February 12. The timing and lack of transparency surrounding the deal have drawn criticism from economists, business leaders and political observers.

Bangladesh’s economy is heavily dependent on ready-made garment exports, which account for nearly 90 per cent of its exports to the US. Any tariff disadvantage compared to India could significantly impact export orders and employment in the sector.

Tariff cuts under negotiation

The proposed agreement follows a series of tariff revisions imposed by Washington. In April 2025, the US imposed a steep 37 per cent tariff on Bangladeshi goods. This was reduced to 35 per cent in July and further lowered to 20 per cent in August.

According to reports, the upcoming deal is expected to bring tariffs down further to around 15 per cent. Officials see this as critical to keeping Bangladeshi exports competitive against Indian products in the US market.

Secrecy around negotiations raises concerns

Concerns have intensified due to the confidential nature of the negotiations. In mid-2025, the interim government led by Muhammad Yunus signed a formal non-disclosure agreement with the US, committing to keep tariff and trade discussions confidential.

No draft of the agreement has been shared with the public, parliament or industry stakeholders. A commerce adviser had earlier stated that the deal would not go against national interests and could be made public with US consent.

Policy experts, however, argue that the lack of disclosure prevents meaningful debate on the agreement’s long-term implications.

Conditions reportedly linked to the deal

Media reports suggest that the agreement may include several conditions. These include reducing imports from China, increasing military procurement from the US, and allowing American goods easier access to the Bangladeshi market.

It is also reported that Bangladesh may be required to accept US standards and certifications without additional scrutiny. Inspections on US vehicle imports and parts could reportedly be eased to facilitate smoother entry into the local market.

A senior policy analyst described the process as opaque, noting that signing the agreement just days before elections could bind the hands of the next elected government.

Garment industry left in the dark

Bangladesh exports garments and textiles worth between $7 billion and $8.4 billion annually to the US, accounting for nearly 96 per cent of its total exports to the American market. In comparison, Bangladesh imports around $2 billion worth of goods from the US.

With India and Bangladesh exporting similar apparel products, lower tariffs for India could shift US buyers towards Indian suppliers. Industry leaders warn that this could put millions of jobs at risk in Bangladesh’s garment sector, which employs 4 to 5 million workers, most of them women.

The sector contributes over 80 per cent of Bangladesh’s export earnings and nearly 20 per cent of its GDP.

A senior garment exporters’ association official said the agreement carries major implications and should ideally have been signed after the election to allow broader political and public discussion.

Political timing draws criticism

Economists and analysts have also questioned why an unelected interim administration is finalising a major trade agreement so close to national elections. They argue that responsibility for implementing the deal will fall on the incoming elected government.

A prominent economist criticised the process as lacking transparency and warned that the country could be pushed into long-term commitments without adequate scrutiny or public consent.

Meanwhile, US diplomats have indicated openness to engaging with various political forces in Bangladesh, including Jamaat-e-Islami, which has been banned multiple times in the country’s history.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com