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

Trump rejects Iran’s 7-day peace plan, says deal can come after US polls

US President Donald Trump rejected Iran’s seven-day proposal to end hostilities and indicated that a deal could come after the US midterm elections in November.

Published

on

Donald Trump

US President Donald Trump has rejected Iran’s latest proposal aimed at bringing an end to the ongoing conflict, while indicating that a possible agreement could come after the US midterm elections in November.

Iran had proposed a seven-day framework under which hostilities could be brought to an end, the Strait of Hormuz could be reopened and negotiations over its nuclear programme could resume.

Iran’s seven-day proposal

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran had put forward the proposal through intermediaries. Under the plan, the Strait of Hormuz would be reopened by the end of the seventh day if specified conditions were met, while broader nuclear discussions would restart.

The proposal was based largely on an earlier understanding reached between Washington and Tehran, but Iran sought to implement the latest framework much faster. The earlier arrangement had provided a longer period for negotiations.

The Strait of Hormuz is a strategically important waterway for global energy shipments, making its reopening a key element of any effort to ease the wider conflict.

Trump points to US midterm elections

Trump, speaking at the United Nations, showed no indication that he was ready to immediately resume negotiations on the terms proposed by Tehran.

He called for the economic isolation of Iran and said he believed a deal could be reached after the US midterm elections in November. Trump also said Iran was waiting to see how he performed in the midterm elections.

The remarks came as Iranian officials signalled that they remained open to diplomacy and described the UN General Assembly as an opportunity to revive negotiations.

Nuclear talks remain part of Iran proposal

Iran’s latest plan links the easing of hostilities with the resumption of negotiations over its nuclear programme.

The proposal follows the collapse of an earlier US-Iran arrangement. According to reporting on the latest proposal, the new framework is intended to compress the timeline for implementing commitments that had previously been discussed by the two sides.

For now, Trump’s remarks indicate that Washington is not accepting Tehran’s seven-day framework as presented, while Iran continues to put diplomacy and negotiations forward as part of its proposal.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Iranian President Pezeshkian at UN says Iranians have been victims of US terrorism

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said at the UN General Assembly that Iranians had been victims of US terrorism and insisted that Iran had acted in self-defence.

Published

on

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian accused the United States of subjecting Iranians to what he described as terrorism while addressing the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday.

Pezeshkian said Iran had defended itself against attacks and rejected the characterisation of the country as a terrorist actor. His remarks came during a rare wartime appearance at the UN as tensions between Iran and the United States remain high.

Pezeshkian accuses US and Israel of attacks

Speaking at the General Assembly, Pezeshkian said Iranian civilians had been targeted by attacks and described the actions against his country as aggression.

“We have only defended ourselves. We are not terrorists,” he said, according to the report.

Pezeshkian also accused the United States and Israel of attacking Iran, while maintaining that Tehran’s response was an act of self-defence.

The Iranian president displayed photographs of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and more than 150 schoolchildren who, according to his account, were killed during the early days of the conflict.

Iran’s message at the UN

Pezeshkian’s address came against the backdrop of the ongoing conflict between Iran and the United States and heightened tensions in the region.

Iranian officials had indicated ahead of the UN visit that they intended to highlight what Tehran considers attacks against its people and raise concerns over the international response to the conflict.

The Iranian delegation’s visit to New York also comes amid restrictions imposed by the United States on the delegation’s movement and other aspects of its stay, according to reporting ahead of the address.

Pezeshkian says Iran defended itself

Pezeshkian’s central message at the UN was that Iran’s military actions should be viewed as a response to attacks rather than terrorism.

His description of the conflict and the allegations against the United States and Israel represent the Iranian government’s position. They should therefore be attributed to Pezeshkian rather than presented as independently established facts.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

PM Modi’s Canada visit could help wrap trade talks, says Canada PM Mark Carney

Canadian PM Mark Carney said he is looking forward to hosting PM Narendra Modi, with both countries aiming to conclude their ongoing trade negotiations.

Published

on

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has said he is looking forward to hosting Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as India and Canada continue efforts to advance their bilateral relationship and conclude ongoing trade negotiations.

The two countries have been working towards a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), with both sides previously setting a target to conclude the negotiations in 2026.

Carney and Modi have held discussions on strengthening economic ties between India and Canada, including trade and investment. Their engagement has gained momentum following Carney’s visit to India earlier this year.

India-Canada trade talks

India and Canada formally resumed efforts towards a broader trade agreement after a period of strained bilateral ties. The two sides have committed to advancing negotiations on a CEPA covering their economic relationship.

In June, Carney and Modi reviewed progress in bilateral economic cooperation during their meeting on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in France. They expressed satisfaction with the progress in CEPA negotiations and reaffirmed their shared objective of concluding the talks in 2026.

During Carney’s visit to India in March, the two leaders had also agreed to accelerate negotiations on the CEPA and work towards finalising the agreement during 2026.

Modi’s proposed Canada visit

Carney had invited PM Modi to visit Canada in 2026, and the two leaders agreed to remain engaged through diplomatic channels to work towards a mutually convenient date for the visit.

The proposed visit comes as New Delhi and Ottawa seek to build on renewed diplomatic and economic engagement, with trade negotiations remaining a key part of the relationship.

The focus on completing the trade talks comes as both countries look to expand commercial ties and establish a broader economic framework through the proposed CEPA.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com