West Asia News and Discussions

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 23 Mar 2011 18:46

shyamd wrote:Yes, Iran can rebuild it, but it would take a lot more time etc. Not that straight forward. I mean it would delay them by another 3 to 4 years at most. Hence why the cost effective way right now is killing scientists and using attacks like Stuxnet (and other assorted experiements). Also why the only real way to solve this is regime change, which is what they are trying to do.

The GCC isn't about to take interference in their backyard lightly. Thats what the war is about, having a nuclear weapon will give them implicit ability to - so preventing this needs to be done first at all cost. Better to deal with this now than later - is their PoV. Regime change is long term stuff - which needs to be done.

If there is war imposed on Iran, regime ~~change~~ collapse may be a mission which will be postponed by at least a couple of decades. Everybody in Iran, no matter how young or how moderate, would fall behind the regime, thereby contributing to the regime's strength.

So if GCC thinks, it is better to deal with this now rather than latter, by striking at Iran, they will only be kicking the ball 3 to 4 years into the future, as you yourself said, so they would again be forced to deal with Iran a few years into the future. Who knows whether the World political situation would be conducive to a renewed attack?! Who knows whether USA would be willing to lead the charge then?!

However if GCC manages to dismember Iran by creating new statelets - Iranian Kurdistan (which could be united with Iraqi Kurdistan, if Turkey is willing); Khuzestan (an Arab Shia state); Hormozgan (another Arab State); Sistan-Balochestan (a new route to Central Asia for the West); and Bushehr under occupation (say as war compensation); and if GCC manages to cripple Iranian armed forces; then Iranian regime would indeed be so badly beaten up, that a regime change could be considered, as the population may be willing to put the blame on the Mullahcracy for the dissection of their nation.

For Persian nationalism to reemerge as a substitute for Mullahcracy, Iran would have to be cut down to the Persian majority areas. Like any multi-ethnic state, Persia too imposes a larger narrative on the country (Iran) than simply its tribal identity (Persia). For the tribal identity to reassert itself and usurp the right to rule, GCC would have to make the necessity of a larger national narrative superfluous, and hence the need to dissect the country.

Russia would agree, if the West agree to Abkhazia and South Ossetian Independence.

Just my thoughts!

As said, it is purely speculation, and one can only know once it comes to pass.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Mar 2011 19:20

I dont think rus or china would agree to a new bunch of munna-cracies right on soft backdoor.

this would deepen and complete the american occupation of the entire persian gulf region and give them a strong toehold into the caspian basin - an area which russia considers its backyard.
http://biglizards.net/Graphics/Foregrou ... pSized.gif

baku ceyhan pipeline caused enough heartburn

american foreign policy is a aggressive beast. russian knows if it eats iran will start biting into the next line of russian sphere. afterall when rus presented no threat to the west and was in deep economic slump in 1990s, what did the west do ? expand nato into baltic states, poland, hungary, czech republic, incited and gave cover to the chechens and so on, tear apart serbia...and also base anti-missile systems there. russia was not left in peace but kicked in the ribs when it was down on the floor. so putin took deep delight in beating up georgia and sending a message that the bear was back - and very angry.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 23 Mar 2011 19:24

Singha wrote:I dont think rus or china would agree to a new bunch of munna-cracies right on soft backdoor.

this would deepen and complete the american occupation of the entire persian gulf region and give them a strong toehold into the caspian basin - an area which russia considers its backyard.
http://biglizards.net/Graphics/Foregrou ... pSized.gif

baku ceyhan pipeline caused enough heartburn

Well the West would not be going as far North as the Caspian sea, because an occupation of Persian regions of Iran, i.e. the biggest portion of Iran would not be possible - only the regions occupied by disenchanted ethnic and religious minorities could be game, along with some part along the Persian Gulf itself!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Mar 2011 19:25

the GCC now has competent and modern AFs compared to Iran. but no real army capability to launch a ground attack to dissect the country.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 23 Mar 2011 19:34

Singha wrote:the GCC now has competent and modern AFs compared to Iran. but no real army capability to launch a ground attack to dissect the country.

No but the West does have that capability, and sufficient troops in the neighborhood - Gulf, Iraq, Afghanistan! And then they have allies, like the Peshmarga of Iraqi Kurdistan, and other dissidents amongst the Iranian minorities.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 23 Mar 2011 19:46

An actual war between GCC and Iran will be very interesting to watch. One one hand you have the GCC countries with the latest and most sophisticated weapons but massively dependent on western and umma countries for human resources and support, and on the other you have Iran with mostly low tech indigenous but the opposite in the human area.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 Mar 2011 20:09

Singha wrote:the GCC now has competent and modern AFs compared to Iran. but no real army capability to launch a ground attack to dissect the country.

Thats why most of the armies are called "Defence Force". They are there to defend not to occupy. They have no interest in occupation. UAE has developed their special operations forces to operate behind enemy lines. They are currently in operation in Afghanistan, to have real war experience and also for counter terror at home. No point having a well equiped force with no real battle practice.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Mar 2011 21:03

er, let us agree to disagree and move on until real events occur on the ground.

my belief is the west(US+EU) has no stomach for this. not that EU had any to start with. times are lean and they need to fund their socialist benefits.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Mar 2011 21:07

Nightwatch:

Nightwatch 3/22/2011

Bahrain-Arab League: The Arab League aims to maintain the stability of Bahrain and "Arabism," Arab League chief Amr Moussa said, after talks with Bahraini Foreign Minister Sheikh Khaled bin Ahmed al-Khalifa. Moussa said the league is communicating with Iran, and prior to his meeting with al-Khalifa, he met with the Iranian charge d'affaires in Cairo. The Arab League's permanent delegate-level council also confirmed the legitimacy of the Peninsula Shield Forces in Bahrain.

Comment: The Bahrain and Saudi monarchies apparently believe they have confronted and defeated a major threat from the spread of Shiite apostasy and subversion from Iran. If Iranian agents have been involved in the unrest in Bahrain, the program has backfired to the detriment of Bahraini Shiites.

Arab League: Saudi Emir Turki al-Faisal, Director of the King Faisal Center for Islamic Research and former ambassador to Washington, has called for a conference in Abu Dhabi to make the Gulf Cooperation Council more like the European Union and to create a united "Gulf" army, Al-Watan reported.

Turki said other nations must be prevented from forcing their agendas on Saudi Arabia to weaken its military power. Saudi Arabia should be able to obtain nuclear weapons if it fails in its effort to persuade Iran from abandoning its nuclear program.

Comment: Taking the two preceding reports together, the message is the Arabs want a nuclear- armed pan-Arab army to fight the Persians. The implication is that Sunni Arabs appear to want to take Arab security interests into their own hands, and not rely on the US.

That implication raises the prospect of new regional polarity in the Middle East, provided the Sunni Arab leaders can remain united in support of Arab strategic objectives. Israel's survival depends on the fractiousness of the Arabs. Persians are today's enemy.

{Saddam said the same while being led to the hangman's noose and was derided for saying that by the same Wastern observers!}

The fools hanged Saddam on Id ul Zuha or Bakri Id. I don't know of anyl eader killed on that day in history!

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 23 Mar 2011 21:18

Singha wrote:the problem will then reduce to what it does in libya - nobody is willing to put boots on ground, but willing to provide air cover. can they help the rebel republics to stay alive that way - maybe - but the cost will be huge and the iranians will be stoking the fire all the time.

No boots on ground has been already dented. The moment American jet went down, there was Search and Rescue mission to get the two pilots who ejected. Rumors are that during the process they fired at some civilians too.
The plan is unclear now. There is talk about what happens after Gaddafi is gone. USA, France and UK are just not going to leave the country in the resulting chaos/civil-war/power struggle. They will have to appoint some care taker and support him. There might be some consultants, advisers and other boots on the ground. Else it will be really messy.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 Mar 2011 21:22

Ramanaji, Nightwatch has just echoed everything i have been saying. Please see my comments on Turki's speech posted yesterday.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Mar 2011 22:41

doesnt KSA already have chinese n-weapons via Pak or atleast any arrangement to get them in emergency?

since china cannot overtly provide these maal to KSA , this need is going to raise Pak's value to the arabs? yet another example of pakis filling the role as niche provider of paid services...

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 24 Mar 2011 00:58

Diplomats in Cairo were saying that any sort of Israeli action in Gaza would set the tone for Egypt's foreign policy on Israel.

Bomb blast at Jerusalem bus stop kills woman, injures 30 people

A medium-sized bomb exploded Wednesday afternoon, March 23, at the No. 74 bus stop opposite Binyanei Haooma at the main entrance to Jerusalem from the north, injuring some 31 passers-by and passengers, several seriously. A woman later died of her wounds in hospital. Initial reports of a suicide attack were dispelled when the smoke subsided and the explosion was traced to a bomb planted in a bag attached to a phone booth near a bus stop at the busiest traffic hub of the city. The 74 bus and a number of passing vehicles were damaged by the blast. The attack, recalling years of deadly Palestinian attacks on Israeli buses, occurred on the same day as Palestinians in Gaza fired Grad missiles at Beersheba. Click here for that story.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu delayed his departure for an official visit to Moscow.

The last major Palestinian terrorist attack in Jerusalem was the massacre at the Mercaz Harav yeshiva seminary on March 6, 2008. Later, Palestinians used tractors for rampages on city routes.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 24 Mar 2011 01:45

From nightwatch

Arab League: Saudi Emir Turki al-Faisal, Director of the King Faisal Center for Islamic Research and former ambassador to Washington, has called for a conference in Abu Dhabi to make the Gulf Cooperation Council more like the European Union and to create a united "Gulf" army, Al-Watan reported.

That is what I mentioned last week in my post..............this talk about "gulf army" by Arab league is not good for INDIA.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 24 Mar 2011 02:18

Instead of beating around the Iranian bush, wouldn't it be a good strategy for GCC to procure couple of nukes from their munna or the master?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 24 Mar 2011 02:29

RajeshA wrote: Well the West would not be going as far North as the Caspian sea, because an occupation of Persian regions of Iran, i.e. the biggest portion of Iran would not be possible - only the regions occupied by disenchanted ethnic and religious minorities could be game, along with some part along the Persian Gulf itself!

Who needs occupation? West's interests are best served with rightsized state-lets/

It reminds me that article on client states with comparison between Georgia and Pakistan (found it)

client states: states which imperial powers can closely influence without having to incur the expense, risk and unpopularity of occupying and ruling them directly.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 24 Mar 2011 03:23

A GCC army is not such a bad idea. It would provide a good chance of destroying the entire military potential at one stroke. Any belligerence, or growth of military prowess to the west of India within the IOR - is good for India long run. It forces the rashtryia captains to take sides or quit. Military prowess of the enemy is never really a problem - as long as a people does not give up and does not agree to be called defeated. Our problem in this case is that rashtra does not give any indication of its plans for that region. This is interpreted by hagiographers as a Chankian sign of deep plans to crush all our enemies - all in time - (somewhat like the claims of Qyamat - only the God of Muslims knows when that final fireworks will happen - which is rather convenient, so that you can raise the spectre and fear without ever becoming a false preacher), and by skeptics as a pretended mask to cover lack of any plans or avoidance of any commitments to the people.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Mar 2011 03:34

Guys the thread is getting off topic. Lets stick to West Asia facts.
Thanks, ramana

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Mar 2011 10:47

Shyam, How and why did France get Syria and Lebanon as their mandate after WWI?

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 24 Mar 2011 15:38

shyamd ji,

on second thoughts, I too think, that Iran will not be dismembered by the GCC+West coalition, as USA would not allow it, for the simple reason, that that would take away the fear of the Persians from the hearts of the Gulf Arabs, and they may try to resist USA from then onwards. So a scarecrow like Iran is necessary for American presence in the Gulf.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 24 Mar 2011 16:19

A Gulf security apparatus will complicate the defence of various countries there. Because it creates an obligation on all of them to intervene in case one of them falls into trouble. Which means that if any country goes into trouble then others will have to send forces to help. This will spread the unrest much faster than in the past, when the main defence against chaos was to ignore it (The way KSA usually dealt with the occasional flare ups in Yemen) or to supress it quietly. Neither will be possible now. Which means that any interventionist outside power has to search for a weak link to shake up all the countries.

GCC army makes GCC both more secure and more vulnerable at the same time.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Mar 2011 19:54

Nightwatch 3/23/2011

Bahrain: An anti-monarchy movement, the 14 February Revolutionary Youth Coalition has published the following schedule of activities in the next two days.

Thursday, 24 March 2011:

On Thursday, 24 March 2011 - the night before Friday - from 2000 to 2015: Taking to the streets in the villages, instead of standing on rooftops, and exclaiming "God is Great" out loud.

On Thursday, 24 March 2011 - the night before Friday - from 2100 to 2115: Beating drums, blowing horns, and hoisting the slogan: "May Hamad Fall."

On Thursday, 24 March 2011 - the night before Friday - from 2200 to 2215: Taking to the streets in the villages, instead of standing on the rooftops, and exclaiming "God is Great" out loud.

Friday, 25 March 2011:

On Friday 25 March 2011 - noon: We call all areas and villages to arrange their ranks and take the initiative to organize huge demonstrations in all the areas, so as to assert the revolution's fundamentals until this corrupt regime is overthrown, to pave the way to liberate the Martyrs (Pearl) Square and the liberation Harbor from the hands of the Saudi and Al Khalifah regime occupation forces, God willing, leading to liberate Bahrain from these invading forces, and overthrow the Al Khalifah regime that wreaked havoc, corruption, injustice, and murder in Bahrain.

On Friday, 25 March 2011 - noon: Assertion about massive and strong participation in a demonstration to pay tribute to the first person who fell as martyr, "the revolution's martyr," Mrs. Bahiyyah al-Aradi, in the capital Manama, especially by the people who live close to the Bahraini capital.

Comment: The anti-monarchists have appropriated the Muslim faith declaration as their slogan of protest. Clever. A strong backlash against the "Saudi occupation" is building. Events of the next two days will show its strength.

The intervention of the Peninsula Shield Force might guarantee the survival of the house of al-Khalifa, but the al Khalifa's might be under de facto house arrest. Expect more trouble in the next two days.

Yemen: The British Foreign Ministry announced on 23 March that due to the security situation in Yemen, the high risk of increased tension in Sana'a and the likely protests on 25 March part of the staff at the British Embassy in Sana'a will be withdrawn temporarily, leaving a small core staff in place.

More district and government officials defected from Saleh to join the youth protestors.

Comment: President Saleh said he accepted the five demands presented by the opposition, which call for political reform and a transition to a new president by the end of the year. The difficulty is this arrangement is not responsive to what the youth are demanding.

{So expect more instability unless some Al Q elements become prominent triggering Western pressure.}

Syria: Security forces, some reports said the Republican Guard, attacked anti-government demonstrators in a mosque in the town of Dar'a, killing 15 people. Dar'a is in southwestern Syria, 100 km southwest of Damascus on the Jordanian border. President Asad sacked the governor of the governate, apparently for overreacting to the protests.

{Good Move. Lest it alienates the public.}

Comment: Low level protests have taken place in various cities of Syria since 26 January. Protests gathered strength after 15 March, almost in parallel with the Libyan uprising. Since 18 March, protests have occurred in multiple cities, but only in Dar'a did security forces kill three protestors. Since then anti-government crowds have continued every day in Dar'a and in a few other towns, culminating in today's crackdown.

Protests in outlying governates keep the movement alive, but must converge on Damascus before they have any impact on the Asad government. That convergence can happen quickly, but has not yet.

Israel-Gaza Strip: An explosive device detonated in central Jerusalem, injuring at least 40 people. At least three Palestinian terrorist groups claimed responsibility. All described the bombing as retaliation for Israeli attacks into the Gaza Strip, which were in retaliation for Palestinian rocket attacks.

Comment: A resumption of rocket attacks against Israel coincided with the start of Operation Odyssey Dawn against Libya.

Palestinian groups have fired the occasional rocket or mortar round every few days this year to show they were alive. On 19 March they fired 50 mortar rounds into southern Israel, purportedly to avenge two Palestinians killed in an Israeli air attack. One analyst speculated the unusually large mortar attack was to prevent Palestinian youths from demonstrating against the incompetent Hamas government in the Gaza Strip, by provoking the Israelis.

Whatever the case, Gaza Strip prime minister Ismail Haniyeh reportedly has been in contact with Gaza Strip leaders and Israelis to prevent a return to violence.

Egypt: The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has made a constitutional decree stating that parliamentary elections will be held in six months. The decree, which has the goal of organizing the government for the transitional period, also includes the articles that were approved in the 19 March referendum.

The interim government also made a criminal offense strikes by unions whose enterprises provide essential services.

Comment: It is very difficult to distinguish the post-revolutionary government from the Mubarak government, based on actions and reflexive, authoritarian reactions.

{In other words only the face changed not the regime. this was because the system successfully managed the change without triggering Western intervention.}

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Mar 2011 20:27

ramana wrote:
SwamyG wrote:I am unable to understand the Libyan crisis.
1.Gaddafi.
a) After reining in his activities against the West, why did he not accept the people's demands and go Mubarak's way?
b) Did he think he could quell the rebels?
2. GCC or whatever. Why did these folks not support Gaddafi the way they are supporting Bahrain ?
3. West. They influeneced Gaddafi enough earlier. So why did they side with the rebels this time?
SwamyG, while waiting to be called for jury duty I did a decision tree on Gaddafi / despot options after Egypt. What I find he shouldn't have used his air force on the rebels. It reminded West of Saddam's Basra campaign and transfer of malice.
That allowed the UN resolution for NFZ an West opportunity for a bombing campaign.

Will convert to ppt and jpeg it.

LINK in slide share

I think it address how the different states and the paths they chose and how it resluts in regime change or not.

For rebels the biggest is to avoid Al Q or MB tag. And keep the hot heads under check. Use twitter/facebook to give image of modernity.

For the states the biggest is to avoid air force use. And concede what is non essential. If they ask for jobs give them that and not something else.

For West its to ensure that the states use excess force to trigger the UN authorization.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 24 Mar 2011 23:45

Assad has announced a package of promises - like guaranteed rise in pay to gov servants to pay for health insurance, a committee to "look into grievances", take steps if "any excesses/wrong doing" by local police officers are proven, etc. Assad spokesperson also denied any deliberate raid into the "mosque". Some constitutional reforms, anti corruption measures etc will also be looked into - as promised.

But Assad seems to have panicked too early. The greatest danger of a long standing authoritarian or totalitarian regime comes exactly at the point that the dictator or oligarchy appears to "concede" to dissent. For most of the dissenters in Syria, since Assad has becomes the state, all the ills of the state are the ills of Assad. When Assad concedes its a sign of his age/fear/decreasing confidence - to his dissenters of a large generation gap.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 25 Mar 2011 06:46

My blog post on situation in the MENA region at the moment.
Quick Update: Libya + GCC

Here is a short update on Libya as well as the GCC.

Libya

* We expect to see more coalition strikes on Gaddafi's armed forces. In particular we expect Libyan tanks and other artillery equipment to be destroyed over the next few days.
* If a settlement is to be agreed, we expect the country to be split into 2 - Tripolitania and Cyrenica. Where Gaddafi will retain control of the West (Tripolitania) with the rebels holding the East (Cyrenica).
* The person running the rebellion is Gaddafi's former interior minister Younis Al Obaidi, who is backed by a few military officers.
* One of the officers backing Obaidi is supposedly close to the US pentagon. As the WSJ had reported the Libyan National Council can rely on arms supplies coming from over the border in Egypt that is indeed partly financed by the KSA.
* Obaidi's aim is to recapture Adjdabia from the Gaddafi forces, since the western coalition air force is taking out any Gaddafi forces on the main highways. Once this is complete, we believe he will head for the coastal oil transportation hubs - especially Ras Lanouf ( a site of a major oil export terminal).
* Capture of these oil export terminals would mean oil revenues and hence greater viability of the state of Cyrenica. Establishing a state of Cyrenaica is the minimum the rebels aim to achieve at the moment.
* A problem Obaidi is facing is that the force is filled with enthusiastic civilians who have very little military training.
* Meanwhile Gaddafi is aiming to grab Zintan and Misrata as well as other Western towns. These cities would be important to be able to stabilise the Tripolitania region.
* We expect additional political appointments to be made over the coming week - we strongly expect Ali Issawi (the former Ambassador to India) to be given a very senior posting - either in Foreign Affairs or Economy.
* We believe most western capitals are now debating on the end game in Libya - as in what the west hopes to achieve in Libya. Also at what point do they cease military operations.

GCC

Gulf states 'to deport Hezbollah, Iranian agents'

(AFP) – 16 hours ago

KUWAIT CITY — Arab states in the Gulf plan to deport thousands of Lebanese Shiites over their alleged links to Hezbollah and Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard force, a Kuwaiti newspaper reported on Thursday.
Al-Seyassah, quoting London-based Arab diplomatic sources, said the measure was being considered because of intelligence reports that Lebanese Shiites activists had been involved in protests in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.
Based on the assessments by the United States, France and Bahrain, alleged Hezbollah and Revolutionary Guard agents were leading the protests along with local Shiite clerics in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province, it said.
It said Bahrain's decision to suspend flights to Iran, Iraq and Lebanon and its condemnation of remarks by Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah had "paved the way for the deportation of thousands of Lebanese Shiites from the Gulf."
"No Lebanese Shiite linked to or suspected of being associated with Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Guards will remain in the Gulf," the diplomatic sources said, citing high-ranking Bahraini officials.
Bahrain is preparing to deport 90 Lebanese Shiites, most of them arrested during the Shiite-led, pro-democracy in the kingdom, and is examining the status of 4,000 Lebanese families living in the Gulf kingdom, the sources said.
Last week, Bahraini authorities carried out a bloody crackdown on the protesters who have been demanding political reforms since February 14 in the tiny Shiite-majority, Sunni-ruled kingdom.
The crackdown came hours after a Saudi-led joint Gulf force rolled into Bahrain to back up the regime, a move condemned by Shiite Iran and the head of Lebanon's Shiite militant Hezbollah who has offered to help the demonstrators.
On top of the suspension of flights to Beirut by its two national carriers, Manama has advised Bahraini citizens to avoid travel to Lebanon, a popular destination for wealthy Gulf Arabs.
"Due to threats and interference by terrorists," the Bahraini foreign ministry said on Tuesday it "warns and advises its citizens not to travel to the Republic of Lebanon as they might face dangers threatening their safety."

Bahrain and KSA have pointed the finger at Iran for the unrests that have taken place over the last few weeks. This is evident by HM King Hamad's speeches of an external hand in the protests and also by the expulsion of diplomats between Iran and Bahrian.

The expulsion of Lebanese nationals appears solely directed at Iran and Iranian interests. The MOIS (Iranian Ministry of Intelligence Servies) and IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps) are known to use Lebanese nationals for their operations in the GCC. This article suggests that several individuals appear to have been caught taking part in protests.

The expulsions of Lebanese individuals linked to the Hezbollah will serve to heighten the tensions between Iran and also to protect the KSA and Bahrain from any potential Iranian involvement in any unrest or future protests.

Due to the large Lebanese community in Bahrain, any expulsion may also serve as a sanctioning of the Hezbollah led Lebanese government. We see this similar to the sanctioning of the Hamas government in Gaza by the EU after winning the democratic led elections. However for this to be truly effective, it would require a GCC wide expulsion of Lebanese individuals - the article above does suggest that there may be a GCC wide expulsion and we agree that a GCC wide expulsion may take place. There have been reports in late 2010 of expulsion of Hezbollah supporters from the UAE, so this would not be the first time that a Gulf state has taken action against lebanese expatriates in the Gulf.

Iran has making its own moves recently, by allowing Iraqi shi'ite political parties to form an alliance against the "KSA intervention" in Bahrain. This alliance has threatened to open a front (by sending shia tribes to the border) in the KSA/Iraq border in solidarity with the Bahraini shia.

Syria

In light of the major protests in Syria. This has caused serious worries of instability in neighbouring Iraq - across all parts of the country. Therefore, the Kurdistan Regional Government and the central government in Baghdad have struck an agreement to provide for security of all northern iraqi oil fields.

It appears that there is a heightened risk of serious instability all over Iraq as a result of a protests in Syria. We expect tightening of the border security between Syria and Iraq over the next few days in order to prevent any instability spreading into Iraq.

----------------------

Thank you for reading. Feel free to email us any questions you have to eye.on.middleeast "at" gmail "dot" com.

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 25 Mar 2011 22:34

57 Jordanian protesters injured in an attack: Link. Government supporters pelt with stones, a student organised pro-reform movement.

However, the protesters vow to continue with their sit-ins. Link.

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 25 Mar 2011 22:38

17 killed in an attack on demonstrators in the Syrian city of Daraa. Link.

This came after they decided to protest after dismissing promises of reform made by authorities.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 26 Mar 2011 00:25

I do not know if this was posted earlier.

THE ROVING EYE - Endgame: Divide, rule and get the oil - By Pepe Escobar

Its "decision" was propelled by Washington's promise to protect the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) kings/sheikhs/oligarchs from the democratic aspirations of their own subjects - who are yearning for the same democratic rights as their "cousins" in eastern Libya.

This is exactly the same GCC, posing for Saudi Arabia that invaded Bahrain to help the Sunni al-Khalifa dynasty to crush the pro-democracy movement. The GCC gang is considered by the West as "our" ********, while Colonel Muammar Gaddafi - according to the Western narrative - is a terrorist who went to rehab and is now a thug

The bulk of Libya's proven oil and gas reserves lie in "rebel" Cyrenaica. Oil and gas account for 25% of the economy, 97% of exports and 90% of government revenue. Sarkozy - as well as the West - fear a protracted war. France wants it to end now. Unlike Germany, Britain and Italy - they're already in - France is salivating to get a huge piece of the oil action.

So Western moral uprightness may be summed up like this. If you sell us a lot of oil, buy our weapons, and smash al-Qaeda, that's fine with us. You may even kill your own people, provided it's just dozens, not thousands.

That's how Saudi Arabia can get away with anything in the current counter-revolution climate, with the House of Saud pulling all stops to crush any measure of democratic aspirations in the Persian Gulf.

As for those regimes that kill perhaps thousands of their own people - and have oil, and threaten to sell the oil to the Russians or the Chinese, their destiny is to fight a UN/Tomahawk resolution.

The forces of counter-revolution are now joined at the hip with the West. Saudi Arabia's military will remain inside Bahrain. The GCC legitimizes the Western war in Libya. The favorite Western endgame in Libya is divide and rule, and roll with the oil. Is the great 2011 Arab revolt about to crash-land in the desert sands?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Mar 2011 00:29

Iran was behind the moves in the GCC. The US in private is very different to what they say in public. THeir public messages are driven by the social mood in the media.

Doubt the evidence will be released though.

------------------
Also, has anyone picked up the Portuguese bailout discussion? Does anyone understand the effect this is having in the EU economy? I don't think anyone has picked it up until now. They just gave the euro a shot in the head. Portugal will spread to Spain (without a doubt). This is the end of the european economy and the euro.

-------------------
Its easy to see the western interest in oil. Its a major part of their economy.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 01:39

The Portuguese "bailout" has not yet happened. The budget was refused by the parliament - and so the PM resigned. This will get the country to elections - but by constitutional law - it will be 55 days from now at the least. Austerity measures are being seriously challenged everywhere, and since the overall elite network of Europe controls a lot of strings - even opposition but established parties riding a wave of discontent (like in Eire) will turn to the same austerity and anti-people measures without slapping a single sting on the hind quarters of bankers and financial sharks. So the real crisis will come in the next round once the new governments supported by popular anger comes into power.

Oil alone will not solve this economic crisis. There are more fundamental problems with the Euro economy - based on serious educational, innovation and wealth-concentration/tax-evasion problems. So a mere Libyan cheap oil may not be the dominant factor.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 01:57

Bahrain, and Yemen are ahead of the curve in terms of uprisings. But the more "stable", powerful regimes - will also come into this unrest phase soon. Watch out for Assad getting more cornered, and Abdallah of Jordan struggling more and more.

I think we will make a grave error if we model these uprisings as purely a proxy-war of the Cold-war types. The countries behind have joined up seeing an opportunity - but the real motivation is on the ground. The primary spokespersons of the youth movements are articulate, speak English fluently but with an accent that shows their non-western-city education. These are home-grown "rebels", and many of them are simply carrying out "unfinished" commitments and business with the regimes. We don't care to look into history - because living in the past is bad, very very bad - but a similar popular move happened around the late 60's early 70's - that sporadically resurfaced into the late 70's in many countries there almost 30 years to the dot from present. Many of the kids had ancestors, fathers, uncles, aunts, grandfathers, granduncles etc who vanished, or were tortured, or raped.

There has always been this tension between the marginalized, "dispossessed" of the ME and the feudal or imperial forces that roamed it. I think even the early Islam started out using this grievance but as usual, once it gained momentum, the marginalized individuals of the older elite reinvented themselves as revolutionaries and joined up to gain power - creating the mullahcracy that we know today and the genocidal imperialism we saw unleashed on India in the past.

British were particularly responsible - in fact the Anglo-Saxon world itself - in projecting a history of the ME as purely mullahcratic. The Anglo-Saxon helped to suppress the alternative strand of this millenial level struggle - and coopted the mullahs to foist regimes that they felt would be immune to "communism" and be dependent on the west for survival. So we are usually not aware of this other underlying theme in ME.

I repeat, India should have played a more nuanced strategy and position publicly about the ME. We should have declared support for modernizing and liberalizing forces and against retrogressive, theocratic forces. We cannot and should not make the error that USA made in supporting regimes purely on the basis of immediate convenience. On the long run, it costs more and only creates forces that over the long run is going to come against us - just as it has done against the West.

It is better to strengthen whatever weak "liberal" even "leftist" forces are there in ME, so that a struggle continues against the theocratic strands. Let them wear each other out. Out of that in the future will be created a better chance of a democracy and a realignment of forces that does not see India as a qufr land to be used and oiled up when needed - but ultimately a fattened cow to be slaughtered once Islamism becomes overwhelming in military terms. Do please think long term - and not think like the West!

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Mar 2011 02:49

Brihaspati ji, the bailout is coming for both of them. The ECB already admitted to giving them money secretly. Not just that, its a matter of time now. Just a few months ago they were debating about expanding the bailout fund due to Portugal and Spain. Its inevitable and they all know it. They are just trying to put it off as long as possible.

Libyan moves do seem politically motivated rather than strategic (for the oil). They still haven't even decided how to end this or what the end game is.

-----------------
Regarding your next post. Ultimately, its self interest that governs our relationship. The attitude of the leadership at the moment is trying to befriend anyone and everyone. The guys at the top are not asleep. We are just using them to build up the economy. We need money to be pumped into infrastructure and so on. Not sure if you saw but they opened up $20billion infrastructure bonds to foreign investors. I think the aim is to create a US type relationship with the GCC and get them to pump some money in. The Joint Investment Fund with Oman will invest pre-dominantly into Indian infrastructure and assorted businesses.

India is expanding this model across the GCC. But the problem now is that KSA $$ is being stretched to Bahrain and Oman. Then you had a former Kuwaiti minister the other day asking for a big marshall plan for Egypt to rebuild its economy. For the next few years until this Iran threat is resolved they need India on their side. So, they'll have to send some $$'s our way. Its what we do with our defence expenditure that counts.

SM Krishna is in Dubai now, he'll be in Riyadh tomorrow. Lets see what they say. I am quite surprised that SM Krishna is going to Riyadh as I'm not sure if Saud Al Faisal is back from Moscow yet (where he will be meeting the Israeli PM). Something is up. The Indo - KSA military exercise has been postponed lookslike and so has Prince Turki's visit.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Mar 2011 03:33

Just to back up my point about Indian policy of befriending anyone and everyone.

India and China had similar considerations on Libya

Both were against use of force, at the same time they did not want to upset ties with the West and Arab countries

Without consulting each other intimately, India and China adopted largely similar stands while abstaining from the United Nations Security Council resolution on approving a no-fly-zone over Libya.

China's decision to abstain from the UNSC vote, according to officials and analysts in Beijing, reflected a difficult balancing act between a historical opposition to any kind of military intervention and concerns about isolating itself among both Western powers and Arab countries that backed the resolution.

Similar considerations also compelled India to abstain instead of opposing the resolution. India has always opposed the use of force and it did so this time in its explanation of vote. Government sources pointed out that when read with the explanation of vote on the first UNSC resolution on Libya that imposed sanctions, it becomes clear that India was opposed to the direction that the issue was taking.

But pragmatic considerations prevailed in India deciding to abstain from the vote. The first was the uncertainty among permanent members China and Russia over the direction that Libyan ruler Muammar Qadhafi's war against his opponents would take. They were not sure if their opposition to the no-fly-zone and air strikes would strengthen Qadhafi's resolve and the aggression could deteriorate into mass killings of civilians. The second, like China, was its desire not to upset existing ties with the West and the ruling Arab autocracies.

The other consideration was for civilians. Informed sources pointed out that despite Western assurances about the accuracy of its missiles and bombs before the start of aggression, the experience has been to the contrary since the first Gulf War. Each war, whether to liberate Kuwait or hunt down the Taliban in Afghanistan, civilians were killed and maimed in large numbers.

Call for ceasefire

While China has backed a no-fly-zone to protect civilians, it has, like India, hit out at the air strikes, expressing “regret” over the military intervention, though Beijing chose to not veto the resolution.

“We always oppose use of armed forces in international relations,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu said, calling for an immediate ceasefire. “Therefore, we have serious reservations about part of the resolution. But given concerns and stances of Arab countries and African Union as well as special conditions of Libya, we, together with other countries, have abstained from voting” rather than vetoing the resolution, she added.

She, however, criticised the air strikes, warning that military action was “an abuse” of force that was “causing more civilian casualties and a greater humanitarian crisis.”

Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao also made more or less the same arguments. “We believe we did the right thing. Military intervention has its dangers and risks. Are you so sure about outcomes...we said all along that we did not condone the loss of innocent lives,” she said.

No pushovers

At the same time she made the point about the abstainers being no pushovers although they lacked the combined financial and military muscle of the European powers. “Our countries are a significant presence on the global stage and we had cogent reasons for abstaining. India, China, Russia, Germany and Brazil abstained on the UNSC Libya vote. With a combined population of three billion, they comprise almost 40 per cent of humanity.”

In China, some analysts have seen the vote as underscoring a deepening divide between Western countries and emerging powers. “By abstaining from the vote, the countries of emerging markets have shown that the international community is divided on the issue,” said Qu Xing, president of the China Institute of International Studies.

He said while the BRIC countries did not consult with each other on their stand, their similar national interests brought them together on the vote.

Dangerous precedent

Another common concern was whether the vote would “in principle, be used as a dangerous precedent for future military intervention,” added Shi Yinhong, professor of international relations at Renmin University, in an interview with The Hindu.

China, like India, has also sought to preserve its growing interests in the region, most evident in its fast-growing imports of energy resources, than stand with the West. China's “major interest-related friendship” with Saudi Arabia played a substantial role in its decision to let the resolution pass, Mr. Shi said.

“Narrow interests”

Shen Dingli, a strategic analyst at Fudan University, told The Hindu that the five countries that abstained took “too much take care of their narrowly defined national interests and yielded to American hegemonism.”

India also gave additional arguments to justify its abstention. The most striking among them was that the resolution was passed even before the U.N. Secretary General's Special Envoy on Libya could finalise his report.

It also pointed out that there was little credible information on the situation and the bombing began even before command and control issues were settled.

Brihaspatiji, this one is for you. I found this interesting.

Lakhs throng Deoband for prayers led by Imam-e-Haram Dr As-Sudais

Deoband (Uttar Pradesh): Lakhs of Muslims from different parts of the country thronged the prestigious Darul-Uloom seminary in this Uttar Pradesh town to participate in the Friday prayers led by the chief Imam of the Masjid-al-Haram in Makkah - Islam's most sacred site.

Imam-al-Haram Dr Abu Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman As-Sudais, especially took time off from his busy schedule in New Delhi to fly down in a helicopter to Deoband to offer namaz, which attracted Muslims from far-off places.

He was accompanied by former Indian cricket captain turned MP Mohammad Azharuddin, union Minister of State for Tourism Sultan Ahmad and Urdu daily Sahafat's editor Hasan Shuja.

Dr As-Sudais was received at the helipad by Darul-Uloom rector Maulana Mohammad Ghulam Vastanvi and other top members of the institution's faculty.

Dr As-Sudais is visiting India on the invitation of Jamiatul Ulema-e-Hind.

All roads leading to the world-famous school of Islamic thought were packed with people and when it came to offering the 'namaz', people joined the ritual in every nook and corner of the town, including streets, parks, rooftops and even highways on the outskirts.

In an hour-long 'khutba' (sermon), the cleric praised the Darul Uloom for its rich contribution to Islam.

He also made a fervent appeal to all for observing peace and harmony, which he described as the "true essence of Islam".

He returned to New Delhi shortly afterwards.

The Makkah mosque, encircling the Kaaba, and the Prophet Mohammad's mosque at Madinah in Saudi Arabia, collectively called the "Harmain-al-Sharifain (the sacred sanctuaries)", are the two most sacred sites for Muslims and the centre-points of the annual Haj pilgrimage.

Earlier, Dr As-Sudais arrived in New Delhi March 24, hours before his actual schedule. At the airport, he was received by Saudi Ambassador, and other dignitaries including Jamiatul Ulema-e-Hind president Maulana Arshad Madani.

Dr As-Sudais met Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh later in the evening.

During his three-day stay in India, Dr. As-Sudais will visit various places in the national capital besides addressing the conference organised by Jamiatul Ulema-e-Hind at Ramlila Ground on March 26. He will also meet various groups representing the Indian Muslims including Jamaat-e-Islami Hind.

On March 27, Dr. As-Sudais will visit the Jamiat-e-Ahle Hadees Complex at Okhla and lead the afternoon prayers. The prayer will be followed by his address.

Dr As-Sudais is regarded worldwide as one of the most loved and respected Muslim clerics. He is leading the prayers at the Grand Mosque, Makkah in Saudi Arabia since more than a decade.

This is Dr. As-Sudais’s first visit to India. Earlier, he was scheduled to address a peace conference in Mumbai in November 2010 but his visit was cancelled in the last moment. The Mumbai Peace Conference was however addressed by Dr. Saud As-Shuraim, his colleague and another Imam of the Grand Mosque with equal stature.

I think all this was part of the greater strategic ties that is forming with KSA and would have taken place with the visit of Prince Turki and the military exercise in the background.. This is all happening under our nose. We need to keep an eye on these developments.

Follow Modern Education for Reform: Al-Sudais

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 04:18

Not surprising for me. But however way we look at it, its an error, and a severe shortsight. Welcoming any iconic ideological/cultural leader of a theology with which we have not yet reached resolution within the subcontinent - and that too from a "foreign" nation, is dangerous. Allowing him to become so publicly visible and with obvious rashtryia support or backing is foolish. What happened to that legendary caution that our top leadership is supposed to have shown in "delicate" international contexts? That caution which prevents us from taking sides? Will the GOI similarly sponsor from behind a leading rabbi from Israel to come and hold shop on some perfectly legitimate occasion - say a remembrance day for the murdered (and tortured) Jews on 26th November in Mumbai?

If it is international "inputs" into Indian needs/growth etc., Israel should have similar importance in terms of defense inputs!

Okay - onlee difference that can be cited without appearing favouring a particular religion over others, is the "overwhelming" number of "Muslims" in India compared to "Jews". Now given that fact, really how low politicians need to sink in intelligence not to see the immensely negative implication in this?

First, you are emphasizing the foreign roots and focus and centre of identity of Indian Muslims - by aiding congregations in "lakhs" attending a theologian from a foreign nation. Second, you are overtly and virtually acknowledging the potential role of foreign nation's theologian in controlling/exhorting the behaviour of a section of your own citizens. Third, if economic investments etc are cited, does it not then set up a "dangerous precedent" that GOI would be turning a blind eye to foreign religious claims on Indian populations in return for money.

I thought our impression was that GOI was averse to setting "dangerous precedents" of "dangerous" foreign interventions?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 04:28

shyamd ji,
I did say that even if opposition parties come to power in European elections they are likely to continue with the "austerity" measures. So the real crisis in political terms will start after that - after the coming round of elections. Until that time there will be a desperate scramble to preserve the financial moguls and their capital as much as possible from a public backlash. But it is here probably in the next phase we may see a European version of whats happening on the Arab streets. It may not appear so at the beginning - because of obvious outlets for dissent, but the essential political drives would be very similar. But the real flavour of that is some years away.

Meanwhile, oil is a factor but just one of several different factors. For some time Europe had been drifting away from southern Med, increasingly finding itself cut off from the society there. There comfy ties were with the regional dictators, and that create a severe disconnect. Brits are clever in that you will find all colours of dissenters from the world being given shelter there. This way the Brits stay slightly ahead of the curve of mainland in keeping a tab on the changing moods of regions. They can also select and groom candidates from the dissent. What we see is a belated waking up of mainland in seeing the need to reinvest and rebuild entry points and chains of control to the south of the pond. If they lose North Africa, what stares at them in the sub-Saharan belt is a disaster - politically, which will then cast its shadow on the Med.

It is strategically important for them to prevent the ME reaching out again into the Maghreb, and the "revolutions" provide them with a gap to assert their control again.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Mar 2011 05:23

brihaspati wrote:Not surprising for me. But however way we look at it, its an error, and a severe shortsight. Welcoming any iconic ideological/cultural leader of a theology with which we have not yet reached resolution within the subcontinent - and that too from a "foreign" nation, is dangerous.

Before we start talking about him as an ideological figure. We should analyse his speech to the Indian people and also what he's been upto. You are just assuming a lot of things right now.

Allowing him to become so publicly visible and with obvious rashtryia support or backing is foolish. What happened to that legendary caution that our top leadership is supposed to have shown in "delicate" international contexts? That caution which prevents us from taking sides?

He's there to play to an audience and to develop our relations, nothing more nothing less.

Will the GOI similarly sponsor from behind a leading rabbi from Israel to come and hold shop on some perfectly legitimate occasion - say a remembrance day for the murdered (and tortured) Jews on 26th November in Mumbai?

If the Rabbi was state sponsored probably with diplomatic status, then yes.. They would. FYI MK's, minister and Rabbi's have visited Chabad house as part of memorials and official delegations etc. We've taken many foreign delegations there too.

If it is international "inputs" into Indian needs/growth etc., Israel should have similar importance in terms of defense inputs!

Who said Israeli doesn't?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 06:07

shyamd ji,
GOI or a section of the rashtra is acting in a way with a foremost Islamic cleric from KSA that some of us are interpreting as "trying to develop the relationship" with KSA ruling regime. If you are willing, I can quote a series of statements/speeches from the same group/institution to which this particular theologian is affiliated to, based in KSA, at different time points with respect to their current aims/tactics and future aims/long term strategies or objectives. Their public or "tactical" statements should be researched against their not-so-public statements, before we start swallowing the special message for Indian "special audience" as representing any fundamental change of colours from that quarter.

There was a research group/think tank sponsored some years ago along the lines of Indo-Arab/Gulf cooperation. As far as I recollect, luminaries from both sides at the time shed a lot of tears about the tardy growth in economic and other "cooperation" between the two "sides" at that time. I am aware that a certain attempt has been going on for years to bridge the Arabian sea from the Indian side. There are obvious incentives for certain sections of Indian elite. For example the two Biblical patriarchs reincarnated as one in Mumbai.

However what that entails for the future of the country - whether such "development of relationship" will also entail tacit acceptance from GOI side of concurrent and typical [in all countries where such Saudi relations "improved"] cultural "investments" in Saudi linked madrassahs, increasing stature of Saudi clerics and their inroads and spreading of institutional tentacles into the country [given that the Sunnis appear to have been winning the war against the Barelvis in UP] - is not clear. The narrative of the cleric's welcome you cited is something to be worried about. Where an Islamic institution and theologian from ME, especially from the iconic centre of the Sunni world is concerned, in the context of India, and given all past behaviour - it is safer to be paranoid.

As for Israeli Rabbi - I wanted a comparison between people of similar religious stature and significance in their respective communities.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Mar 2011 06:15

+1 to brihaspati. this is just GOI sucking up to IM constituency - never mind the UP IMs are not with cong(I) anymore.

a israeli head rabbi would get a meeting with the PM ? I doubt that. even the eastern christian patriarch would probably be denied.

only two religions get platinum grade access into GOI circles.

and Azharuddin is taking his new mulla role quite seriously...probably this makkah mullah is going to Hyd too and azza wants some reflected glory.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Mar 2011 06:23

If the clerics message is about the importance of "reform through modern education" and the importance of being "peaceful" - to Indian muslims, do the Indian Muslims need to be told of the importance of these two concepts from a Saudi top cleric - to be convinced? What does elation at such statements from such a personality mean for Indian rashtra? Doe sit not imply that we already acknowledge that only such a person from a foreign nation can motivate Indian muslims to "reform" and be "peaceful" and that GOI has failed to convince Indian Muslims so? Why is it so difficult to see that this is a symbolic but iconic giving up of leadership of Indian Muslims from Indian side and at best offering a share of such leadership to a foreign theologian?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Mar 2011 07:22

Wasnt Maulana Vastanvi have the same message as the Saudi Maulana?