West Asia News and Discussions

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 06 Apr 2011 22:51

Okay! From the KSA side it makes sense for them to try and start a war against Iran. It diverts attention of their abduls from the KSA "decadence" and "corruption", and raises the danda of "patriotism+purity" to suppress any discontent. It is supposedly also then in Israel's interest and US interest to cut Iranian wings and therefore these will at least stay neutral if not participate.

What makes it fishy is the supposed involvement of Pak. The story of Pak's revitalized joining [as if they were not in it before] could help everyone concerned in a very predictable way. Without actually going to war.

It can be used by GCC+USA to coopt GOI into supporting GCC-Sunni-clique.
It can be used by GCC against USA and Pak as saying look "we may do some ahem ahem with India if you guys do not play ball. If you do, we can consider paying you in return by dumping India quietly without India knowing about it - and then you can take your flesh"
It can be used by GOI to convince dissenting voices within Indian spectrum - "oh look Pak will gain so much more strength, we can't allow this - we must go and lick GCC thighs a bit at least if the feet is too much"
It can be used by Pak to lend support to the internal "kshama-sundar" view of Pak from Indian glitterati, and pressurize India on "Kashmir".

In all the scenarios and angles, who gains? who loses ? who gains or loses nothing?

Pak gains, KSA gains, Sunni Dawa imperialist network gains, US loses nothing, Israel may actually lose [either Iran unleashes on Israel diverting attention from itself and concentrating ME Islamism behind its own banner or once Iran goes down KSA turns its amorous eyes and props up Hamas - Shia-sunni problem will not be relevant any more then], and India will definitely lose. Because no one will rescue a GOI subject to loving embraces by Islamist armies - a G that has itself hobnobbed so slavishly and in friendliness with the Sunni leadership.

Be very very clear - anti-Islamist forces will not come to GOI rescue from outside because GOI stance on Islamism has been dubious, and outcomes of such rescue attempts itself could be disastrous on attempting powers themselves since at some crucial point GOI may start talking of the millions of IM's feelings and the importance of not hurting an Islamist army.

jimmyray · Post by **jimmyray** » 06 Apr 2011 23:09

Singha wrote:BBC:

Sudan: Air strike kills two in Port Sudan
An air strike has destroyed a car near Sudan's city of Port Sudan on the Red Sea coast, killing its two passengers, local officials say.

They say vehicle was moving from the city's airport when the unknown plane carried out the raid.

There was no immediate word on the identity of the two victims. Security forces have now sealed the area, reports say.

So far no-one has claimed to have carried out the attack.

In 2009, the Sudanese authorities said a convoy of arms smugglers was hit by unidentified aircraft in Sudan's eastern Red Sea state, Reuters reports.

There was speculation at the time that the strike may have been carried out by Israel to stop weapons bound for Gaza.

Israel has not commented on the claims.

Debka says that Israelis dronned Hamas representative in Sudan to prevent smuggling of chemical weapons allegedly obtained by Hamas/Hizb from Libyan rebels. That story (chemical weapon story) was reported by Debka last week.
Hamas rep killed in Sudan organized chemical weapons shipment for Gaza

Late Tuesday, April 5, two passengers of a Hyundai Sonata car were killed in a mysterious attack by a missile that wrecked their car near Port Sudan. debkafile's counter-terror sources report that the attack, carried out by an unmanned aerial vehicle at Kalaneeb south of Port Said, targeted the Hamas representative in Sudan in charge of the vast Iranian weapons smuggling enterprise for the Gaza Strip via Egypt and the Suez Canal. His latest task was to organize the transfer to Port Sudan of a shipment of mustard and nerve gas purchased by Hamas and Hizballah representatives with Tehran's help from Libyan rebels in Benghazi.

The covert WMD consignment was destined for Gaza and Lebanon. debkafile broke the story of this transaction on March 31.
It raises the possibility that Israel carried out the missile strike in Port Sudan to cut short this traffic. This charge was leveled by the Sudanese foreign minister in Khartoum Wednesday. Jerusalem has made no comment.

debkafile also reports that Hizballah and Hamas personnel are stationed at the headquarters established in Port Sudan by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards intelligence and naval arms.
On March 31, debkafile reported:

Senior Libyan rebel “officers” sold Hizballah and Hamas thousands of chemical shells from the stocks of mustard and nerve gas that fell into rebel hands when they overran Muammar Qaddafi’s military facilities in and around Benghazi.
Word of the capture touched off a scramble in Tehran and among the terrorist groups it sponsors to get hold of their first unconventional weapons.

According to our sources, the rebels offloaded at least 2,000 artillery shells carrying mustard gas and 1,200 nerve gas shells for cash payment amounting to several million dollars.

US and Israeli intelligence agencies have tracked the WMD consignments from eastern Libya as far as Sudan in convoys secured by Iranian agents and Hizballah and Hamas guards. They are not believed to have reached their destinations in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, apparently waiting for an opportunity to get their deadly freights through without the US or Israel attacking and destroying them.

It is also not clear whether the shells and gases were assembled upon delivery or were travelling in separate containers. Our sources report that some of the poison gas may be intended not only for artillery use but also for drones which Hizballah recently acquired from Iran.

Tehran threw its support behind the anti-Qaddafi rebels because of this unique opportunity to get hold of the Libyan ruler’s stock of poison gas after it fell into opposition hands and arm Hizballah and Hamas with unconventional weapons without being implicated in the transaction.

Shortly after the uprising began in the third week of February, a secret Iranian delegation arrived in Benghazi. Its members met rebel chiefs, some of them deserters from the Libyan army, and clinched the deal for purchasing the entire stock of poison gas stock and the price.

The rebels threw in a quantity of various types of anti-air missiles.

Hizballah and Hamas purchasing missions arrived in the first week of March to finalize the deal and arrange the means of delivery.

The first authoritative American source to refer to a Hizballah presence in Benghazi was the commander of US NATO forces Adm. James Stavridis. When he addressed a US Senate committee on Tuesday, March 29, he spoke of “telltale signs of the presence of Islamic insurgents led by Al-Qaeda and Hizballah” on the rebel side of the Libyan war. He did not disclose what they were doing there.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 06 Apr 2011 23:13

brihaspati wrote: Israel may actually lose [either Iran unleashes on Israel diverting attention from itself and concentrating ME Islamism behind its own banner or once Iran goes down KSA turns its amorous eyes and props up Hamas - Shia-sunni problem will not be relevant any more then].

Israel will lose not at Iranian hands but the reinvigorated GCC. Iran cannot get any help from the arab street. Even with all that sympathy Saddam couldn't galvanize Arab street (himself being sunni overlording shia-majority Iraq) against Israel.

Israel will become irrelevant with the emergence of GCC-military alliance with Turkey and Pakistan and the nukes. Why would west need Israel then and against whom?

I doubt west will let GCC win as it would end GCC's dependence on west (who will buy those toys without the Shia demon?). The extended GCC (GCC+Pak+Turkey) has almost everything that is needed in a regional power (Oil, Demographis, and Nukes). More over Pakis can do a nixon on GCC with PRC any day. UNLESS the next step in the game is extended GCC Vs Bharat (India has already been conquered by west)! In the process west can do Romans on Islam (Ramanaji - remember your projection?).

AKalam · Post by **AKalam** » 06 Apr 2011 23:15

Marten wrote:
AKalam wrote:Things are moving at a fast pace it seems. ramana ji, with due respect, disagree with your comment above, Ottomans had their problems, but breaking of Ottoman was a disaster for Muslims (specially Sunni's), just like the Subcontinental Partition was. Perhaps the Saud's have finally realized their mistake. The rise of Shia was a by product of that twin disaster. Shia demographic map:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Islam_by_country.png
That map says Islam by country, unless you intended it to point to something else.

The map shows Islam by country as well as a comparison of Sunni vs Shia among Muslim populations in these countries, shades of red for Shia and shades of green for Sunni. Another map posted by RamaY, a few post after my previous post, shows better detail of Shia majority population centers within these countries.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 06 Apr 2011 23:17

Strategy--------------~~Probability~~Outcome---------------~~Probability
Peace (Surrender Nuke dreams)~~0.5~~~~
---------~~~~Regime Change - Western Alliance~~0.2
---------~~~~Regime Change - SCO Allaince~~0.05
---------~~~~Mullahcracy - Western Alliance~~0.1
---------~~~~Mullahcracy - SCO Alliance~~0.15
Conflict (Just in Posture)~~0.25~~~~
---------~~~~Mullahcracy - SCO Alliance~~0.05
---------~~~~Mullahcracy - IRAN goes Nuclear~~0.07
---------~~~~Regime Change~~0.1
---------~~~~Formation of Arab-Shia state~~0.01
---------~~~~Free Baluchistan~~0.02
Conflict (Military)~~0.2~~~~
---------~~~~GCC Victory~~0.12
---------~~~~Iranian Victory - No change in borders~~0.06
---------~~~~Iranian Victory - Formation of Arab-Shia state~~0.01
---------~~~~Iranian Victory - Free Baluchistan~~0.01
---------~~~~~~
Conflict (Military and Nuclear)~~0.05~~~~
---------~~~~GCC Victory - Iran survives~~
---------~~~~GCC Victory - Occupied Iran~~
---------~~~~Iranian Victory (Pulls out JDAM)~~
---------~~~~Pakistan as new Caliph~~

{Added Later}

Will do Ramanaji. Just put it out to get the discussion going.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Apr 2011 23:50

Try to put this in the Decision process chart like I had in slideshare. Will give better visual appreciation

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 00:07

Manvendra Singh's article on WikiLeaks reverse and has an interesting observation on India and Iran old and new.

http://www.dailypioneer.com/326243/Wiki ... verse.html

...
India had also built up its relationship with Saudi Arabia that has rarely been matched since then. And it developed its relationship with Iran to a point where it seemed ancient India and Persia were once again playing the game. Nothing could reflect statecraft better than managing relations with the three, distinct, poles of politics in the western parts of Asia....

Now we understand the pressure by US on India to give up Iran.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 07 Apr 2011 00:45

SECDEF Gates just landed in baghdad to meet with govt. Probably to get a feeling for what's happening and some plans etc

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 00:47

shyamD, Sub-rosa in GDF.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 07 Apr 2011 00:56

India is not going to deploy troops, no matter what.
Those guys are getting ready to gangbang Iran, and I suspect India won't join in overtly.

IIRC the last time India devoted troops to such an endeavor was in Korea, since then it has been UN peace keeping exclusively. Other than the IPKF and Maldives ops.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Apr 2011 01:01

ramana wrote:<SNIP>

Rohitvats, Whats the TSPA infrastructure in Balochistan? Can it support ops westwards? I dont think so but am ready to be corrected.

And do you expect Iran to move into Balochistan? Again I dont think so.

And where do Turks expect to deploy or they plan to be a NFZ operator?

<SNIP>

ramana garu, this analysis is based on some quick reading on the net, so please use it fwiw.

Now coming to ability of PA to lauch and sustain major operations against Iran through Baluchistan, we need to first define what the objectives, if any, of such a military operation could be. And then, see if the logistic requirement at their bare minimum, roads and railways, are available.

Let me address the issues in order:

(a) Objective: What could be the objective of PA in attacking Iran, even on behest of KSA? IMO, it could be to put the fear of sword into the hearts and minds of Iranians and desist them from medling in the gulf. So, what could the PA be targeting? Territorial gain or just to create nuisance and cause economic damage? Honestly, I don't know. But guessestimate would put the option as latter. So, how does one acheive that? Well, for that one needs to look at the geography of Iran and especially, along the coastline. The closest economic target for PA could be the port of Chabahar in province of Sistan-Baluchistan, which is ~100kms from the Pakistan-Iran border. Control of this port will also lay to rest any future attempt to bypass pakistan when it comes to access into afganistan.

With a strong base established here, Pakistan can threaten targets in hormozgan province (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormozg%C4%81n_Province) which is the prime real estate controlling the mouth of persian gulf. It also houses some prime oil assets of Iran. While, IMO, this is out of reach of PA (it is ~500kms from TSP-Iran border), it will put serious pressure on iran.

I do not know anything about other pockets of iran-pakistan border, so I cannot comment whether they will warrant love and affection of PA.

(b) Logistics: The first thing one would need is roads and railways. Pease look at the road and railway map of pakistan here:

road map 1 - http://www.daleelteq.com.pk/images/maps ... kistan.jpg

road map 2 - http://www.telepk.com/img/balochistanmap.jpg

railway map 1 - http://115.186.133.3/pcportal/NTCIP/Pak ... etwork.png

Now look at road map of Iran here and please concentrate on network along coastal region bordering pakistan - http://mapsof.net/uploads/static-maps/iran_road_map.jpg

Before we proceed, please keep in mind that PA troops need to move in from Multan, Hyderabad, Bahawalpur, Quetta and other part of southern, central and north punjab and eastern sindh.

Now, what do these maps tell us? First, the railway network is conspicous by its absence in baluchistan. I guess, with all the fireworks by baluchis, tsp never bothered. So, large scale troops movement, especially of armor and mechanized infantry assets, will be problematic. The movement by train will be limited to nodes in western sindh. From there on, the movement to iran border along the coastline will have to take place by road.

In north baluchistan, troops can move by rail right upto iran border by rail.

If you look at the road maps (iran and pakistan), two things stand out - one, that major roads and one rail netwrok are connected to iran-pakistan at two point (one in north baluchistan and other in south, along the coast) and second, there is limited north-south connectivity (even though there is iran-pakistan border road on iranian side). And roads along tsp coast merge with road along iran coastline.

Also, tha major centers of commerce, or important towns are limited and along the two major roads. So, while wikimapia does shows roads from pakistan going into iran in central and parts of southern baluchistan, i think these are not important towns and loss or gain would not mean much on high-table.

All this has implication in terms of likely geography of conflict.

(c) PA options: The level and kind of road and rail connectivity means that there are likely to be two major axises of offensive (and defence) along these two points in north and south baluchistan.

One, PA troops are likely to go on offensive on Gwadar-Chabahar axis and offensive defence or defensive along the Taftan-Zahedan axis in north. And this will require more troops than I had thought earlier.

(i) Northern Front - see the location here:http://wikimapia.org/#lat=28.7363557&lo ... =9&l=0&m=h

XII Corps based in Quetta has two infantry divisions. Even considering defensive option, it will need reinforcement from east. And TTP will have to be 'persuaded' to sit very quite. Will need at least one more division+armored assets+artillery assets from east. Also, PA will have to ensure that no iranian troops can outflank them by coming up the road from south which meets N40 in depth inside pakistan. This could be a 200kms front - from toftan in north to place in south where road from iran enters pakistan (place called narreh now in iran - zoom the wiki map) and then cuts up north towards N40. The main body of troops are likely to be in north along toftan-zahedan axis.

(ii) Souther front - http://wikimapia.org/#lat=26.6081744&lo ... =8&l=0&m=h

May have three sub-parts -

(a) northern part - to prevent threat to N85 and direct assault on heartland; location is here:
http://wikimapia.org/#lat=26.8154918&lo ... 10&l=0&m=h - force level will depend on how serious a threat from iran can emerge. Can also be treated as seperate sector - Central sector.

(b) central part - http://wikimapia.org/#lat=26.170229&lon ... =9&l=0&m=h

prevent threat to M-8, outflanking of PA troops in southern region and threat to heartland. Govar in iran could be a target -will prevent any north-south movement of iranian formation along iranian 95 and border road. Saves the flank of PA troops in iran. Will require reinforce Corps level troops.

(c) Souther part - http://wikimapia.org/#lat=25.4383141&lo ... 10&l=0&m=h

For the assault along the coastal belt, it will need at least three Corps level troops. II Corps (ARS) is highly likely to form the nucleus - it will draw assets from other formations.

Conclusion - I think PA can do this. Yes, it will be a challenge. For example, ammunition depots will be all positioned for war in the east. So are the POL depots. Supply chain will become very long. Gwadar will become center of gravity. Also, there is question about PAF bases in the region (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... e-map4.gif). Satellite bases will need to shoulder the burden.

**All this gyaan is based on looking at wikimapia and some other maps- some of iran-pakistan the roads in central baluchistan might not be able to sustain any iranian threat. Also, I know nothing about iranian army save for wiki entry. Some information is here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... -orbat.htm. If these numbers are true, then even if you add up the IRGC troops, I don't know how iran can resist two-front war.

***I cannot answer about Turkish military.

****I don't think PA will attack Iran.

Hope this helps.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 01:11

Great job at for first cut.

From TSPA side its a challenge and will commit more than they can spare especially if two divs are sent for IS in West Asia. To me will need at least 250K kul mila ki for this front.

Now think like an Irani and plan the opposite.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Apr 2011 01:15

ramana wrote:Great job at for first cut.

From TSPA side its a challenge and will commit more than they can spare especially if two divs are sent for IS in West Asia. To me will need at least 250K kul mila ki for this front.

Now think like an Irani and plan the opposite.

Happy to be of help, sir.

And you're correct about troop levels. PA will need at least four Corps to cover all bases; and it has total of nine.

Will attempt iran tomorrow.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 01:18

So its a big frog (toad!) to swallow when it needs four corps! So most likely they will be pehra daar screaming jaagte raho in GCC and collect baksheesh.
------

Nothing worse then stir a hornet's nest with brutus fulmen.

Most likely invite a jahaapad.

GD, need you to conjure some good scenes.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 01:32

Rohitvats read this before you do the write up:

http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/0 ... f_iran.pdf

By Anthony Cordesman and group.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Apr 2011 01:33

All this preparation means temporary peace in Afghanistan?

AKalam · Post by **AKalam** » 07 Apr 2011 01:35

Someone raised the question of Bangladesh's role in this coming period of change in West Asia. I will try to address this question from my own personal vantage point.

The comatose Muslim world that we have discussed many a times before, it seems, is showing some signs of life by twitching fingers, eyes are still shut though, but they may not be shut for long IMHO.

Muslims in far corners of the world are watching the ongoing stirring in MENA with interest, and Bangladesh, I am sure, is no exception.

The identity of the Muslim population of Bangladesh is precariously balanced between two pillars, Indic Bengali (from time immemorial) and Islam (Sunni Hanafi in particular, Shia have negligible presence in East Bengal) which is more recent. A detailed study of Muslim demographics:

http://pewforum.org/uploadedfiles/Orpha ... lation.pdf

From above study Bangladesh does not make the list of countries with more than 100,000 Shia.

Going back to the two identities of Bangladeshi Muslims, it seems like a tug of war, from 1905 Bengal Partition to 1947, it worked to create Muslim League and provide space for the proponents of Two Nation Theory to succeed in the Subcontinent, perhaps to get out from under Bhadralok class based in Kolkata (short sighted IMHO). Since 1947 the Bengali identity asserted itself (an inevitable outcome of partition in my IMHO) to get out from under the new Pakjabi master, who seemed to be the perpetual mercenary working against subcontinental interest since 1857, under the rubric of Martial race theory, with Brit-raj initially and then with Amir Khan dominated world order since 1947.

What is clear is the opportunism of Bangladeshi Muslims, following goodies from early days of conversion under Turko-Mongols in trying to find ways to a better life and a secure future. Misrule of Sheikh Mujib helped Bangladesh to swing back again towards Islam, under Army and BNP rules, but since 1991 a shaky democracy that is still consolidating over the years, has helped Bangladesh to slowly find a middle ground between our Indic Bengali identity and Islam. I believe that is where we are now.

Bangladesh Muslims are of course mindful of the geography of their territory and its constraints, so a good relation and equitable working partnership with India on many levels are important for Bangladesh, as well as fostering the common and shared cultural and ethnic history. But I believe they are not willing to trade the other part of their identity, Islam, for this relationship. Just like any other Muslim population, as the largest most homogeneous ethno-linguistic group among Muslims, Bangladesh Muslims are likely to use Islam, increase their influence in the Muslim world and play their increasingly larger role in the coming years.

While it is in Egypts interest to promote and be a part of African Union and ensure its proper share of water from Nile river, similarly Bangladesh should be and is interested in a future SAARC union. But this does not lessen Bangladesh Muslims interest to play its proper role in Muslim affairs of the world. I can only imagine that IM's may have similar aspirations of playing important roles in the new emerging Muslim Renaissance, although I admit that it is still premature to give it such a label.

When the dust settles from this turmoil in MENA, there is a high likelihood that todays warring parties will be significantly weakened and this includes:

- all remaining Tinpots in Arab world
- Mullahcracy in Iran
- Pakjabi dominated Army

as all of the above are trying to deflect attention from the truly important local and domestic issue, the empowerment of the masses, by creating side issues, like Shia-Sunni rivalry in case of GCC, a stand off with Israel-West on New Cooler proliferation in case of Iran and the bogeyman of India and Kashmir in case of PA.

I would predict that a democratic Neo-Ottoman Turkey will be the temporary winner in the region, as the leader of the Sunni nations, as it seems to have all the right elements as of this moment. A revived Arab League led by GCC can soon outshine the Turks over the course of a few decades, since it has a more dynamic population, land and resources, if the divisions subside and a workable unity can be achieved. Al Qaeda, I believe will reform (as pointed out in some previously posted articles already) and take their fight for empowerment in democratic politics in the fight for supremacy in the Muslim consciousness. But their role is not assured, since true spark of leadership came from a more globalized, secularized and democracy and freedom loving youth, which might be the best case scenario for Muslim future IMHO. So the following forces will be on the rise:

- Turkey for the time being
- till they are eclipsed by a new generation of Arab youth in a post Tinpot era
- new generation of Iranians in a post Mullahcracy era

The remaining masses of Muslims in:

- Subsaharan Africa
- Central Asia
- Subcontinent
- South East Asia

will be followers in this trend.

This attempt at an analysis is based on relative size of well fed and well informed populations that will emerge in different Muslim societies, in the next few decades, as opposed to the absolute size of population.

It is my sincere hope and wish that there is more and more of Muslim population in the well fed and well informed category, so they can eventually form a working Islamic or Muslim bloc, tying together other regional blocs, such as ASEAN, SAARC, CAU (Central Asian Union), Arab League and African Union.

Those who will not feel threatened from such an eventuality within these regions, should gain unquestioned loyalty of the Islamic bloc, but those who would try to sabotage this effort, may develop a rocky relationship with this future bloc. The way things are shaping up, IMHO it is not a matter of if, but when this loose bloc takes shape. The side shows for now are just the initial birth pangs.

The dual identity syndrome of Muslims is not just for Bengalis, but other Muslim ethnicities as well (Buddhists in ASEAN, black Africans in African Union, Mongolians in CAU etc.), who in my opinion should embrace and utilize both identities to create a world where people can co-exist and cooperate and keep outsiders, who have no relation or commonality, out of the supra regional affairs, except for purely trade, scientific and other material exchanges. These outsiders include:

- Sinic
- West+Orthodox+Japanese+Korean
- Latin American

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 01:42

Good job Kalamji. Thanks for the prespective.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 07 Apr 2011 01:49

Does India get to have whole decade plus of economic peace, prosperity and development? India will come out as one of the real winners if we quadruple the economy size while all these 'peaceful" folks sort out each other.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 07 Apr 2011 03:10

rohitvats, Amazing job. Well done. Very useful for people to conjur up the real picture. But give PAF more credit - I think the PAF will be the most involved. PAF pilots already fly front line KSA aircraft, so they will deploy them in Pak - without a doubt. GCC has plenty of aircraft in their side - like I said, UAE alone can take on IRan. So, if PAF can get air superiority then should be a good move to seize Chabahar (Check mates us and our regional moves in afghanistan doesnt it?). The Air force should be able to prevent any agressive moves from Iran I think. But that border is very porous, so its easy for IRGC boys to do some behind the lines attacks in Balochistan imo. I think NWFP assets will be employed.

AKalam, thanks for the effort.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Apr 2011 03:17

After reading the link Ramanaji posted on Iran's armed forces, it is doubtful they can withstand even a ground incursion from all sides.

That document shows how western sanctions can cripple a regional power.

AKalamji - Thanks for the insight. It validates some of my thoughts. I also believe that Islam and Islamism are inseparable, so it is almost impossible to implement most of RajeshAji's strategies IMHO.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 07 Apr 2011 06:00

ramanaji: Re Hedge Funds.

I am not the most connected but from what I have heard they are long oil. The price action in oil also suggests steady buying support (i.e. all dips are being bought) and there has been significant out of the money call buying.
Hedge funds bet oil prices to rise past $150

The general feeling is that if Saudi oil goes, there is no upper limit on how high oil can go. There is a very high threshold of pain when it comes to reduction oil usage and demand had barely budged even though Brent Crude has hit an all time high when measured in Euros

Traders weigh risk to ‘irreplaceable’ Riyadh

It says that some banks have stopped writing far out of the money call options. So clearly something is brewing and traders are playing for the Fat Tail scenario to pan out.
===================
Regarding Egypt: Mubarak was 80+ and his time was up with no succession plan. I am not sure this but I think read somewhere that Mubarak's younger son was not seen as the right person to takeover and the US wanted to make sure that the trusted military men took over the power. They pretty much dumped him within the first days of protest.

===================
Some Questions:
(1) Will Iran de-nuke without the Sunni bomb also being de-nuked?
(2) Why did Iran start the mischief now? Did they underestimate the GCC fear (and the reaction) OR do they have a few surprises up their sleeves?

===================

In that USvsChinainTSP thread that I had pondered that Iran is the key to the realignment of the Middle-East. If Iran can be bought to the high-table and some guarantees given that the PRC will get steady supply of a now kosher Iranian oil, the dismantling of the TSP could potentially begin.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 06:19

VikramS, Thanks a lot for that insight. Will need to find answers to all questions for in the end the picture clarifies.

Can anyone dig the KSA succession issues? Who follows whom and when?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Apr 2011 06:21

^

Between Iran and Iraq they are equal to KSA. If Iran is smart it should surrender its nuke plans and make long-term energy contracts with India and PRC in return for security umbrella. This would protect its H&D that it didn't surrender to west.

Between India and PRC it would be easy to convince unkil to put their rabid dog to sleep. If it requires few fire works on the skys of Af-Pak they can be arranged.

Shia crescent can make peace with Sunni crescent by exchanging few pieces of symbolic lands to protect mutual echendee

The 2008 economic melt-down offers interesting opportunity to regional powers to permanently come out of western overlordship.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Apr 2011 06:27

Saudi king loses power to choose successor

This landmark constitutional reform, enacted by royal order last October but only disclosed this week, fundamentally changes the way the desert kingdom – which controls 25 per cent of the world's oil – is governed.

Until now, the king alone has selected his successor, known as the crown prince, from among the sons and grandsons of King Abdul-Aziz, the founding leader of Saudi Arabia, better known as Ibn Saud.

The reigning King Abdullah is probably 84 years old and Crown Prince Sultan is about 83, although their exact dates of birth are uncertain.

Until now, the interior minister, Prince Nayef, had been expected to become king after Sultan. This will almost certainly not happen. Prince Nayef, who is about 74, is a deeply conservative figure regarded as one of the principal obstacles to reform.

Under the new system, if Abdullah dies before Sultan, Sultan will still succeed him, but the next crown prince {Nayef} will be selected by the new procedure.

All 21 surviving sons of King Abdul-Aziz, plus representatives of sons deceased or incapable, will sit on the council. Women are excluded from governance in Saudi Arabia.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 06:38

Is Prince Bandar a Nayef supporter?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Apr 2011 06:52

May not be. Kind Abdullah (not crown prince) selected Nayef as Sultan's successor.

Wiki on Crown Prince Sultan

On August 1, 2005, he became the Crown Prince despite having a discord with King Abdullah.[11] As Heir Apparent and Crown Prince, Sultan is first in the Saudi line of succession.

A leaked March 2009 diplomatic cable from WikiLeaks stated that U.S. diplomats view him as "for all intents and purposes incapacitated".[12] He is possibly suffering dementia, specifically Alzheimer's disease.[13]

Wiki on Nayef

In July 2003, Senator Charles Schumer lobbied through Prince Bandar to remove Nayef as Minister of Interior.

When meeting with US diplomats in 2009, he voiced support for aggressive activity against Iran after what he believed was a breach of the 2001 security agreement. He urged European nations to hand in terrorist suspects and asked for U.S. intercession. He said the most effective way to combat extremism was through Friday sermons.

Looks like both Prince Sultan and Bandar are labelled as extremely corrupt.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 07 Apr 2011 07:08

ramana wrote:So its a big frog (toad!) to swallow when it needs four corps! So most likely they will be pehra daar screaming jaagte raho in GCC and collect baksheesh.
------

Nothing worse then stir a hornet's nest with brutus fulmen.

Most likely invite a jahaapad.

GD, need you to conjure some good scenes.

I wish India becomes brutal killer after a while.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 07 Apr 2011 07:13

The question is, who wants to put the rabid dog to sleep?

Other than India, and perhaps Iran, for the doggie's dubious role, no one else.
The rabid dog is proving itself to be invaluable, and like I said has a variety of measures to please its customers.

PRC wanting to get rid of TSP is not going to happen. TSP is unstable, but the relationship is by and large managable from their POV. Besides TSP is a very useful tool.

KSA doesn't want to give its population the arms so that that country can defend itself against its regional challangers. Its leaders fear that weapons in the arms of the abduls == armed rebellion at some point of time. So a mercenary army of arab wannabes that can be bought on the cheap with some free oil and some dollars is a good solution.

Massa as we all know has 'understood and accepted' TSPs actions thus far, even 9/11, I suspect. Massa is concerned about China, but is still suspicious of India. India on its part does nothing to assuage those suspicions, India doesn't aim to be a poodle.

But then massa is also keeping the pot boiling by its actions in NWFP and Balochistan - this queers the pitch a bit. What are massa's intentions here?

So there we have it. TSP will survive - until:
1. India decides one day that it is time for an Aar paar ki ladai, in a momentary insanity commits murder.
2. India constantly covertly undermines TSP, hoping that the freedom movements all around the islamic world will have some positive influence within pakistan.
3. India actually has a plan to take care of the post TSP vassal states mess, jihadis on the loose mess.

India needs time, patience and leadership. I don't think that an insecure PRC + TSP will give india a decade of peace. The current times we live in are probably the best we can hope for. The great thing is that India seems to be doing quite ok with these level of reforms, but if we want to progress onto the next level - seemless integration with the western system, then TSP is a monkey on our backs that we have to get rid of.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 07 Apr 2011 08:31

Nayef and Bandar are said to be competitors. Bandar was also close to USA, and was alleged to have made moves against the monarch - which implies factional infighting even if the anti-monarchy rumours are not true. Complicated entanglements with Amir Khan intel, possible terror finance, and factional infighting within peninsula. So Nayef-Bandar contest could be the proxy one between two very different networks.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Apr 2011 09:41

shyamd wrote:rohitvats, Amazing job. Well done. Very useful for people to conjur up the real picture. But give PAF more credit - I think the PAF will be the most involved. PAF pilots already fly front line KSA aircraft, so they will deploy them in Pak - without a doubt. GCC has plenty of aircraft in their side - like I said, UAE alone can take on IRan. So, if PAF can get air superiority then should be a good move to seize Chabahar (Check mates us and our regional moves in afghanistan doesnt it?). The Air force should be able to prevent any agressive moves from Iran I think. But that border is very porous, so its easy for IRGC boys to do some behind the lines attacks in Balochistan imo. I think NWFP assets will be employed.

AKalam, thanks for the effort.

shyamd ji, that is an interesting perspective. GCC fighters operating from major PAF bases in east and central pakistan will be a real asset. These are high up on range and weapon capability - they will augment PAF F-16 and Mirage-5 perfectly. This alone will be a big game changer.

As for IRGC boys operating inside Baluchistan, well, that is foregone conclusion. Pakistan's main concern will be to cover the main lines of communication and strategic logistic nodes. For this, one needs to understand that TSP has a large para-mil formations in FC and Rangers. FC Baluchistan itself is said to have ~30K troops and FC NWFP is ~55K.Then, you have the Mujahid Battalions. So, basically, while PA cannot sanitize the entire province, it can be expected to do a rather good job. The fact that Baluchistan is sparsely populated and hence, there is that many less targets to defend. Also, PA is not averse to using heavy hand to put things down. So, BLA may have nuisance value - but I don't expect any major issues for PA.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2011 09:45

We are expecting a regular war. What if Iran takes out a few bridges and cuts the rail lines in Balochistan and beyond?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Apr 2011 09:48

ramana wrote:So its a big frog (toad!) to swallow when it needs four corps! So most likely they will be pehra daar screaming jaagte raho in GCC and collect baksheesh.------

Nothing worse then stir a hornet's nest with brutus fulmen.

Most likely invite a jahaapad.

GD, need you to conjure some good scenes.

My thoughts excatly on the bolded part. We could see messages being sent to Iranian about the possibility of two front war and some movement on the ground by the PA and Turkish armed forces to reinforce the message. I don't think Iranians are stupid to take on two nations at one go.

I read through your article on Iranian armed forces - they simply cannot match the PA (assuming TSP goes alone on western front the whole hog), forget two front war. Addition of GCC air asset will simply blow everything to kingdom come on Iranian side.

But then, you can expect the Baluchistan couldron to be on real high fire for a long time to come.

We live in interesting times.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 07 Apr 2011 11:10

Shyamd - this is for you, Check this out

Why is Glenn Beck freaking out over Egypt and a caliphate?
Fox News commentator Glenn Beck finds in Egypt’s democratic revolution a conspiracy involving left and right. Other conservatives are distancing themselves from Beck’s “delusional ravings.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/ ... -caliphate

It’s not a “conspiracy,” Glenn Beck says, but just a group of “like-minded” organizations and individuals – from the Muslim Brotherhood to the AFL-CIO (with assorted other fellow travelers in a "red-green alliance") – working together to “overthrow and overturn stability.” And he has the charts, graphs, and a map to prove it.

If such protests become "contagious," he warns, they will "sweep the Middle East" then "begin to destabilize Europe and the rest of the world."

Beck’s latest theory about where the freedom revolution in Egypt is headed may resonate with his hard-core followers. But it has some conservatives wondering if he’s gone off the deep end.

William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard and a regular Fox News commentator, welcomes the debate among conservatives over the political revolution in Egypt.

“It’s a sign of health that a political and intellectual movement does not respond to a complicated set of developments with one voice,” he wrote recently.

“But hysteria is not a sign of health,” he continued. “When Glenn Beck rants about the caliphate taking over the Middle East from Morocco to the Philippines, and lists (invents?) the connections between caliphate-promoters and the American left, he brings to mind no one so much as Robert Welch and the John Birch Society. He’s marginalizing himself, just as his predecessors did back in the early 1960s.”

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 07 Apr 2011 11:55

I do not believe this is a succession issue imho, nayef has already taken command, CP is out and is too sick to govern, full CP powers hhave already been transferred to nayef anyway...

---------------
These moves are just deterrence for the moment. But its moved to alert level 3, instead of 5 (all out war).

Pressure on Iran now.

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 07 Apr 2011 12:45

RamaY wrote:Shyam garu,

That GOI has more/better info is given and it is also given that what we discuss here has zero impact (if any) on GOI decision making.

Suggestions on what GOI should/shouldn't do are also part of understanding MENA developments and their impact on India and Indians. Laying down all possible strategies and their probabilities, possible outcomes and their probabilities, and value of those outcomes to given players (India and Bharat) is part of that understanding.

It is also possible that some of those strategies may never get executed due to the quality/world-view of the leadership irrespective of the probabilities/outcomes/value. Posts on that line of thought are indicators of that unavoidable variable.

What is the point of any discussion if we agree that we know nothing/very-little and can do nothing about the problem? Very MENA-ish thought process, I would say, to be a (sacrificial) lamb {follow thy ruler blindly} in national affairs.

RamaY-ji,

My point was not that we should not discuss this. More literate the public the better for the country - and it applies to every field. Look at last couple of pages and you will see that people were going ballistic with suggestions to GoI what it should do and what it should not, which eventually forced Ramana to ask people not to do so. I believe that some people connected to GoI (a la B Raman, who called it a Hindutva forum) reading this open forum and able to take the intellectual outcome. Of course, if we feel that GoI is doing something contrary to our understanding, that must be dissected and must be questioned if required.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 07 Apr 2011 12:57

On second thought, I take back my statement. Succession may be an issue. The selection of nayef is a problem for some. Some parts of the family (with no real mil power) are not in agreement. Will explain later.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 07 Apr 2011 14:37

ramana garu,
shyamd ji,
Gagan ji,
RamaY ji,
rohitvats ji,
Acharya garu,
brihaspati garu,

As keen observers of West Asia,
sent you all an email!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 07 Apr 2011 16:38

And more emails!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 07 Apr 2011 17:29

I agree with the view that we should not suggest things to the GOI to do about GCC. What GOI is doing is best for the country in the long run. Perhaps in the same way Siddharaja Jayasimha of Gujarat did for his country. If he did otherwise, we would have had no space to expose the elite and their shenanigans and at least open up space for new leadership.

Perhaps even pointing out the possible scenarios of negative consequence is not so bad. For many in influence may actually smack their lips in delight - ah, would that be so negative on this scum among ourselves who dare to criticize and suggest to us, lets dot it then! As long as there are monetary profits to make, and my own personal safety and that of my immediate family is ensured - transactions and financial flows are the arms and legs of Ishwar!