TNS – The News on Sunday

WP_Query Object ( [query] => Array ( [post_type] => post [orderby] => post_date [order] => DESC [post_status] => publish [cat] => 8 ) [query_vars] => Array ( [post_type] => post [orderby] => post_date [order] => DESC [post_status] => publish [cat] => 8 [error] => [m] => 0 [p] => 0 [post_parent] => [subpost] => [subpost_id] => [attachment] => [attachment_id] => 0 [name] => [static] => [pagename] => [page_id] => 0 [second] => [minute] => [hour] => [day] => 0 [monthnum] => 0 [year] => 0 [w] => 0 [category_name] => special-report [tag] => [tag_id] => [author_name] => [feed] => [tb] => [paged] => 0 [comments_popup] => [meta_key] => [meta_value] => [preview] => [s] => [sentence] => [fields] => [menu_order] => [category__in] => Array ( [0] => 8 ) [category__not_in] => Array ( ) [category__and] => Array ( ) [post__in] => Array ( ) [post__not_in] => Array ( ) [tag__in] => Array ( ) [tag__not_in] => Array ( ) [tag__and] => Array ( ) [tag_slug__in] => Array ( ) [tag_slug__and] => Array ( ) [post_parent__in] => Array ( ) [post_parent__not_in] => Array ( ) [posts_per_page] => 9 [ignore_sticky_posts] => [suppress_filters] => [cache_results] => 1 [update_post_term_cache] => 1 [update_post_meta_cache] => 1 [nopaging] => [comments_per_page] => 50 [no_found_rows] => ) [tax_query] => WP_Tax_Query Object ( [queries] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [taxonomy] => category [terms] => Array ( [0] => 8 ) [include_children] => [field] => term_id [operator] => IN ) ) [relation] => AND ) [meta_query] => WP_Meta_Query Object ( [queries] => Array ( ) [relation] => ) [queried_object] => stdClass Object ( [term_id] => 8 [name] => Special Report [slug] => special-report [term_group] => 0 [term_taxonomy_id] => 8 [taxonomy] => category [description] => [parent] => 0 [count] => 1145 [cat_ID] => 8 [category_count] => 1145 [category_description] => [cat_name] => Special Report [category_nicename] => special-report [category_parent] => 0 ) [queried_object_id] => 8 [request] => SELECT SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS tns05_posts.ID FROM tns05_posts INNER JOIN tns05_term_relationships ON (tns05_posts.ID = tns05_term_relationships.object_id) WHERE 1=1 AND ( tns05_term_relationships.term_taxonomy_id IN (8) ) AND tns05_posts.post_type = 'post' AND (tns05_posts.post_status = 'publish') AND tns05_posts.post_date >= '2017-06-18' AND tns05_posts.post_date <= '2017-06-19' GROUP BY tns05_posts.ID ORDER BY tns05_posts.post_date DESC LIMIT 0, 9 [posts] => Array ( [0] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 67293 [post_author] => 29 [post_date] => 2017-06-18 03:23:37 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-06-17 22:23:37 [post_content] => If the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) were a WhatsApp group the status would read: Qatar (feeling weird), Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE (left the group), Kuwait (typing), and Oman (last seen 2010). This is a joke doing the circles in the Gulf that highlights the fact that the GCC as an organisation will not be able to survive the current conflict in the Middle East, nor will the OIC remain unscathed. In fact, if the tension escalates towards some form of violence it would engulf not just the entire Middle East but South Asia as well and may become precursor to yet another world war. Even without war, the ongoing political conflict is making the citizens throughout the Gulf region so nervous and preoccupied with the threat of war that in the words of a member of a Sharjah royal family, “I feel if I wrote an article calling for legalising prostitution, gay rights, atheism, marijuana, civil marriages, gambling, press freedom, releasing political prisoners, constitutional democracy, and the abolition of capital punishment no one would bat an eye.” A conflict that becomes difficult to predict is always dangerous. In this case, its direction is hard to fathom, partly because the goals of Saudi Arabia and its allies are not really transparent. Even the outside world finds it difficult to believe that the issue pertains primarily to Qatar’s links with the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and Hezbollah. There is no country in the Middle East or the Gulf region that can claim innocence of having links with religious-militant groups in the region or other regions. Read also: Pakistan’s dilemma While Doha has links with the aforementioned groups and has even hosted others like the Taliban, Riyadh had a share in the ongoing conflict in Yemen in which it contributed through financing a Salafi hub in the heart of a Zaidi stronghold in Northern Yemen at Dammaj after 1979. This was initially in the form of financing a madrassa that turned into a Salafi-Wahabi bastion and, hence, an issue of conflict with the Zaidis. This particular clash ran parallel to the rift between the Zaidis, who are Shias but closer in many ways to Sunnis, and the political government in Yemen that is now a partner with Saudi Arabia. But it is worth pointing out that not all Zaidis are Houthis, a name derived from a leader of the rebels, nor are all Houthis Zaidi. [box type="shadow" align="alignright" class="red_lines" ]Despite the fact that Iran has supported Doha through supplying it with food and an air route, Tehran is not likely to jump into the conflict, at least not until it gets attacked.[/box] The Saudis were concerned about the conflict in Yemen but not excessively worried until the Houthis-Zaidis occupied Aden in March 2015. The real concern was that the rebels could become powerful enough to throttle traffic through the Bab-al-Mandeb, the strait that connects the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden. Riyadh blames Doha for supporting Tehran and Shia militias/militant groups that may include supplying weapons despite the fact that getting weapons in Yemen is no issue as the country is a transit route for illegal arms for decades and used by all kinds of suppliers and states. It has definitely been a source of weapons into Africa. Yet the Yemen war is an excuse for other political concerns, such as Saudi Arabia wanting to reformat American patronage in the Middle East. In many ways, this is a conflict between various American proxies like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE that were sidelined by the former American President Barack Obama. In the words of an Arab source, “Obama screwed the Saudis.” Although Obama didn’t overplay the Saudis’ role as a major source of violent extremism around the world, he abandoned them to re-develop links with Iran. Furthermore, the ‘screwing-up’ was also financial that happened during the process of devaluing some of the financial institutions that were used by the Saudis. This happened in the backdrop of continued decline of oil prices that affected the UAE too. Read also: Editorial In any case, Dubai had lost a lot of money earlier because of its real estate bubble bursting. Thus, while Riyadh bled financially, prospects for Tehran became bright due to its access to resources blocked due to earlier American sanctions. For instance, many from the airline industry had predicted that Iran Air would emerge as a huge challenge to the Gulf airlines because of the orders it could afford to place for new aircraft. Qatar got a favourable treatment because it was sympathetic to the shift. With a US military base in Qatar, Doha received even greater support from American thinktanks that were on the same page with Obama regarding the change of policy in the Middle East. Donald Trump seems to have provided these states a much-desired breathing space without which they feared getting irrelevant in the Middle East. But the regional sanctions against Qatar are not only meant to force it to sever its ties with Iran but also to extract economic opportunities in the form of gas contracts, possibly Doha investing in financially broke projects like ARAMCO, and the UAE’s wish for the US to shift its base from Qatar. It almost smells like a game that Saddam Hussain had once played vis-à-vis Kuwait, asking it to pay Baghdad’s debt for fighting its long war with Iran. Even at that time, all parties involved were close American allies. However, the one difference is Saudi Arabia’s questionable capacity to fight a war with Qatar that still has an American base. Notwithstanding investment in its navy and air force, its ground forces that suffer from disciplinary issues may not be a total guarantee of security for the royal family that either looks at Pakistan or Egypt. While Islamabad has good relations with both Riyadh and Doha and has declined to become an active party, Egypt may be an option because Cairo is upset over Qatar’s links with the Muslim Brotherhood, and is enticed by Saudi money. Apparently, Riyadh is using its financial lure to force African states of the Middle East to take the former’s side in this conflict. Riyadh’s plan seems to be to besiege Doha diplomatically, especially in the Islamic world. However, the conflict could escalate into a military engagement depending on signals from Trump, who has a deep dislike for Muslims and is certainly the inspiration behind the ongoing tension which has started to look like kabuki, a form of Japanese dance. A war would cripple the Islamic world as Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies would fight with the help of Egypt and Pakistan against a Qatari-Turkish military contingent. Turkey is displeased with the UAE for its alleged financing of the failed military rebellion in 2016. It has already dispatched 3000 troops for Qatar’s defense. Despite the fact that Iran has supported Doha through supplying it with food and air route, it is not likely to jump into the conflict, at least not until it gets attacked. The Iranian government is not even provoking Trump who is the man to watch for the drop scene to this bizarre theatre. What can be said with certainty is that whether it is prolonged siege or indirect war through proxies or direct conflict using militaries, the cost to the Middle East will be phenomenal. [post_title] => The Gulf widens [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => gulf-widens [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-06-17 19:06:54 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-06-17 14:06:54 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://tns.thenews.com.pk/?p=67293 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw [format_content] => ) [1] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 67297 [post_author] => 29 [post_date] => 2017-06-18 03:21:28 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-06-17 22:21:28 [post_content] => Following the holding of Arab-Islamic-US summit held in Riyadh in May and the Saudi led action taken against Qatar in June, Pakistan having cordial relations with both Saudi Arabia and Qatar is facing a paradoxical situation. How should Pakistan cope with recent crisis in the Gulf and what should be its strategy to deal with the growing schism between the Saudi led GCC members and Qatar and the Turkish-Iranian position taken against Riyadh? What leadership role Pakistan can play in preventing an impeding armed conflict in the Gulf and how it can withstand growing Saudi pressure over Islamabad to take a position against Qatar? Saudi led action against Qatar on June 5 tends to divide the Arab-Muslim world because Doha has rejected the allegations of Saudi Arabia and the United States of Qatar sponsoring terrorist groups in the Arab world. Paradoxically, if Qatar is involved in fomenting terrorism then why are there 10,000 US forces in that country and why were the charges against Qatar not presented during the Riyadh summit? Supporting Hamas against its struggle to emancipate the Palestinian territories from the clutches of Israel is legitimate and cannot be equated with terrorism. Likewise, Qatar’s support to the then regime of Mohammad Morsi of Egypt made sense because it was a legitimate and democratically-elected government which was overthrown in a military coup. In fact, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan made it clear that charges against Qatar of sponsoring terrorism in the Middle East were baseless and action against the Gulf state must be withdrawn immediately. Read also: Between Trump and his administration Qatar has remained an important member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) but it refused to take sides against Iran. In fact, the Saudi led action against Qatar emanates from insecurity prevailing in some Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE and Bahrain about Doha’s successes in transforming Qatar as an economic and technological hub of the Middle East. [box type="shadow" align="alignright" class="red_lines" ]When it is becoming obvious that the very purpose of Riyadh summit and the so-called IMA was to isolate Iran and now Qatar, Pakistan must seek an immediate withdrawal from that alliance before it is too late.[/box] As far as TV channel Al-Jazeera located in Doha is concerned, since long its independent and professional news coverage and analysis caused reservations and insecurity among the conservative and dictatorial Arab regimes. Foreign Minister of Qatar, Sheikh Mohammad bin Abdul Rahman al-Thani said in Moscow the other day that his country will not come under any pressure from Saudi Arabia or UAE to close Al-Jazeera and will not compromise on its foreign policy interests. On these grounds, actions taken against Qatar under the initiative of Saudi Arabia and the United States are devoid of any legitimate reason and tend to generate a major crisis in the Middle East. Furthermore, two key members of GCC: Kuwait and Oman, are not a party to the Saudi led action against Qatar, which further reflects deep split in the Gulf. Because of four main reasons Pakistan is facing a catch 22 situation as far as dealing with Qatar crisis is concerned. First, since Pakistan has cordial relations with both Qatar and Saudi Arabia and is also dependent on both the Gulf countries for economic reasons, it cannot afford to be partisan and take sides in the prevailing conflict. If Saudi Arabia, UAE and Bahrain exert pressure over Pakistan to cut off diplomatic relations with Qatar and ban Qatar Airways operating its flights from that country, Pakistan must refuse such coercion because acquiescing to Riyadh led alliance against Qatar would compromise its national interest and sovereignty. Second, following the Islamic-Arab-US summit held in Riyadh and the subsequent action against Qatar, the issue of Pakistan remaining in the so-called Islamic Military Alliance (IMA) needs to be given second thoughts. Saudi-US nexus against Iran is a serious matter as both countries are focusing on further isolating Tehran on unsubstantiated charges of sponsoring terrorism. The recent terrorist attacks in Tehran and Qum and the allegations of Iranian leaders that Saudi Arabia was responsible for conducting such attacks has made the position of Pakistan quite delicate. Saudi Arabia and some other Gulf countries were angry with Qatar on why it was not supporting their anti-Iranian alliance and was pursuing an independent foreign policy. If the motive of IMA is to isolate Iran and take action against Qatar, in that case, Pakistan must adopt a bold stand by withdrawing from that alliance, which is becoming a source of embarrassment and rift in the Arab-Muslim World. Third, without further wasting any more time, Pakistan must play a leadership role in the Muslim world by presenting a meaningful plan for managing existing conflicts between Saudi Arabia and Qatar because crisis between the two is detrimental to the interests of the Arab-Muslim world. In that case, Pakistan can coordinate with Oman and Kuwait, the two neutral GCC members on Qatar crisis and compel Saudi Arabia and Qatar to resolve their contentious issues through negotiations. Qatar, unlike Iraq, which in August 1990 had occupied Kuwait, is not involved in any aggression and cannot be punished by imposing sanctions on dubious charges of sponsoring terrorism and terrorist groups in the Middle East. If Saudi Arabia and its allies want to take a position against aggression, occupation, and terrorism, they must take measures against Israel which since its inception is involved in targeting innocent Palestinians and is also an occupier of Arab lands including the holy city of Jerusalem. Finally, the perception that Pakistan is a hub of sectarian proxy war of Saudi Arabia and Iran needs to be dispelled by denying any space to all those forces that have foreign linkages and are using religious discords to pursue their own agendas. Pakistan also needs to dispel the notion that it can be taken for granted by Saudi Arabia because of economic dependence. It needs to be cleared by those who wield power in Pakistan that their country is not a mercenary state and cannot be used in Saudi-Iranian conflict. Unfortunately, the fault lines in Pakistan’s crisis of decision-making are responsible for creating doubts, ambiguity and concerns on how to respond to a situation which appears to be quite critical. While Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif along with the Chief of Army Staff paid a visit to Saudi Arabia and had a meeting with the Saudi monarch to find a solution of Qatar crisis, Nawaz Sharif on account of his personal relations with the royal family should have also visited Qatar and discussed with Qatri leadership on how to resolve the prevailing conflict between Qatar on the one hand and the Saudi-backed GCC countries on the other because a unilateral diplomatic initiative cannot succeed and is always counterproductive. The Qatar crisis is a test case for Pakistan’s foreign policy because the aggravation of crisis will negatively impact on the country’s vital interests. When it is becoming obvious that the very purpose of Riyadh summit and the so-called IMA was to isolate Iran and now Qatar, Pakistan must seek an immediate withdrawal from that alliance before it is too late and the sectarian divide in the Gulf destabilises the state and society of Pakistan. [post_title] => Pakistan’s dilemma [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => pakistans-dilemma [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-06-17 19:29:21 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-06-17 14:29:21 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://tns.thenews.com.pk/?p=67297 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw [format_content] => ) [2] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 67299 [post_author] => 29 [post_date] => 2017-06-18 03:19:55 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-06-17 22:19:55 [post_content] => The President of the United States and his administration seem to be at odds with each other. Be it the environment, travel ban, Nato or the Middle East crisis; they contradict each other on almost every issue. Last week, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson read out a statement urging the Arab countries to “immediately take steps to de-escalate the situation [of severed ties with Qatar] and put forth a good faith effort to resolve their grievances they have with each other.” Shortly after an hour, Trump appeared before the media at the White House and hinted that it was him who had suggested the aggressive action against Qatar. “The time had come to call on Qatar to end its [terrorism] funding,” he announced. He also outlined his meetings in Riyadh saying, “nations came together and spoke to me about confronting Qatar over its behaviour. So we had a decision to make. Do we take the easy road or do we finally take a hard but necessary action?” The opposition in the administration was difficult to miss. Senator Chris Murphy, member of the Foreign Relations Committee, noticed the obvious, and tweeted, “I don’t think this is how foreign policy is supposed to work.” The Secretary of State, who actually runs the diplomatic wing of the administration had called for a “calm and thoughtful dialogue with clear expectations and accountability among the parties in order to strengthen relationship.” He stated, “We ask that there be no further escalation by the parties in the region.” Tillerson clarified that Qatar made progress in halting financial support and expelling terrorist elements. “Others must also continue to eliminate factions of support for violent organisations within their own border,” he said adding, “We call on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Egypt to ease the blockade against Qatar. There are humanitarian consequences to this blockade.” Read also: In the throes of the blockade “The blockade is also impairing US and other international business activities in the region and has created a hardship on the people of Qatar and the people whose livelihoods depend on commerce with Qatar. The blockade is hindering US military actions in the region and the campaign against ISIS,” he said. Tillerson had a point since Qatar is the regional headquarters for the US Central Command. It houses American equipment and around ten thousand troops that not only keep eyes on the Middle Eastern region but also monitor Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan from there. The Pentagon spokesperson told local media, “While current operations from Al Udeid Air Base have not been hindered or curtailed, the evolving situation is hindering our ability to plan for long-term military operations.” [box type="shadow" align="alignright" class="red_lines" ]"It is, no doubt, possible that long-term pressure from regional states may induce Qatar to scale back the scope of its foreign policy. But this will come at the cost of other US foreign policy objectives in the region.“[/box] In a statement, the Defense Department said, “United States and the Coalition are grateful to the Qataris for their longstanding support of our presence and their enduring commitment to regional security. We have no plans to change our posture in Qatar.” However, the staffers at the White House and the State Department struggled to present a common policy. “The United States continues to be in close communication with all the parties to resolve the issues and restore cooperation, which is so important to regional security,” said the White House spokesperson insisting that “the president had a very, very constructive conversation with the emir [of Qatar] during his visit to Riyadh.” Similarly, the State department spokesperson maintained that, “Qatar has made some great efforts to try to stop financing of terror groups, including prosecuting financiers, freezing assets, and introducing stringent controls on its banking system.” But Trump kept on praising Saudi Arabia for leading the bloc against Qatar. “So good to see the Saudi Arabia visit with the King and 50 countries already paying off,” he posted in a series of tweets, “They said they would take a hard line on funding extremism, and all reference was pointing to Qatar. Perhaps this will be the beginning of the end to the horror of terrorism!” His reference to the visit has a story of its own. Trump’s first foreign visit as president was to Saudi Arabia where he joined member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to discuss extremism and terrorism. He had also announced over a 100 billion dollars arms deal to strengthen bilateral relations with Saudi Arabia. “There is no $110 billion deal. Instead, there are a bunch of letters of interest or intent, but not contracts,” Bruce Riedel, director of the Brookings Intelligence Project, wrote in an article. Riedel, who has also served at the Central Intelligence Agency and later as senior advisor on South Asia and the Middle East to the last four presidents of the United States, clarified in his article that “many are offers that the defense industry think the Saudis will be interested in some day.” He maintained that it’s unlikely that the Saudis could pay for a $110 billion deal any longer, due to low oil prices and the two-plus years old war in Yemen. “President Obama sold the Kingdom $112 billion in weapons over eight years, most of which was a single, huge deal in 2012 negotiated by then Secretary Bob Gates. To get that deal through Congressional approval, Gates also negotiated a deal with Israel to compensate the Israelis and preserve their qualitative edge over their Arab neighbours. With the fall in oil prices, the Saudis have struggled to meet their payments since,” he wrote. Interestingly, President Trump also had a separate meeting with Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad al-Thani, at the GCC moot where he had announced, “We are friends. We’ve been friends now for a long time … our relationship is extremely good.” Yet, Trump’s departure from what’s happening on the ground was obvious when he celebrated the blockade. “During my recent trip to the Middle East, I stated that there can no longer be funding of radical ideology,” he tweeted. “Leaders pointed to Qatar - look!” But it wasn’t just Trump vs. Tillerson across the line from each other. It’s other heads of various departments, and even their high-level officials. Trump’s tweet aggravated America’s position. The US ambassador to Qatar, Dana Smith, jumped in to rescue diplomatic ties, and was quite frustrated with the confusing developments. “Increasingly difficult to wake up overseas to news from home, knowing I will spend today explaining our democracy and institutions,” she tweeted. Ultimately, the ambassador announced to resign from her post. Meanwhile, Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, also observed that Qatar was moving in the right direction when it comes to curtailing its funding of terrorism. He stated that the United States needed to find a common ground with Qatar due to the two countries’ shared interest. Experts are hopeful that diplomacy prevails. Emma Ashford, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, wrote that foreign policy often requires trade offs. It is, no doubt, possible that long-term pressure from regional states may induce Qatar to scale back the scope of its foreign policy. But this will come at the cost of other US foreign policy objectives in the region. “As the president will eventually learn, in foreign policy, you really can’t always get everything you want.” [post_title] => Between Trump and his administration [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => trump-administration [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-06-17 19:30:02 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-06-17 14:30:02 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://tns.thenews.com.pk/?p=67299 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw [format_content] => ) [3] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 67295 [post_author] => 29 [post_date] => 2017-06-18 03:17:42 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-06-17 22:17:42 [post_content] => While the focus is understandably on the geo-politics of the crisis, the direct first affectees are the common citizens of the countries locked in the dispute. The humanitarian crisis resulting from the stand-off has hit mixed families — largely involving a Qatari spouse, or students studying away from home in one of these countries — the most. After enforcing the blockade, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Bahrain ordered Qatari expatriates to leave these countries within a fortnight as well as direct their own citizens in Qatar to return home. Taking cognizance of the situation, albeit with a disclaimer about taking “no view on the political dispute itself,” the Amnesty International expressed serious concern over its impact. “These drastic measures are already having a brutal effect, splitting children from parents, and husbands from wives. People from across the region — not only from Qatar but from the states implementing these measures also — risk losing jobs and having their education disrupted,” Amnesty said in a statement. In one case cited by Amnesty, a Qatari man, who has lived in the UAE with his family for more than 10 years, was refused entry and sent back to Qatar as he tried to return home to Dubai from Doha, just after the measures were announced on June 5. His wife is an Emirati national and is, therefore, forbidden from travelling to Qatar, while his children are Qatari nationals and so are required to leave the UAE. He is now separated from his family and does not know when he will see them again. The man told Amnesty how his wife had pleaded with the duty officer to see her husband one last time. “The officer said, no way, just go back,” he recalled. He fears his employers will dismiss him since he cannot return and also because of his nationality. [box type="shadow" align="alignright" class="red_lines" ]“These testing times will strengthen the country’s resolve, may be, it will help them develop contingency plans, risk management, and find more sustainable alternatives”.[/box] In another case, a Saudi man, who lives in Doha with his Qatari wife, says he is unable to visit his mother, who is seriously ill in a hospital in Saudi Arabia, because if he does, he will not be able to return to Qatar to be with his wife and children. “If I go home, I can’t see my wife. If I stay here, I can’t see my mom,” he bemoans. Qatar, however, has taken a more humane view of the situation even if critics conjecture it may be a calibrated move to win hearts and minds. The contrast was evident last week when Qatar’s Ministry of Interior notified that residents from the countries that have severed diplomatic relations or downgraded ties with Doha will face no action and that they can stay on in the peninsula “in accordance with the laws and regulations of the country in the framework of labour contracts signed with them”. Read also: Daesh and the region Saudi Arabia, UAE and Bahrain later announced they would address the issue of mixed citizenship. But Qatar’s National Human Rights Committee retorted that “while the directives make reference to considering the humanitarian situation, they provide no solution to the serious legal and human rights issues that have resulted from the arbitrary measures.” Talking of contrasts, it is also evident in how Saudi Arabia, UAE and Bahrain criminalised any criticism of their respective governments’ policies on the issue or sympathy for Qatar on the social media or written/verbal mediums with varying degree of jail terms (3-15 years in UAE; 5 in Bahrain) and fines ($136,000 in UAE). Similarly, Qatar’s influential Al Jazeera and its affiliated networks and websites of Qatari publications were also banned forthwith, with severe penalties in the event of violation. Qatar, however, continues to allow broadcasts and online access of publications from the blockading countries without let or hindrance. While urging citizens and residents to exercise freedom of speech with responsibility, the Qatari government cautioned them not to make any insulting remarks about the countries that have severed ties with Qatar and their leadership and peoples! This apparent gulf in treatment hasn’t gone unnoticed with a ‘loyal’ base of expatriates, who outnumber the locals by a distance. Ahmad Hussain, a prominent businessman and President of Pakistan Welfare Forum — a leading charity organisation based in Doha focused on educating students from poor families and providing healthcare to the less privileged members of the community — zeroes in on the crux of the crisis thus: “The cracks seem to be too wide, too deep and may be too old to be filled soon or easily. May be the idea behind the abrupt and intense siege was to starve Qatar of supplies, especially food, so that the country would be on its knees within no time. Well, that hasn’t happened, thanks to Qatar’s resilience and friends like Turkey, Iran and Morocco coming to the party.” “These testing times will strengthen the country’s resolve,” Hussain avers philosophically, before adding, “may be, it will help them develop contingency plans, risk management, and find more sustainable alternatives”. Does the situation worry the expatriates? “There is concern, yes, but no panic. The shelves are full; the prices are roughly the same and so, too, the quality. One hopes it will get even better as new supply chains are established,” Hussain says. Shiela Cinchez, a Filipino teacher who has lived in Doha for more than half a decade, hopes that the crisis will not escalate and an amicable resolution would be found. “But if the situation deteriorates, we will have little choice but to return home,” she conjectures. For now though, she feels comfortable, especially with the replenishment of stocks. Rajan Shrestha, Vice President of the Nepali football team, who has lived in Doha for a decade, believes the ties that bind the Gulf are too deep for these to be uprooted. “The GCC countries are like brothers and will resolve their differences. It is just a matter of time,” he wagers. When asked about any noticeable change to the lives of expatriates in the wake of the crisis, Shrestha shakes his head, but says he will only consider the option to leave, if the situation becomes untenable. Musthaq Ahmed, a Sri Lankan logistics and procurement staffer with a company, who has been a Doha resident since 2008, says he does not feel encumbered by the situation because the blockade has not affected normal life as such but if it does take a turn for the worse, he will only “take the last flight home”. [post_title] => In the throes of the blockade [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => throes-blockade [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-06-17 19:30:46 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-06-17 14:30:46 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://tns.thenews.com.pk/?p=67295 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw [format_content] => ) [4] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 67301 [post_author] => 29 [post_date] => 2017-06-18 03:15:19 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-06-17 22:15:19 [post_content] => Post Iran attacks, the jihadi media was jubilant. The Islamic State claimed the twin strikes on Tehran, raising serious concerns of the looming threat in the region. While celebrating the attacks, Daesh affiliates released various online posters. In one of the posters, a Daesh militant was shown carrying the outfit’s flag at the famous Azadi Square of Tehran. Another poster said, “The war has not yet begun.” There was a poster carrying the statement, “By the order of Allah, we are near in Iran.” Immediately after the terrorist attacks, Daesh’s mouthpiece agency, Amaq released a video showing two militants killing a man inside the parliament building. The clip was sent by a member of the terrorist squad participating in the operation and was later killed during the encounter. Militant organisations have long vowed to attack Iran, the only declared Shia state in the world. They consider Tehran as centre of evil, interfering and supporting anti-sunni elements in neighbouring countries. The Iranian capital was targeted in the midst of the gulf crisis. Tehran accused Riyadh of these deadly strikes deepening the prevailing tension in the region. Iran showed full support to Qatar, which is facing threats from the Saudi led coalition. In the gulf diplomatic crisis, the question is how Daesh is going to exploit the tensions in the region and how is it going to be emboldened? Read also: Editorial Editor of Newsweek Pakistan and author, Khaled Ahmed, believes Iran after Khomeini systematically pushed the non-Shia down, a totalitarian state could do it easily, the popular bias is on the same level as the popular bias against Ahmadis in Pakistan. “Sunni Baloch in the east and Sunni Arabs of Khuzestan in the west of Iran are restless but can’t communicate among themselves because of ethnic and linguistic differences,” Ahmed tells TNS. [box type="shadow" align="alignright" class="red_lines" ]“Daesh is a major threat (to Pakistan) because Daesh is using the elements of TTP, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, al Qaeda, Haqqani Network and Afghan Taliban to build its infrastructure on both sides of the Durand Line”[/box] “The power of the state prevents disorder. But Iran is surrounded by unfriendly states who can exploit its internal regimentation disenfranchising the non-Shia. The recent attack by Daesh is the beginning of this trend,” he adds. “Daesh will benefit from the intra-Sunni power struggles. First, it can benefit directly from the turmoil on the Sunni side of the geo-sectarian divide. Second, Iran is also trying to exploit the divisions in the Sunni camp and a growth in Iranian influence, in turn, provides Daesh with more room to grow as well,” explains Kamran Bokhari, a specialist on geopolitics of the Middle East & South Asia. Those observing the gulf crisis closely are of the opinion that there are limits to how far a country can patronise al Qaeda or Daesh. It is far more dangerous for the Saudis to do this because the more the Saudis use the sectarian card against Iran the more they empower Daesh and al Qaeda. It is a double-edged sword that cuts more deeply into Saudi Arabia. Iran will always be less vulnerable because it is a totalitarian state than the Arab sheikhdoms without the army like the Pasdaran needed for totalitarianism. Besides eyeing the Middle East, Daesh is constantly struggling to expand its foothold in the South Asia region. Last week, reports emerged that Daesh militants had captured Tora Bora mountains. In a radio announcement on June 13, it was announced that Daesh had expelled all their opponents, including Afghan Taliban from the area. “Daesh is a major threat (to Pakistan) because Daesh is using the elements of TTP, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, al Qaeda, Haqqani Network and Afghan Taliban to build its infrastructure on both sides of the Durand Line,” says Bokhari. From June 1 to June 3, Pakistani security forces conducted an intelligence driven operation in Mastung. The LeJ spokesman claimed that those killed in the Mastung operation were not their men but were members of Daesh. Recently, Daesh published an info graphic chart of its attacks during the last 8 months in Khurasan. The banned organisation claimed it had killed and injured more than 2200 people, including American, Pakistani and Afghan security officials, members of Afghan Taliban, Shia and Ahmedi community. “Regional tension is not where Daesh gets a foothold, it feeds into the ideological extremism of the victim state and exploits a prepared sectarian ground to plant itself. Ironically, Muslim democracies are more vulnerable than kingdoms and sheikhdoms,” Ahmed says. When the departure of trained Sunni and Shia militants from the Middle-East war theatre begins, Pakistan will face the crisis of a new wave of sectarian violence. [post_title] => Daesh and the region [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => daesh-region [to_ping] => [pinged] => http://tns.thenews.com.pk/editorial-80/ [post_modified] => 2017-06-18 06:06:26 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-06-18 01:06:26 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://tns.thenews.com.pk/?p=67301 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw [format_content] => ) [5] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 67303 [post_author] => 29 [post_date] => 2017-06-18 03:10:14 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-06-17 22:10:14 [post_content] => In the first week of June, six countries — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen and the Maldives — declared they were severing diplomatic ties with Qatar. The Saudis claimed they were taking the action for the sake of ‘national security’ and accused Qatar of aiding terrorist and sectarian groups that “aim to create instability in the region”. The reference of course is to Qatar’s support for Hamas, Hizbollah and Muslim Brotherhood. The decision came after the Arab-Islamic-US summit held in Riyadh in May where there were declarations and speeches made against Iran. Interestingly, while no action, diplomatic or otherwise, has been taken against Iran, Qatar has been singled out, bringing the seething differences into the open. It’s an uncertain situation where the countries in the Muslim world are being made to declare their loyalties to one side or the other in a conflict that is not drawn along any strict sectarian lines. The erstwhile allies of the Islamic Military Alliance have been forced to pledge their allegiances in the new power game set in motion in the region. Read also: The Gulf widens  As Ayesha Siddiqa suggests, the violence that ensues out of this conflict may not just engulf the Middle East but South Asia as well. For us in Pakistan, the concern is real. As opposed to the rational thinking emerging out of the country’s parliament in 2015 that Pakistan should not take sides in Saudi Arabia’s war against Yemen, we went ahead and became a part of the Saudi-led military alliance. Not just that, against all wise counsel, we allowed the country’s retired army chief to head that alliance. Now in the current power game between Riyadh and Doha, and having already soured its ties with Tehran, Islamabad is not in a position to side with either one. It is proposing to mediate and end the crisis but it doesn’t look like it is in a position to do that. In our Special Report today, we have a separate piece on the United States because the policy of the current President is diametrically opposed to the former president Obama’s, especially on Iran. It turns out, however, that the current president is even at odds with his own administration if their recent statements and Tweets on Qatar are anything to go by. Here is an attempt to take stock of the alignments and realignments in the wake of the current standoff in the Middle East, hoping that it does not turn take a violent turn. As for the solutions, they lie within these analyses. [post_title] => Editorial [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => editorial-80 [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-06-17 19:08:31 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-06-17 14:08:31 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://tns.thenews.com.pk/?p=67303 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw [format_content] => ) ) [post_count] => 6 [current_post] => -1 [in_the_loop] => [post] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 67293 [post_author] => 29 [post_date] => 2017-06-18 03:23:37 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-06-17 22:23:37 [post_content] => If the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) were a WhatsApp group the status would read: Qatar (feeling weird), Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE (left the group), Kuwait (typing), and Oman (last seen 2010). This is a joke doing the circles in the Gulf that highlights the fact that the GCC as an organisation will not be able to survive the current conflict in the Middle East, nor will the OIC remain unscathed. In fact, if the tension escalates towards some form of violence it would engulf not just the entire Middle East but South Asia as well and may become precursor to yet another world war. Even without war, the ongoing political conflict is making the citizens throughout the Gulf region so nervous and preoccupied with the threat of war that in the words of a member of a Sharjah royal family, “I feel if I wrote an article calling for legalising prostitution, gay rights, atheism, marijuana, civil marriages, gambling, press freedom, releasing political prisoners, constitutional democracy, and the abolition of capital punishment no one would bat an eye.” A conflict that becomes difficult to predict is always dangerous. In this case, its direction is hard to fathom, partly because the goals of Saudi Arabia and its allies are not really transparent. Even the outside world finds it difficult to believe that the issue pertains primarily to Qatar’s links with the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and Hezbollah. There is no country in the Middle East or the Gulf region that can claim innocence of having links with religious-militant groups in the region or other regions. Read also: Pakistan’s dilemma While Doha has links with the aforementioned groups and has even hosted others like the Taliban, Riyadh had a share in the ongoing conflict in Yemen in which it contributed through financing a Salafi hub in the heart of a Zaidi stronghold in Northern Yemen at Dammaj after 1979. This was initially in the form of financing a madrassa that turned into a Salafi-Wahabi bastion and, hence, an issue of conflict with the Zaidis. This particular clash ran parallel to the rift between the Zaidis, who are Shias but closer in many ways to Sunnis, and the political government in Yemen that is now a partner with Saudi Arabia. But it is worth pointing out that not all Zaidis are Houthis, a name derived from a leader of the rebels, nor are all Houthis Zaidi. [box type="shadow" align="alignright" class="red_lines" ]Despite the fact that Iran has supported Doha through supplying it with food and an air route, Tehran is not likely to jump into the conflict, at least not until it gets attacked.[/box] The Saudis were concerned about the conflict in Yemen but not excessively worried until the Houthis-Zaidis occupied Aden in March 2015. The real concern was that the rebels could become powerful enough to throttle traffic through the Bab-al-Mandeb, the strait that connects the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden. Riyadh blames Doha for supporting Tehran and Shia militias/militant groups that may include supplying weapons despite the fact that getting weapons in Yemen is no issue as the country is a transit route for illegal arms for decades and used by all kinds of suppliers and states. It has definitely been a source of weapons into Africa. Yet the Yemen war is an excuse for other political concerns, such as Saudi Arabia wanting to reformat American patronage in the Middle East. In many ways, this is a conflict between various American proxies like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE that were sidelined by the former American President Barack Obama. In the words of an Arab source, “Obama screwed the Saudis.” Although Obama didn’t overplay the Saudis’ role as a major source of violent extremism around the world, he abandoned them to re-develop links with Iran. Furthermore, the ‘screwing-up’ was also financial that happened during the process of devaluing some of the financial institutions that were used by the Saudis. This happened in the backdrop of continued decline of oil prices that affected the UAE too. Read also: Editorial In any case, Dubai had lost a lot of money earlier because of its real estate bubble bursting. Thus, while Riyadh bled financially, prospects for Tehran became bright due to its access to resources blocked due to earlier American sanctions. For instance, many from the airline industry had predicted that Iran Air would emerge as a huge challenge to the Gulf airlines because of the orders it could afford to place for new aircraft. Qatar got a favourable treatment because it was sympathetic to the shift. With a US military base in Qatar, Doha received even greater support from American thinktanks that were on the same page with Obama regarding the change of policy in the Middle East. Donald Trump seems to have provided these states a much-desired breathing space without which they feared getting irrelevant in the Middle East. But the regional sanctions against Qatar are not only meant to force it to sever its ties with Iran but also to extract economic opportunities in the form of gas contracts, possibly Doha investing in financially broke projects like ARAMCO, and the UAE’s wish for the US to shift its base from Qatar. It almost smells like a game that Saddam Hussain had once played vis-à-vis Kuwait, asking it to pay Baghdad’s debt for fighting its long war with Iran. Even at that time, all parties involved were close American allies. However, the one difference is Saudi Arabia’s questionable capacity to fight a war with Qatar that still has an American base. Notwithstanding investment in its navy and air force, its ground forces that suffer from disciplinary issues may not be a total guarantee of security for the royal family that either looks at Pakistan or Egypt. While Islamabad has good relations with both Riyadh and Doha and has declined to become an active party, Egypt may be an option because Cairo is upset over Qatar’s links with the Muslim Brotherhood, and is enticed by Saudi money. Apparently, Riyadh is using its financial lure to force African states of the Middle East to take the former’s side in this conflict. Riyadh’s plan seems to be to besiege Doha diplomatically, especially in the Islamic world. However, the conflict could escalate into a military engagement depending on signals from Trump, who has a deep dislike for Muslims and is certainly the inspiration behind the ongoing tension which has started to look like kabuki, a form of Japanese dance. A war would cripple the Islamic world as Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies would fight with the help of Egypt and Pakistan against a Qatari-Turkish military contingent. Turkey is displeased with the UAE for its alleged financing of the failed military rebellion in 2016. It has already dispatched 3000 troops for Qatar’s defense. Despite the fact that Iran has supported Doha through supplying it with food and air route, it is not likely to jump into the conflict, at least not until it gets attacked. The Iranian government is not even provoking Trump who is the man to watch for the drop scene to this bizarre theatre. What can be said with certainty is that whether it is prolonged siege or indirect war through proxies or direct conflict using militaries, the cost to the Middle East will be phenomenal. [post_title] => The Gulf widens [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => gulf-widens [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-06-17 19:06:54 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-06-17 14:06:54 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://tns.thenews.com.pk/?p=67293 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw [format_content] => ) [comment_count] => 0 [current_comment] => -1 [found_posts] => 6 [max_num_pages] => 1 [max_num_comment_pages] => 0 [is_single] => [is_preview] => [is_page] => [is_archive] => 1 [is_date] => [is_year] => [is_month] => [is_day] => [is_time] => [is_author] => [is_category] => 1 [is_tag] => [is_tax] => [is_search] => [is_feed] => [is_comment_feed] => [is_trackback] => [is_home] => [is_404] => [is_comments_popup] => [is_paged] => [is_admin] => [is_attachment] => [is_singular] => [is_robots] => [is_posts_page] => [is_post_type_archive] => [query_vars_hash] => db1169c0b02392f7845b184a6030aa64 [query_vars_changed] => 1 [thumbnails_cached] => )