Persian Gulf & Middle East Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Re: Gulf Matters

delft said:

True, and Pakistan received a lot of money from Saudi Arabia and such education as Pakistani children receive is largely paid for by Saudi Arabia. But Pakistani military leaders looking forward twenty years have a lot to think about.

Click to expand...

The strong military cooperation between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia plays a strong role for the future. Iran and Pakistan have enough cultural, social and religious differences that both don't fully trust each other, and this distrust runs extremely deep.

Re: Gulf Matters

This is stretching the area a little. The talk is that on the 15 of June the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation will accept Pakistan as well as India as new members and accord Afghanistan observer status. Iran also has observer status and is likely to become a member in the further future. Countries cannot become members when they are under UN sanctions, as Iran is.

Re: Gulf Matters

This New York Times article suggests that Robert Gates prevented war against Iran under Pres. Bush.



I hope his successor will, if the occasion occurs, be as successful.

Re: Gulf Matters

Indian ex-ambassador M K Bhadrakumar writes an interesting article in Asia Times on line about the growing importance of SCO. When India and Pakistan become members the organisation will represent more than half the population of the world.
And after that? "From a regional organization limited to Central Asia and its environs, SCO may well become the leading integration process over the entire Eurasian landmass".

Re: Gulf Matters

This is turning into a thread about South Asia. An article about India moving towards SCO membership:


With Iraq complaining about $18b missing from US managed Iraqi funds, will Iraq move to SCO too? After the US forces leave in December of course.

Re: Gulf Matters

The Indian ex-ambassador M K Bhadrakumar writes in Asia Times on line on the conflict between the US and President Karzai. Will Karzai exchange the US for a coalition of China, Pakistan, Russia and Iran? It would give him much more freedom than when him is wholly dependent on the US.

Re: Gulf Matters

delft said:

The Indian ex-ambassador M K Bhadrakumar writes in Asia Times on line on the conflict between the US and President Karzai. Will Karzai exchange the US for a coalition of China, Pakistan, Russia and Iran? It would give him much more freedom than when him is wholly dependent on the US.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

But could any of the alternative provide as much aid/support as US would? That's the question.

Re: Gulf Matters

MwRYum said:

But could any of the alternative provide as much aid/support as US would? That's the question.

Click to expand...

My understanding is that the US is asking for permanent military bases. In the end, this is the sticking point. Neither Karzai nor the Taliban, want this. Nor do Iran and Pakistan, nor China and Russia. Apparently even India is apprehensive about this. So if you are talking about MILITARY aid/support, I think an agreement among the various sides is now possible (minus US bases) so that this won't be necessary. If you are talking about RECONSTRUCTION aid/support, yes, China can handle it by itself!

Re: Gulf Matters

MwRYum said:

But could any of the alternative provide as much aid/support as US would? That's the question.

Click to expand...

Red Moon looked mostly at the military side. Let's also look at the political side in Afghanistan. The Afghans are opposed to the military bases, for many of which building contracts have been let running into 2016, and this gives great support to the Taliban. The Taliban ended the growing of opium just before the US invasion, but now uses it to finance its operations. The US stimulates corruption ( Think of the $18b missing from Iraqi money that was administered by the the US ).
When the unifying factor of the US presence disappears in 2014 the differences between groups which now support the Taliban will become more important. Taliban will again be opposed to the growing of opium, losing the support of the opium traders. The economy can start to grow. Already China is investing in a large mining operation. Iran is building a railway to Herat. A politically competent president ( Karzai ) will be able to reduce violence in the country to near a "peace time" level and start to build Afghanistan politically and economically. And, for those interested in women's rights, they cannot be protected by the US army but will be developed with all other things in Afghanistan.
If the US think that staying in Afghanistan is really important they will organize a coup against Karzai, maybe have him killed, as happened with the South Vietnamese dictator Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963.

Re: Gulf Matters

Another fascinating article by ambassador M K Bhadrakumar on the developments relating to Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan:
A summit in Tehran trumps the US ( ).
He judges that the position of the US in Afghanistan is not strong enough to divide the country in a southern and southeastern part to be left to the Taliban and a northern part garrisoned by the US. Such a division would endanger the survival of Pakistan.

Iran wants to see an end to US support for the terrorist group Jundallah which foments violence in the Sistan-Balochistan region in eastern Iran bordering Pakistan. It wants an end to the opium production in Afghanistan. Their interests and that of Afghanistan are parallel. Peace will only return with the departure of the occupation forces from Afghanistan.