Will the OIC take Pakistan's side when it comes to dealing with India?

[Abdullah719]

Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi in an unusually sharp warning asked Saudi Arabia-led Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on Wednesday to stop dilly-dallying on the convening of a meeting of its Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM) on Kashmir.

Appearing in a talk show on ARY News, the foreign minister said: “I am once again respectfully telling OIC that a meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers is our expectation. If you cannot convene it, then I’ll be compelled to ask Prime Minister Imran Khan to call a meeting of the Islamic countries that are ready to stand with us on the issue of Kashmir and support the oppressed Kashmiris.”

Mr Qureshi said that if OIC fails to summon the CFM meeting, Pakistan would be ready to go for a session outside OIC. In response to another question, he said Pakistan could not wait any further.

Pakistan has been pushing for the foreign ministers’ meeting of the 57-member bloc of Muslim countries, which is the second largest intergovernmental body after the UN, since India annexed occupied Kashmir last August.

Mr Qureshi had at an earlier presser explained the importance of CFM for Pakistan. He had then said that it was needed to send a clear message from Ummah on the Kashmir issue.

Although there has been a meeting of the contact group on Kashmir on the sidelines of UN General Assembly session in New York since last August and OIC’s Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission has made statements on the rights abuses in the occupied valley, but no progress could be made towards the CFM meeting.

Why is Saudi Arabia unwilling to hold OIC session on Kashmir?

A major reason behind the failure to call the foreign ministers’ meeting has been Saudi Arabia’s reluctance to accept Pakistan’s request for one specifically on Kashmir. Riyadh’s support is crucial for any move at the OIC, which is dominated by Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries.

Mr Qureshi said Pakistan skipped Kuala Lumpur Summit last December on Saudi request and now Pakistani Muslims are demanding of Riyadh to “show leadership on the issue”.

“We have our own sensitivities. You have to realise this. Gulf countries should understand this,” the foreign minister said, adding that he could no more indulge in diplomatic niceties.

Mr Qureshi made it clear that he was not being emotional and fully understood the implications of his statement. “It’s right, I’m taking a position despite our good ties with Saudi Arabia,” he said.

“We cannot stay silent anymore on the sufferings of the Kashmiris,” he said.

Pakistan is furious over Kashmir issue being sidelined at OIC

Frustration in Islamabad over OIC’s inaction on Kashmir has been growing for months. Prime Minister Khan voiced his concern while speaking at a think-tank during his visit to Malaysia in February.

“The reason is that we have no voice and there is a total division amongst [us]. We can’t even come together as a whole on the OIC meeting on Kashmir,” Mr Khan had said.

It should be recalled that Turkey, Malaysia and Iran had unequivocally rejected India’s annexation of Kashmir and voiced serious concerns on atrocities committed by Indian security forces on Kashmiris in the occupied valley.

Kaula Lumpur Summit: Is it time for a new OIC?

Earlier, in light of the Muslim world’s current depressing situation, the Malaysian President Mahathir Mohamad called for a conference in Kuala Lumpur to gather scholars and activists from across the Muslim world together. He described it as: “[A] first step … to help Muslims recover their past glories, or at least to help them avoid the kind of humiliation and oppression that we see around the world today.”

The summit has mostly focused not only on political issues, but especially the need for sustainable development in the Muslim world.

The summit’s declaration almost immediately sparked rumours and fears that the five primary countries of Malaysia, Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan and Qatar were trying to form a new bloc of power to rival the OIC.

While Mahathir officially denied such accusations personally to Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdulaziz, it seems to have been to no avail.

Saudi Arabia, fearful of a rival bloc or organisation to the OIC, seemed to have successfully taken action to diminish the summit’s potential impact.

However, by playing geopolitics-as-usual, Saudi Arabia failed to recognise what this summit truly represents in the long term.

However, most Muslims, fairly or unfairly, fail to see how the OIC has truly led to greater unity for the Muslim world over the past five decades.

The Muslim world’s desire for autonomy and real change is not going away anytime soon. Saudi Arabia and the OIC would do well to recognise it or risk being replaced by new actors.

GVS News Desk with additional input by other sources

https://www.globalvillagespace.com/pakistan-oic-kashmir/

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Oh I See

 

[Bewal Express]

If Saudis don't want to do anything, step aside and let countries that do, get on with it.

 

[Nostalgic]

Do it already. I wouldn’t be surprised if this dovetails with the burgeoning China-Iran ties as well. If one of the fringe benefits is a slow but steady extrication from the chokehold the Wahhabi Entity has had us in for decades, I for one would be delighted.

 

[PetroDollars]

Pakistan needs to take the step, create an EU for islamic world

 

[sweep_shot]

KSA has become corrupt along with some of the gulf countries. It is not just Kashmir issue but also other issues. The fact KSA is fighting with Qatar and dropping bombs over Yemen is pathetic.

OIC needs to show better leadership. Stop dropping bombs over Yemen and stop isolating Qatar. Also, address things like Uighur issue, Kashmir issue, Rohingya issue etc.

 

[JaDed]

KSA has become corrupt along with some of the gulf countries. It is not just Kashmir issue but also other issues. The fact KSA is fighting with Qatar and dropping bombs over Yemen is pathetic.

OIC needs to show better leadership. Stop dropping bombs over Yemen and stop isolating Qatar. Also, address things like Uighur issue, Kashmir issue, Rohingya issue etc.

No one is going to address that incl the ones threatening to form a new "bloc" , they can't even draw a border on Chinese side of J and K.

 

[JaDed]

Very important line here :

“The reason is that we have no voice and there is a total division amongst [us]. We can’t even come together as a whole on the OIC meeting on Kashmir,” Mr Khan had said.

 

[sweep_shot]

No one is going to address that incl the ones threatening to form a new "bloc" , they can't even draw a border on Chinese side of J and K.

I was referring to OIC leadership. Pakistan can do whatever they want. But, OIC needs to address these issues. They are supposed to be the UN for Muslims.

There is no point in having OIC if Qatar (a Sunni Muslim state) gets isolated and Yemen gets bombed by KSA. Also, other issues need to be addressed (including Kashmir issue).

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

OIC is useless. Pakistan should demand that they raise Kashmir, or Pakistan leaves.

 

[cricketjoshila]

OIC is useless. Pakistan should demand that they raise Kashmir, or Pakistan leaves.

And then? What happens then?

Do you think muslim nations will cut off relationship with India for Pakistanis? Will they announce sanctions? What is that they will do?

 

[Itachi]

.... This proves, religion can't be a factor to unite people. Some other factors will have to get tick marked first before religion can unite. No wonder, east Pakistan was born as a new country later on.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

.... This proves, religion can't be a factor to unite people. Some other factors will have to get tick marked first before religion can unite. No wonder, east Pakistan was born as a new country later on.

Bangladesh may well join up with an eastern based OIC which gives some importance to their concerns, it could well be that Erdogan's Turkey can capitalise on disaffection in the area, especially given the history of the Turkish leadership of the Islamic world in the past.

 

[sweep_shot]

Bangladesh may well join up with an eastern based OIC which gives some importance to their concerns, it could well be that Erdogan's Turkey can capitalise on disaffection in the area, especially given the history of the Turkish leadership of the Islamic world in the past.

I personally have more faith in Erdogan and Turkey than modern day Arabs.

One of the reasons why Ottoman Empire fell apart was due to betrayal from the Arabs. You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Revolt.

Turkey and Bangladesh also have pretty good relationship.

Ideally, OIC should remain as one. However, if OIC doesn't show leadership, another OIC can happen.

 

[Itachi]

Bangladesh may well join up with an eastern based OIC which gives some importance to their concerns, it could well be that Erdogan's Turkey can capitalise on disaffection in the area, especially given the history of the Turkish leadership of the Islamic world in the past.

Bangladesh may well join. But even then, religion will take a back seat because it will be based upon common interests in financial, geographical areas. The impact of "I" in the OIC greatly reduces even if this happens.

I don't think in modern world, you can be united via religion (any) only. What if tomorrow someone in OIC initiates a movement against China?

Will Pakistan support the movement for the interest of Muslims or reject because it will be suicidal to go against China?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

And then? What happens then?

Pakistan is no longer part of OIC.

Do you think muslim nations will cut off relationship with India for Pakistanis? Will they announce sanctions?

Nope.

What is that they will do?

What they are already doing, nothing. But there is no reason for Pakistan to be part of the OIC, if it cant simply raise a meeting on something that is very important to Pakistan. I see zero value for Pakistan to be part of this organization.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Bangladesh may well join. But even then, religion will take a back seat because it will be based upon common interests in financial, geographical areas. The impact of "I" in the OIC greatly reduces even if this happens.

I don't think in modern world, you can be united via religion (any) only. What if tomorrow someone in OIC initiates a movement against China?

Will Pakistan support the movement for the interest of Muslims or reject because it will be suicidal to go against China?

Pakistan will do whats best for Pakistan first. However i dont think if the Turkic countries, like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, raised the Uighur issue Pakistan would object to a meeting being held.

This is pretty insulting. And Pakistan should say Khuda Hafiz to the OIC if they cant even raise a meeting.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

.... This proves, religion can't be a factor to unite people. Some other factors will have to get tick marked first before religion can unite.

Yes. Culture first.

No wonder, east Pakistan was born as a new country later on.

That had more to do with a dictatorship. If there was no dictatorship, then maybe Sheikh Hasina would be Prime Minister of a United Pakistan today. If Punjabis and Bengalis can be in one country in India, there is no reason why East Pakistan would leave, a country where they would be the majority, if they were not discriminated against by the dictatorship.

 

[PakLFC]

OIC is a waste of time. We need to ditch them as soon as possible and lead another group with non Arab countries. Time to forget the loser and hypocrite Arabs. Let them deal with their own problems, let us forget Palestine, Iraq, Syria and Yemen as well. Lets build relations with Turkey, Afghanistan and Iran in particular along with Russia. China is already a loyal and tested friend. Arab's never were or will be our kin or brethren

 

[PakLFC]

I stopped caring about the Arabs many years back. They mean nothing to me at all.

 

[Local.Dada]

Pakistan needs to take the step, create an EU for islamic world

EU is due to economic reasons. These are countries which have a longer history of conflict than India and Pakistan which dates back only 73 years.

For Pakistan to do that they need to have a lot of leverage when it comes to trade and business. So just creating an alternative to discuss religious tenets will have no impact. For even going there you need to have some level of economic leverage or have some level of presence in the world.

Before people attack me and India that’s fine but that’s the bitter truth.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Bangladesh may well join. But even then, religion will take a back seat because it will be based upon common interests in financial, geographical areas. The impact of "I" in the OIC greatly reduces even if this happens.

I don't think in modern world, you can be united via religion (any) only. What if tomorrow someone in OIC initiates a movement against China?

Will Pakistan support the movement for the interest of Muslims or reject because it will be suicidal to go against China?

You underestimate common ideological and cultural sensitivities. As an Indian, do you have any idea why your country is not part of the elite 5 Eyes intelligence network that links the most desirable countries to live in today?

 

[CricketCartoons]

You underestimate common ideological and cultural sensitivities. As an Indian, do you have any idea why your country is not part of the elite 5 Eyes intelligence network that links the most desirable countries to live in today?

Indian (hindus) will always play down OIC or any Islamic front, because they have never experienced what religious brotherhood feels like. Nepal is the only other hindu majority country and yet indian hindus don't see the nepalese as brothers. They have no idea how a senegalese, arab, chechen, indonesian, pakistani muslim can meet in a foreign land and feel like long lost brothers. You are wasting your time explaining this bond, but I guess you love wasting time on indians, Capt.

 

[Oxfordchamp]

Atleast the Minister should be appreciated for talking in strong language with the Saudis..he must have realized they will have to dealt with toughly..If you become their driver, they will treat you like a driver..

 

[Itachi]

You underestimate common ideological and cultural sensitivities. As an Indian, do you have any idea why your country is not part of the elite 5 Eyes intelligence network that links the most desirable countries to live in today?

I don't see the relevance of 5 eyes with what I wrote. My point was, common fields does play part but religion isn't even one of the top in that list.

As for India goes, in life, you gain some, you lose some. But that's not the end of the world. You guys have higher quality of life, good for you. That doesn't mean there will be a regret in life if i can't be part of that. Those are not exclusive to each other in my opinion.

 

[Itachi]

Atleast the Minister should be appreciated for talking in strong language with the Saudis..he must have realized they will have to dealt with toughly..If you become their driver, they will treat you like a driver..

I don't understand this "obsession" towards dialogue baazi in bollywoody style of that of Pakistanis.

At the end of the day, Saudis will get what they want. Pakistan will either have to suck it up or go out. Words are useless if nothing is done at the end.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Pakistan should start a new bloc with Turkey and Malaysia. OIC clearly has a different agenda then what these 3 countries want.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Pakistan should start a new bloc with Turkey and Malaysia. OIC clearly has a different agenda then what these 3 countries want.

Pakistan should stay with Saudi block, but use the threat of going with Turkey as a leverage to make the saudi camp give concessions. The threat is more powerful than the execution.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Pakistan should start a new bloc with Turkey and Malaysia. OIC clearly has a different agenda then what these 3 countries want.

Mahathir is no more the Malaysian PM.

 

[MenInG]

ISLAMABAD: The Foreign Office on Thursday defended the ‘controversial’ remarks of the foreign minister about Saudi Arabia-led Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), saying his statement was a reflection of people’s aspirations and expectations from the OIC to raise the Kashmir issue internationally.

Speaking at a weekly press briefing, the outgoing Foreign Office spokesperson Aisha Farooqui said the people of Pakistan had more expectations from the OIC and would like it to play a leading role in raising the Kashmir issue internationally. “In this regard, our efforts will continue and we hope there will be further forward movement,” she added.

Ms Farooqui said Pakistan was a founding member of the OIC and had longstanding fraternal and cooperative relations with OIC member states.

She said Kashmir and Palestine were two key issues on the agenda of the OIC since its inception. “The OIC has consistently supported Pakistan on Jammu and Kashmir dispute. The OIC Contact Group on Jammu and Kashmir established in 1994 is a manifestation of this consistent support and has actively contributed to the advancement of the Kashmir cause.

Since August 5, 2019, Pakistan has closely worked with the OIC secretary general and other brotherly countries of the OIC. Three meetings of the OIC Contact Group on Jammu and Kashmir have been convened during the last one year, two of which were at ministerial level, and they issued strong communiqués deploring grave violations of human rights in India-held Jammu and Kashmir, demanding India rescind its illegal and unilateral actions of August 5, 2019, and calling for resolution of Kashmir dispute in accordance with the United Nations Security Council’s resolutions.

PML-N accuses govt of ‘playing with’ country’s vital interests

About Pakistan’s relations with Saudi Arabia, Ms Farooqui said the two countries had strong historic and fraternal relations. “The people of Pakistan have deep respect for the custodian of the two holy mosques. Pakistan remains deeply committed to sovereignty and territorial integrity of Saudi Arabia. The landmark visit of Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman in February 2019 further cemented our close brotherly relations and charted new avenues of cooperation in trade, investment and other fields,” she said.

In reply to a question, she said that Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi’s remarks that Pakistan expected a meeting of OIC Council of Foreign Ministers and if it was not convened, he would be compelled to ask Prime Minister Imran Khan to call a meeting of the OIC countries that were ready to stand with Pakistan on Kashmir issue were not against diplomatic norms.

She was also asked to explain possible impact of the remarks on Pakistan’s relationship with Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries.

Another questioner referred to the FM’s remarks that Pakistan would move forward with or without Saudi Arabia on Kashmir issue and asked if it was a political statement or the official position. The spok*es*person replied that Pakistan and its people had more expectations from the OIC than from any other international organisation because of deep-rooted and fraternal ties with OIC member states and the OIC itself.

Answering a question about the Islamabad High Court’s directive to the federal government to give another chance to India and its spy Commander Kulbhushan Jadhav to appoint a counsel for his case, she said the Indian side had been contacted through diplomatic channels and conveyed the same. However, a response is still awaited.

Answering a question about the release of new political map of Pakistan, she made it clear that it was not in contradiction with Pakistan’s stated policy.

“This is a political map as opposed to the administrative map that we are more familiar with. There was a need for the political map which has been fulfilled on August 4. Pakistan’s stance on Jammu and Kashmir is anchored in the UN Security Council resolutions under which we await final settlement of this dispute in accordance with UNSC resolutions and the aspirations of the Kashmiri people. There is no change in our principled position”.

On August 4, she said, Pakistan issued a political map depicting its long standing and consistent position on Jammu and Kashmir, anchored in the UNSC resolutions and stipulating that the accession of the state would be through a UN-supervised plebiscite. “Pakistan’s political map firmly rejects the political map issued by India after August 5, 2019, making false territorial claims, including on Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit and Baltistan.”

The FO spokesperson categorically rejected the statement made by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs on Pakistan’s political map. “India cannot create a smokescreen for its illegal and unacceptable actions in occupied Jammu and Kashmir, including those taken since August 5, 2019. It is preposterous for a country that is compulsively expansionist, and a brazen practitioner of state-terrorism, to level charges against others,” she said.

She said the fact that on three occasions in one year the Kashmir issue had been discussed in the Security Council negated the failed Indian assertions that it was only a bilateral issue.

“Voices in support of the Kashmiri people were raised across the globe marking one year of the illegal action by India and continued brutalisation and disenfranchisement of the Kashmiri people,” she said.

Meanwhile, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) has denounced what it called ‘irresponsible’ remarks by the foreign minister about brotherly country Saudi Arabia.

In a statement issued after a joint parliamentary party meeting of the PML-N with its president Shahbaz Sharif in the chair, the party’s secretary general Ahsan Iqbal said Pakistan and Saudi Arabia had historic and strategic relations and Saudi Arabia had always stood by Pakistan in testing times. He said the irresponsible statement about a friendly country was worst kind of diplomacy. He accused the government of “playing with” vital interests of the country.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1573054/fo-defends-qureshis-remarks-on-saudi-led-oic-over-kashmir

 

[Napa]

1,300 years of documented history of Muslim nations constantly fighting with each other and now suddenly some people expect them to come together?

Also, news for the Pakistani FM. If he expects that Muslim nations will be moved to act against India due to human rights violations in Kashmir, they would have acted against the Ugyhur Genocide yesterday.

 

[the Great Khan]

1,300 years of documented history of Muslim nations constantly fighting with each other and now suddenly some people expect them to come together?

Also, news for the Pakistani FM. If he expects that Muslim nations will be moved to act against India due to human rights violations in Kashmir, they would have acted against the Ugyhur Genocide yesterday.

the nation state is a modern construct and thus you cannot apply todays situation to those days.

 

[the Great Khan]

Pakistan should stay with Saudi block, but use the threat of going with Turkey as a leverage to make the saudi camp give concessions. The threat is more powerful than the execution.

i think this is the plan.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I don't see the relevance of 5 eyes with what I wrote. My point was, common fields does play part but religion isn't even one of the top in that list.

As for India goes, in life, you gain some, you lose some. But that's not the end of the world. You guys have higher quality of life, good for you. That doesn't mean there will be a regret in life if i can't be part of that. Those are not exclusive to each other in my opinion.

The relevance was that the Five Eyes spying network links those countries together through a common culture and ideology. Guess which country spawned all them? I will give you a clue here, I am sitting in that very country.

I do agree that religion takes a back seat with politics, but that is how it should be. Doesn't mean that some countries can't make common cause on those areas where their interests converge.

Also, while religion should perhaps take more of a back seat, as an Indian you aren't really in a position to deliver such advice. Just look at your own nation which was split in three pieces because of it. Even now your own PM is laying stones on temples where mosques were razed in a homage to importance of religion in India.

 

[Bewal Express]

The Saudi govt has one interest in that is to save the house of Saud. This leads to it seeing the Americans and Israelis as its saviours. For obvious reasons these countries see anything to do with Islamic unity or activism as a threat. Hence the Saudis want to OIC to be nothing more than a talking shop.

 

[Kianig89]

OIC was already a dead wood dont know who will join Pakistan in alternative bloc Chad Burkina Faso

 

[Napa]

the nation state is a modern construct and thus you cannot apply todays situation to those days.

“Nation state” is just a fancy name for “country”. Name has changed, human nature and religions haven’t changed.

Suppose Pakistan forms a new Islamic bloc with Turkey and Malaysia. Given that Uyghurs who are Turks are facing genocide what will this bloc do about China?

 

[Napa]

The relevance was that the Five Eyes spying network links those countries together through a common culture and ideology. Guess which country spawned all them? I will give you a clue here, I am sitting in that very country.

I do agree that religion takes a back seat with politics, but that is how it should be. Doesn't mean that some countries can't make common cause on those areas where their interests converge.

Also, while religion should perhaps take more of a back seat, as an Indian you aren't really in a position to deliver such advice. Just look at your own nation which was split in three pieces because of it. Even now your own PM is laying stones on temples where mosques were razed in a homage to importance of religion in India.

Not sure what your point is about the Five Eyes network. It is composed of 5 countries out of 157 in the world. The 5 are all English speaking countries, while only 10% of Indians speak English.

The 5 Eyes are by no means equal, the US is the definite leader. Actions such as Blair’s kowtowing to Bush has led to people calling your country a lapdog of the country I’m a citizen of. Being a member of 5 eyes is hardly something to be proud of. Germany refused to join when it realized how much of its internal matters it would have to divulge to the US.

 

[KingKhanWC]

1,300 years of documented history of Muslim nations constantly fighting with each other and now suddenly some people expect them to come together?

Also, news for the Pakistani FM. If he expects that Muslim nations will be moved to act against India due to human rights violations in Kashmir, they would have acted against the Ugyhur Genocide yesterday.

All people fight each other, it's called triablism. See India's treatment of Dalits, their own people aren't allowed in the same temple to worship the same God.

Saudi is a puppet state, Pakistan knows this but also knows Pakistan is THE no.1 military power in the Muslim world. About time it started using it's status to educate and change the policies of the OIC.

If it wasnt for the Yankee bases in the middle east, Pak and Turkey should invade and liberate the holy cities. It will happen when the petrodollar ends, which is not a matter of if now but when.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

1,300 years of documented history of Muslim nations constantly fighting with each other and now suddenly some people expect them to come together?

Also, news for the Pakistani FM. If he expects that Muslim nations will be moved to act against India due to human rights violations in Kashmir, they would have acted against the Ugyhur Genocide yesterday.

He was not expecting them to put sanctions on India, or break relations with India. Only have a meeting regarding Kashmir in the OIC. If the OIC cant do that, then its not an organization Pakistan should be part of.

There was also thousands years of Europeans fighting with each other, and they have the EU.

There was thousands years of Hindus fighting with each other, and they have come together for the most part in India.

So there is no reason, so there is no reason for Muslim countries cant come together and have some sort of bloc. But the OIC has failed to do that, and Pakistan should leave if they cant mention Kashmir.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Not sure what your point is about the Five Eyes network. It is composed of 5 countries out of 157 in the world. The 5 are all English speaking countries, while only 10% of Indians speak English.

The 5 Eyes are by no means equal, the US is the definite leader. Actions such as Blair’s kowtowing to Bush has led to people calling your country a lapdog of the country I’m a citizen of. Being a member of 5 eyes is hardly something to be proud of. Germany refused to join when it realized how much of its internal matters it would have to divulge to the US.

I'd be impressed if you were trying to convince me of this argument in Germanic language. Vas ist aap ka point?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

OIC is a waste of time. We need to ditch them as soon as possible and lead another group with non Arab countries. Time to forget the loser and hypocrite Arabs. Let them deal with their own problems, let us forget Palestine, Iraq, Syria and Yemen as well. Lets build relations with Turkey, Afghanistan and Iran in particular along with Russia. China is already a loyal and tested friend. Arab's never were or will be our kin or brethren

Pakistan has done nothing to help the Arabs with any of those issues. Its been a one way relationship where Arabs have helped Pakistanis financially, while Pakistanis have taken the money and have a public which has zero gratitude towards them.

 

[PakLFC]

Pakistan has done nothing to help the Arabs with any of those issues. Its been a one way relationship where Arabs have helped Pakistanis financially, while Pakistanis have taken the money and have a public which has zero gratitude towards them.

Pak has done plenty of things for the Arabs like offering them our military protection and building the Gulf region. Arabs have been abusing Pak labourers and others poor ones from the subcontinent for decades. They have been treating labourers like filth so we ow them nothing. Prior to oil being found in their region these Arabs would come to the subcontinent like beggars. We also trained their pilots and there Emirates airlines as well in case you don't know.

 

[IAJ]

One of the biggest problems is that the fight between SaudiA and Iran has been fought in Pakistan. Both countries apparantly gives money to their grups in Pakistan and you have sunnis and shias fighting eachother. The Ulema have a big responsibility here. The leaders og these countries are not Khalifas. The khilafat ended a century ago and both set of leaders have own agendas.

 

[fitCricFan]

Also, news for the Pakistani FM. If he expects that Muslim nations will be moved to act against India due to human rights violations in Kashmir, they would have acted against the Ugyhur Genocide yesterday.

And against the Palestine oppression, at-least a couple of decades ago. The Kashmir ship has sailed. IK & his team is all talk. Historically, the Kashmir issue has always been raked up in Pakistan as a detraction for the failures of the ruling party, the more obvious they are to the people, the louder the Kashmir noise.

 

[Abdullah719]

Stop derailing the thread with irrelevant posts about drivers and what not.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

And against the Palestine oppression, at-least a couple of decades ago. The Kashmir ship has sailed. IK & his team is all talk. Historically, the Kashmir issue has always been raked up in Pakistan as a detraction for the failures of the ruling party, the more obvious they are to the people, the louder the Kashmir noise.

Kashmir has been an issue in Pakisatn since August 14, 1947. it has nothing to do with Pakistan's domestic issues. When Pakistan had higher per capita gdp of India it was still an issue.

 

[fitCricFan]

Kashmir has been an issue in Pakisatn since August 14, 1947. it has nothing to do with Pakistan's domestic issues. When Pakistan had higher per capita gdp of India it was still an issue.

Can you remind me how long ago was that. Past his history, you work in the present to build your future, not regress.

Just for reference, the Indians are looking for ways to get Amazon and Walmart out of the country knowing how these trans-national ecommerce retailers are destroying local economies and we are just welcoming Amazon.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Can you remind me how long ago was that. Past his history, you work in the present to build your future, not regress.

Just for reference, the Indians are looking for ways to get Amazon and Walmart out of the country knowing how these trans-national ecommerce retailers are destroying local economies and we are just welcoming Amazon.

My comment was in response to your original comment that Pakistan is only raising Kashmir because of domestic issues. I just wanted to point out that was not true, and Kashmir has been an issue since 1947.

 

[Itachi]

My comment was in response to your original comment that Pakistan is only raising Kashmir because of domestic issues. I just wanted to point out that was not true, and Kashmir has been an issue since 1947.

Even then, your comment is irrelevant.

per capita gdp does nothing to a political team in an election scenario. Because in a similar infrastructure where efficiency of the system is sustainable, any political party can show that performance. When everyone can achieve it, that's not an achievement anymore.

People will look elsewhere for voting a party. And this is where political issues does come in to play.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Even then, your comment is irrelevant.

per capita gdp does nothing to a political team in an election scenario. Because in a similar infrastructure where efficiency of the system is sustainable, any political party can show that performance. When everyone can achieve it, that's not an achievement anymore.

People will look elsewhere for voting a party. And this is where political issues does come in to play.

I never said it did.

One poster suggested that Pakistan is only raising Kashmir because of domestic issues. I simply corrected him/her, by saying that Kashmir has been an issue in Pakistan since 1947.

 

[Hasan]

1,300 years of documented history of Muslim nations constantly fighting with each other and now suddenly some people expect them to come together?

Also, news for the Pakistani FM. If he expects that Muslim nations will be moved to act against India due to human rights violations in Kashmir, they would have acted against the Ugyhur Genocide yesterday.

The same could have been said for Europe.

With the economic and political focus shifting toward the east (esp China) their will be rising tensions and potential conflicts with the western (established) powers. Nations with mutual interests will start to collide and cooperate to better project their interests.

China, Russia, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan and others will be facing of against US, EU, Saudi Arab/UAE, India, Israel and others.

World is changing fast.

 

[Itachi]

The same could have been said for Europe.

With the economic and political focus shifting toward the east (esp China) their will be rising tensions and potential conflicts with the western (established) powers. Nations with mutual interests will start to collide and cooperate to better project their interests.

China, Russia, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan and others will be facing of against US, EU, Saudi Arab/UAE, India, Israel and others.

World is changing fast.

That's the point I guess.

To come together, Muslim nations require mutual interest (as you have wrote above) more than the aspect that all of them belongs to the same umbrella i.e. Islam. Religion alone can't bond them.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

That's the point I guess.

To come together, Muslim nations require mutual interest (as you have wrote above) more than the aspect that all of them belongs to the same umbrella i.e. Islam. Religion alone can't bond them.

Correct. Religion alone would not appeal to Muslim countries any more than it would to Christian countries like Australia, Britain, New Zealand, Canada and the USA. It is just a part of the culture which bonds these countries.

 

[Itachi]

Correct. Religion alone would not appeal to Muslim countries any more than it would to Christian countries like Australia, Britain, New Zealand, Canada and the USA. It is just a part of the culture which bonds these countries.

As far my understanding, Islam, the entity should have been above than any other aspect. Does it mean these countries are not true Islamic country anymore?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

As far my understanding, Islam, the entity should have been above than any other aspect. Does it mean these countries are not true Islamic country anymore?

Well as you said, that is your understanding. Some Jews have the understanding that Israel is not a true Jewish country, and some Christians have the understanding that Britain is not a true Christian country any more. Are we going to apply the same standards to Israel and Britain?

 

[Itachi]

Well as you said, that is your understanding. Some Jews have the understanding that Israel is not a true Jewish country, and some Christians have the understanding that Britain is not a true Christian country any more. Are we going to apply the same standards to Israel and Britain?

You can apply the same if you see it.

If Islam takes a back seat for a Muslim, should he be call a Muslim?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You can apply the same if you see it.

If Islam takes a back seat for a Muslim, should he be call a Muslim?

Why not? This is such a stupid question. Would be like me asking if a Hindu eats a beefburger once a month will he still be called a Hindu?

 

[Itachi]

Why not? This is such a stupid question. Would be like me asking if a Hindu eats a beefburger once a month will he still be called a Hindu?

I don't understand the "stupidity" context. For a muslim, God is above anything and Islam is the means/path through which he/she can make that relationship. If it takes a back seat, then what will be the difference between a kafir and a muslim?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I don't understand the "stupidity" context. For a muslim, God is above anything and Islam is the means/path through which he/she can make that relationship. If it takes a back seat, then what will be the difference between a kafir and a muslim?

Do you think Muslims are some alien form of life that they should all hold uniform beliefs unlike Jews and Hindus?

 

[Itachi]

Do you think Muslims are some alien form of life that they should all hold uniform beliefs unlike Jews and Hindus?

For a Muslim, other religions are contaminated and have deviated from God's way which is why Islam is the only true religion.

If Muslims behave the same, then Islam will also be the same as other religion and shouldn't consider non Muslims as kafirs.

That will mean, either all the religions are true religions or all the religions are contaminated ones where the final revelation is yet to be revealed. But that goes against Islam.

Seems contradictory.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

For a Muslim, other religions are contaminated and have deviated from God's way which is why Islam is the only true religion.

If Muslims behave the same, then Islam will also be the same as other religion and shouldn't consider non Muslims as kafirs.

That will mean, either all the religions are true religions or all the religions are contaminated ones where the final revelation is yet to be revealed. But that goes against Islam.

Seems contradictory.

It only seems contradictory to you as you wish to pigeonhole Muslims as some uniform body in order to discredit them. Otherwise you could well agree that Islam is the true religion and this would not make you any less an atheist hindu who may enjoy the odd beefburger once a month.

 

[Itachi]

It only seems contradictory to you as you wish to pigeonhole Muslims as some uniform body in order to discredit them. Otherwise you could well agree that Islam is the true religion and this would not make you any less an atheist hindu who may enjoy the odd beefburger once a month.

Did I write anything that is against teaching of Islam?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Did I write anything that is against teaching of Islam?

Did I suggest that?

 

[Itachi]

Did I suggest that?

I don't know. That's why I asked.

My point was, on one hand, the Muslim countries are raising issues based upon relevance with that of religion.

But then, filtering the list of issues considering one another's benefits or any harm that may come.

This double standard is what I find a bit unacceptable.

Pick a standard and stick with it.

If you are picking up issues based upon interest of religion, that's ok.

If you are picking up based upon your financial, or any other fields of interest, that's ok too.

But it shouldn't come as surprise when people questions your intentions if you jump between these two standards (whichever, whenever fits your agenda).

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I don't know. That's why I asked.

My point was, on one hand, the Muslim countries are raising issues based upon relevance with that of religion.

But then, filtering the list of issues considering one another's benefits or any harm that may come.

This double standard is what I find a bit unacceptable.

Pick a standard and stick with it.

If you are picking up issues based upon interest of religion, that's ok.

If you are picking up based upon your financial, or any other fields of interest, that's ok too.

But it shouldn't come as surprise when people questions your intentions if you jump between these two standards (whichever, whenever fits your agenda).

What makes you think Muslims can't have both financial and religious standards same as Hindus, Christians and Jews? You seem to want a very exacting and narrow definition to apply to Muslims whereas you don't seem to think that should apply to everyone else.

 

[Itachi]

What makes you think Muslims can't have both financial and religious standards same as Hindus, Christians and Jews? You seem to want a very exacting and narrow definition to apply to Muslims whereas you don't seem to think that should apply to everyone else.

The narrow definition is attributed to Islam because I don't see any organization of hindu cooperation, organization of Christian cooperation, or organization of jews cooperation among countries in practice let alone coming together and raising issues based upon religion.

If you have raised it, you automatically set the bar higher and should be able to walk the talk.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

For a Muslim, other religions are contaminated and have deviated from God's way which is why Islam is the only true religion.

If Muslims behave the same, then Islam will also be the same as other religion and shouldn't consider non Muslims as kafirs.

That will mean, either all the religions are true religions or all the religions are contaminated ones where the final revelation is yet to be revealed. But that goes against Islam.

Seems contradictory.

From my own personal interaction with educated Pakistani Muslims, its extremely rare to see non Muslims being referred to as "Kaafirs".

I am talking about interactions where the only people there were Pakistani Muslims, so its not for politeness they did not refer to them as "Kaafir".

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The narrow definition is attributed to Islam because I don't see any organization of hindu cooperation, organization of Christian cooperation, or organization of jews cooperation among countries in practice let alone coming together and raising issues based upon religion.

If you have raised it, you automatically set the bar higher and should be able to walk the talk.

OIC has not raised any bar, it has mostly lowered it, hence why it is universally criticised by rank and file Muslims. Why do you think you are getting countries like Pakistan threatening to break away and form their own unions?

How they form and what standards they implement is not really my field of expertise, but I am sure that would be the same for atheist Hindus who want to impose what they think should be Islamic principles.

 

[King_Kohli]

Saudi Arabia Holds Back Oil to Pakistan after Imran Khan Govt Threatens to Split OIC over Kashmir

The loan package included a provision under which Saudi Arabia granted Pakistan $3.2 billion worth of oil, a year on deferred payments.

Saudi Arabia has halted the provision of oil on loan for Pakistan after the Imran Khan government threatened to split the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) over Kashmir.

Hit by a severe economic crisis, Pakistan had borrowed a $6.2 billion loan from Saudi Arabia in 2018.

The loan package included a provision under which Saudi Arabia granted Pakistan $3.2 billion worth of oil, a year on deferred payments.

Pakistani media on Saturday said that the provision meant for Islamabad expired two months ago and has not been renewed by Riyadh.

Instead, Islamabad has prematurely returned $1 billion Saudi loan, four months ahead of repayment period, The Express Tribune said quoting sources and Sajid Qazi, the spokesperson of the Petroleum Division.

Recently Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi during a talk show on a news channel had threatened that if the OIC headed by Saudi Arabia did not convene a foreign ministers' meeting on Kashmir, Prime Minister Imran Khan would hold it on his own with his allies among the Islamic countries.

"If you cannot convene it, then I'll be compelled to ask Prime Minister Imran Khan to call a meeting of the Islamic countries that are ready to stand with us on the issue of Kashmir...," he had threatened on Ary news channel.

The OIC, the biggest bloc of Islamic countries in the world, has repeatedly declined Islamabad's several requests to hold a meeting on Indian Kashmir -- a region which Pakistan Army attempted to invade four times in the last seven decades and where it has been waging a proxy war against India for last three decades.

Since August 2019 when India revoked special status of the Jammu and Kashmir state and brought it directly under the control of the Central government by bifurcating it into two Union Territories, the Imran Khan government has been seeking support of the 57-member OIC over the issue in Pakistan's favour.

One of the major reasons for OIC's lack of support for Pakistan has been Riyadh's displeasure with Islamabad's proximity with Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan who nurtures the ambition of replacing Saudi Arabia as leader of all the Sunni Islamic countries.

https://www.news18.com/news/world/s...eatens-to-split-oic-over-kashmir-2769435.html

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Saudi Arabia Holds Back Oil to Pakistan after Imran Khan Govt Threatens to Split OIC over Kashmir

The loan package included a provision under which Saudi Arabia granted Pakistan $3.2 billion worth of oil, a year on deferred payments.

Saudi Arabia has halted the provision of oil on loan for Pakistan after the Imran Khan government threatened to split the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) over Kashmir.

Hit by a severe economic crisis, Pakistan had borrowed a $6.2 billion loan from Saudi Arabia in 2018.

The loan package included a provision under which Saudi Arabia granted Pakistan $3.2 billion worth of oil, a year on deferred payments.

Pakistani media on Saturday said that the provision meant for Islamabad expired two months ago and has not been renewed by Riyadh.

Instead, Islamabad has prematurely returned $1 billion Saudi loan, four months ahead of repayment period, The Express Tribune said quoting sources and Sajid Qazi, the spokesperson of the Petroleum Division.

Recently Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi during a talk show on a news channel had threatened that if the OIC headed by Saudi Arabia did not convene a foreign ministers' meeting on Kashmir, Prime Minister Imran Khan would hold it on his own with his allies among the Islamic countries.

"If you cannot convene it, then I'll be compelled to ask Prime Minister Imran Khan to call a meeting of the Islamic countries that are ready to stand with us on the issue of Kashmir...," he had threatened on Ary news channel.

The OIC, the biggest bloc of Islamic countries in the world, has repeatedly declined Islamabad's several requests to hold a meeting on Indian Kashmir -- a region which Pakistan Army attempted to invade four times in the last seven decades and where it has been waging a proxy war against India for last three decades.

Since August 2019 when India revoked special status of the Jammu and Kashmir state and brought it directly under the control of the Central government by bifurcating it into two Union Territories, the Imran Khan government has been seeking support of the 57-member OIC over the issue in Pakistan's favour.

One of the major reasons for OIC's lack of support for Pakistan has been Riyadh's displeasure with Islamabad's proximity with Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan who nurtures the ambition of replacing Saudi Arabia as leader of all the Sunni Islamic countries.

https://www.news18.com/news/world/s...eatens-to-split-oic-over-kashmir-2769435.html

Great

 

[Itachi]

OIC has not raised any bar, it has mostly lowered it, hence why it is universally criticised by rank and file Muslims. Why do you think you are getting countries like Pakistan threatening to break away and form their own unions?

The establishment of OIC raised the bar automatically. Whether they could stand up to the standard they set, that's a different subject altogether. Setting a bar and not being able to perform on that standard are two different aspect.

How they form and what standards they implement is not really my field of expertise, but I am sure that would be the same for atheist Hindus who want to impose what they think should be Islamic principles.

This is where hypocrisy lies. A muslims could point out the "sufferings" of an another muslim but if a non muslim points out the same on the basis of same principles, it is refered to as "Non muslims imposing what should be Islamic principles"

News flash.... Those muslim entities themselves set it. Only difference is, using those criteria they get so much comfortable in criticizing others that they forgot that those same criteria could be applied to themselves as well where they will be equally guilty.

Even this wouldn't have been an issue. But when you try to meddle in the internal politics of another institution, you will get some repercussion and these type of hypocrisy/double standard will be reflected back to you.

I still remember the Al Jazeera interview of IK and how he was speechless when the host asked about china.....

 

[Itachi]

Great

Not sure a pakitani should be happy. You are making enemies for some place that isn't even inside pakistan. Seems going too far for nothing while losing the trust of friends.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Not sure a pakitani should be happy. You are making enemies for some place that isn't even inside pakistan. Seems going too far for nothing while losing the trust of friends.

Pakistan needs good relations with Saudis as millions of Pakistanis work there. But taking loans from them is not a good idea. This has been going on for 70 years, take loans promise to do economic reforms, refuse to do the economic reforms, and then take loans again.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, so the cost of these loans is too much to bear.

 

[Itachi]

Pakistan needs good relations with Saudis as millions of Pakistanis work there. But taking loans from them is not a good idea. This has been going on for 70 years, take loans promise to do economic reforms, refuse to do the economic reforms, and then take loans again.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, so the cost of these loans is too much to bear.

Won't the interest will be less compared to taking loans from other countries considering Pakistan and Saudi have good relations for decades?

Before China I believe Saudi did invest in Pakistan heavily?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Won't the interest will be less compared to taking loans from other countries considering Pakistan and Saudi have good relations for decades?

Before China I believe Saudi did invest in Pakistan heavily?

Yes but its not free. These low cost loans have a political cost. When the Saudi's and gulf Arab's enemy was Israel, that was not a problem for Pakistan to be against Israel. Very easy price to pay. Most Pakistanis dont like that country. However now the Gulf Arabs enemy is Iran.

About 20 to 25% of Pakistan is Shia.

Baloch and Pashtun are Iranic groups.

Alot of Pakistanis like Iran, because of the Persian influence on Muslims of the subcontinent.


So Pakistan cant afford to be part of an anti Iran faction, which is the price that has to be paid to get these free loans.

So its best not to take them from the Arabs.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The establishment of OIC raised the bar automatically. Whether they could stand up to the standard they set, that's a different subject altogether. Setting a bar and not being able to perform on that standard are two different aspect.





This is where hypocrisy lies. A muslims could point out the "sufferings" of an another muslim but if a non muslim points out the same on the basis of same principles, it is refered to as "Non muslims imposing what should be Islamic principles"

News flash.... Those muslim entities themselves set it. Only difference is, using those criteria they get so much comfortable in criticizing others that they forgot that those same criteria could be applied to themselves as well where they will be equally guilty.

Even this wouldn't have been an issue. But when you try to meddle in the internal politics of another institution, you will get some repercussion and these type of hypocrisy/double standard will be reflected back to you.

I still remember the Al Jazeera interview of IK and how he was speechless when the host asked about china.....

You are talking about Muslim countries as if they are one entity rather than a bunch of different countries that have a common connection based somewhat loosely on religion. If you are suggesting they should behave more like some Ottoman caliphate rather than individual and separate Muslim states, well perhaps you are right, but for that they would need to share the same ideologies and as an example I can give you Saudi Arabia and Iran as two who definitely don't.

 

[Napa]

The same could have been said for Europe.

Because Europeans have fought each other constantly, doesn't mean the Muslim countries are going to overcome their history of fighting each other and come together to take some actions that will produce real results that Pakistan desires on Kashmir.

With the economic and political focus shifting toward the east (esp China) their will be rising tensions and potential conflicts with the western (established) powers. Nations with mutual interests will start to collide and cooperate to better project their interests.

China, Russia, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan and others will be facing of against US, EU, Saudi Arab/UAE, India, Israel and others.

World is changing fast.

This is all speculation. The strongest countries on both sides of your divide are all in demographic decline. They will all be considerably weakened in a hundred years. If the stupid Democrats get over their Russia hysteria, then US and Russia can form a partnership that benefits both.

 

[offstump]

It’s time for Pak to pivot away from the Saudis.. it’s caused more harm than good.
Imagine a region with a strong Pakistan/Iran; secure energy supply from your neighbour, strong relations with Turkey. It’s all much better than the Saudis who have treated us like a client state.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

It’s time for Pak to pivot away from the Saudis.. it’s caused more harm than good.
Imagine a region with a strong Pakistan/Iran; secure energy supply from your neighbour, strong relations with Turkey. It’s all much better than the Saudis who have treated us like a client state.

Nothing to stop Pakistan pivoting away from the Saudis, but to do that they will have to return the monies which have been loaned/gifted to Pakistan. Perhaps they can work out a more favourable deal with other countries which will cover the losses.