Pakistan and South-Central Asia

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan
This Sticky thread is for the containing of all discussion relating to Pakistan and its geo-politics in its neighborhood from a Pakistani point of view. It will include news clippings and discussions on Pakistan's Foreign, Social and economic relations. What Pakistan should do, What Pakistan can do and What Pakistan is doing, shall be the topics we shall indulge in.

On a side note, i may even move/copy news pieces and discussions that i feel are integral for record and i shall form it as an archive of things.
 

Kaptaan

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,734
Reactions
4,073
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Pakistan
Next time people compare Pakistan with India keep this in mind. India has same population [nearly 1.4 billion] as combined -

  • USA
  • Canada
  • Mexico
  • Europe of 44 countries
  • Russia
  • Japan

This is the entire population of the upper Northern Hemisphere and then some.

wG3SBPE.png



Or that India is made of 28 states and just one of them - Utter Pradesh has the same population as all of Pakistan. The population disparity is vast at nearly 7 Indians for every Pakistani. We have a modern day struggle between the giant Indian Goliath and small David.

oH9pdP2.png
 

VCheng

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
488
Reactions
537
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Pakistan
On a side note, i may even move/copy news pieces and discussions that i feel are integral for record and i shall form it as an archive of things.

A question, if I may: Must Pakistan define itself in terms of India, or does it have its own identity?
 

Kaptaan

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,734
Reactions
4,073
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Pakistan
A question, if I may: Must Pakistan define itself in terms of India, or does it have its own identity?
No, it should define by Pitcairn Islands, French Polynesia or perhaps Cook islands in the Pacific which are antipodes of Pakistan? Would that suit your irritability better?

And there was no mention of identity. Instead I was referancing Pakistan to it's giant NEIGHBOUR. It's quite common to use regional referancing. UK will always use Germany, France as referance points. It's logical.
 

VCheng

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
488
Reactions
537
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Pakistan
No, it should define by Pitcairn Islands, French Polynesia or perhaps Cook islands in the Pacific which are antipodes of Pakistan? Would that suit your irritability better?

And there was no mention of identity. Instead I was referancing Pakistan to it's giant NEIGHBOUR. It's quite common to use regional referancing. UK will always use Germany, France as referance points. It's logical.

So is Pakistan any more than just an anti-India?
 

VCheng

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
488
Reactions
537
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Pakistan
Yes, in equal measure to India defined as just anti-Pakistan.

Not really. India (and Indian diaspora) have a very different outlook that they project quite successfully.
 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan

Joe Biden, South Asia and Pak-US ties​

Biden knows the region and the stakes of good relations with Pakistan well

The previous two columns on the foreign policy of the Joe Biden-Kamala Devi team were a precursor to the subject of this opinion piece i.e. the United States’ policy in South Asia with special focus on Pak-US ties.

While discussing the entire gambit of Pak-US relations, three factors external to the scope of this write-up would continue to cast shadow, as discussed last week. First being the Biden administration’s future ties with China as our principal in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC); its approach towards resuscitating the Iran nuclear deal (2015); and its outlook towards UAE-Saudi Arabia combine, as Pakistan’s discreet interlocutors in Washington.

Democrats traditionally view China as a ‘competitor’ and not as an adversary. Experts hope Biden taking a more conciliatory approach towards China and America to end its criticism of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)/CPEC, that the Trump administration considered a predatory trap for developing countries on China’s periphery. This will reduce pressure on Pakistan. Pakistan will also benefit from the likely US-China cooperation to control the coronavirus pandemic. However, if the trade war persists, and in the event that Pakistan has to pick sides, we need to meander a steady course in keeping with our selfish national interests.

As far as South Asia is concerned. As member and then twice chairman of the influential Foreign Relations Committee (1997-2003), Biden knows the region and the stakes of good relations with Pakistan well. An irate Biden had bluntly told president Hamid Karzai that Pakistan was 50 times more important to the US regional interests, when Karzai tried lecturing him.

Democrats are traditionally strong advocates of democracy, human rights and freedom of expression, hence these issues would remain on the forefront of his presidency. His vice-president-elect Kamala Harris had spoken against the Modi government’s anti-Muslim policies and human rights violations in Kashmir. So with the State Department back in the saddle, some heat on India for the Kashmir situation is expected. But no significant deviation of the US South Asia policy is expected. For Pakistan, it is likely to be more of the same.

This October, the US and India signed the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA), which grants India real-time access to American geospatial intelligence. This improves accuracy of Indian missiles, armed drones and automated systems, enhancing America’s continued pro-India articulation. The Biden administration would endure supporting India against China.

The president-elect as part of a three-senator delegation visited Pakistan to observe the 2008 parliamentary elections; and being satisfied called for an expanded US economic aid package for Pakistan. The government of Pakistan awarded then senators Joe Biden and Lugar the Hilal-i-Pakistan (Crescent of Pakistan) for their consistent support to Pakistan, being the co-authors of the Kerry-Lugar Bill (2009); a bipartisan US aid plan to provide $1.5 billion yearly in non-military aid to support Pakistan’s economic development.

The US incursion in Abbottabad to kill Osama bin Laden in 2011 also happened during the Biden vice-presidency. President Obama’s latest memoir, A Promised Land (2020), discusses some interesting details of the incident.

During Imran Khan’s US visit in 2019, intermediaries like Senator Lindsay Graham played a key role in arranging his meetings with Trump. President-elect Biden is likely to follow the traditional reliance on the State Department and Pentagon. This would usher in a degree of certainty and stability in Pak-US ties that mercurial tweets by Trump had evaded.

PM Imran enunciated the tone with Team Biden in his congratulatory tweet… “Congratulations @JoeBiden & @KamalaHarris. Look forward to President-Elect Biden’s Global Summit on Democracy & working with him to end illegal tax havens & stealth of the nation’s wealth by corrupt leaders. We will also continue to work with the US for peace in Afghanistan & the region.”

Joe Biden has supported and opposed US military interventions abroad. He backs narrow objectives in force employment and remains skeptical about US ability to reshape foreign societies. Opposing unilateral efforts, he prefers working through diplomacy, alliances and global institutions. During interventions, he has advocated a “counterterrorism plus” strategy; entailing fighting terrorists abroad using small special force teams alongside aggressive air power, rather than large troop-deployments.

Mr Biden was overruled by President Obama in 2009 on Afghanistan, when he advocated deploying a minimal force, mainly for counterterrorism, opposing a ‘surge’, thinking the Afghan war was politically unsustainable. Biden might move towards that goal by converting the in-country US military presence after whatever is left in January 21, when 2,000 troops pull out of Afghanistan as ordered last week by Trump. The residual contingent is likely to comprise a joint command center and five targeting teams to keep Al Qaeda and the Islamic State in check. Biden too supports a light US military footprint of up to 2,000 troops. NATO member nations meanwhile want an earlier reversion of 7,000 or so NATO/allied troops still in Afghanistan.

Full US compliance of the US-Taliban peace deal remains another area to be watched. The Taliban have emphasised that the deal implementation remains “the most reasonable and effective tool” to end the conflict. Biden will continue to follow the Obama administration’s approach of asking Pakistan to “do more”. However, the new administration’s touted emphasis on pressing Pakistan to nudge the Taliban towards a ceasefire and human rights protection etc, irrespective of an orderly withdrawal, might not yield. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad may keep his job.

US intelligence and logistic collaboration with the future Taliban regime is also likely. Biden would be more amenable to keep the future Afghan government on life support irrespective of the reparation for war — that the Taliban may demand — or otherwise. For which, Australia has set the tone last week by offering apology for the crimes of its Special Air Service (SAS) teams against Afghan civilians.

Pakistan may see marginal US military or economic aid given our Afghanistan relevance; however, there seems no likelihood of full-scale resumption of the coalition support fund (CSF) etc. Pakistan on its part has to bring ‘positive relevance’ to the bilateral ties, frozen in security and Afghan peace process. Diversifying ties would be challenging.

Pakistan from its standpoint would continue to press Washington about India’s unhelpful role in Afghanistan. The US would revert to institutional control of Pakistan through economic coercion, arms twisting and proxies like elite or ashhrafiyya, as needed.

In sum, under Biden, given his past amity, there is a likelihood of marginal improvement of Pak-US relations, which essentially would continue to be transactional and issue-specific but stable. Septuagenarians have never brought revolutions, yet Biden promises his will not be a third Obama presidency.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 26th, 2020.

 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan

India-US strategic ties weakened deterrence stability: experts

ISLAMABAD: Acquisition of advanced military and nuclear capabilities by India through its strategic cooperation with the United States weakened deterrence stability in the subcontinent.

This was the gist of an online discussion hosted by the Center for International Strategic Studies (CISS) on ‘Two decades of Indo-US strategic partnership: impact on strategic stability in South Asia.’ The event was organised to hear Pakistani and Indian perspectives on India’s space, missile and nuclear programme and see how India benefited from the foundational agreements it signed with the US.

CISS Executive Director retired Ambassador Ali Sarwar Naqvi said the Indo-US strategic partnership started with the US think-tank community’s recommendation in 1992 for the then incoming Clinton administration to chart a new South Asia strategy in which India had a prominent role. Indian diaspora, he added, played an important role in shaping the US strategic thinking about India as a net security provider in the Asia-Pacific and promoting New Delhi as a counterweight to China.

“This strategic thinking underpinned all defence agreements signed over the course of two decades under the Indo-US strategic partnership, the prominent of which are the four American foundational agreements of General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) signed in 2002, Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) signed in 2016, Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA) of 2018 and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA) concluded in 2020,” he added.

Senior fellow at CISS Dr Naeem Salik said India’s space programme achieved a notable success only in the late 1980s when the country decided to combine the space and nuclear programme as complementary binaries.

India’s advanced space technology was demonstrated on March 27, 2019, when the country conducted its first anti-satellite (ASAT) test, an exclusive military capability formerly possessed by the US, Russia and China only.

He talked about how India’s signing of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) had emboldened New Delhi to produce advanced versions of missile categories, including the supersonic missile systems and potential hypersonic capabilities.

Prof Rajesh Rajagopalan from India’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, while offering an Indian perspective on India’s missile and nuclear programmes, said South Asian strategic stability was a function of both behaviour and capability of states in the region.

Dr Mansoor Ahmed, another senior fellow at CISS, spoke about how India’s strategic programme had transformed in nuclear latent capabilities in the last two decades.

This includes its civil nuclear energy programme (comprising heavy waterpower reactors) outside safeguards and the nuclear fuel cycle.

More specifically, he saw India’s fissile material production capabilities, comprising uranium enrichment and fuel reprocessing facilities, as having exponentially expanded in terms of their size and efficiency.

Equally worrisome, in his view, is India’s stockpile of a huge strategic reserve of high-quality reactor-grade plutonium which is weapon-usable and far exceeds the fueling requirements for the potential breeder programme.

He also warned that India’s nuclear buildup coupled with its rapidly growing missile and space programme was catalysing transformation in Indian force posture and doctrinal thinking, which could generate instability and undermine deterrence stability in South Asia.

Air University dean Dr Adil Sultan expressed the concern that the foundational agreements such as the BECA have a specific bearing on Pakistan as they will improve Indian military’s situational awareness and preparedness for planning precision strikes against Pakistan.

Published in Dawn, November 29th, 2020

 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan

Absence of backchannel diplomacy: UK think-tank sees further heightening of Pak-India tensions​


LONDON: The International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) has said that there is a wide scope for misunderstanding and misperceptions between India and Pakistan in the absence of an official dialogue and backchannel diplomacy.

In it’s latest report on South Asia addressing issues in specific in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) and Afghanistan, the IISS has said that any attack from either side would raise the risk of the conflict escalating into a new crisis and the situation “remained strained, and Kashmir a potential flashpoint” towards the end of 2020.

The report said that India clamped down on every kind of communication and activity after revoking the status of occupied Kashmir but restored some of the services and released Kashmiri leaders “amid heightened international media criticism.”

The report said: “The Indian government was keen to showcase a return to near normality in the region, including carefully scripted visits for groups of Delhi-based foreign envoys. “But stringent laws remained in place prohibiting protests and allowing for preventive arrests and detention for up to two years without trial.

“Some political activists remained in detention (even though most had been released by June), curbs on media reporting continued and slow 2G internet speeds were the norm. Local political parties (other than the BJP) remained inactive.”

The London-based think tank said that in Narendra Modi’s first term, he ignored Bharatiya Janata Party’s agenda on gobbling Kashmir, focused on development of India and initiated the resumption of dialogue with

Pakistan during Nawaz Sharif’s government but “with Modi’s landslide general-election victory in 2019, the appointment of a powerful new home minister and heightened tensions with Pakistan under Prime Minister Imran Khan, the second Modi government sensed an opportunity to deliver early on its electoral pledge on Kashmir” by revoking articles 370 and 35A. This move attracted strong criticism from Pakistan.

The IISS said that India’s position that there can be no dialogue with Pakistan on Kashmir was problematic as it increased risks of continuity of tensions leading to a bigger conflict. In Afghanistan, the report said that Pakistan has repeatedly assured the US of its cooperation in the peace process and of its willingness to use its influence over the Taliban in a positive manner.

The report said that “some US and Afghan officials remained sceptical of Pakistan’s short and long term intentions” but in a visible attempt to show Pakistan’s support for the Afghan peace process Pakistan’s powerful Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa visited Afghanistan on June 9 for meetings with Afghan leaders, during which both sides reiterated Pakistan’s support for the process.

The IISS report said that Pakistan was not the only neighbour to retain an active interest in Afghanistan. The report claimed that despite the economic hardship and international political and financial pressures it faces, Iran has expanded its regional influence by establishing ties with the Taliban and China, India and Russia are invested in Afghanistan and their role is of paramount importance for the success of the Afghan peace process.

Rahul Roy-Chaudhury, the head of South Asia at the IISS, commented: “South Asia’s geo-politics in 2021 will be shaped by US president-elect Biden’s relative neglect of South Asia (due to domestic COVID and economic priorities and his foreign policy focus on China); prospective political transition in Afghanistan marked by greater influence by Pakistan and lesser Indian influence; a further heightening of India-Pakistan tensions, with potential for escalation; continuing Sino-Indian tensions resulting in the emergence of an unprecedented ‘two-front’ challenge for India with both China and Pakistan. In effect, in 2021, South Asia is likely to see the resumption of ‘hard power’ geo-politics amidst dramatically weakened economies due to COVID.”

 

Jackdaws

Experienced member
Messages
2,759
Reactions
1 1,583
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
One thing Pakistan must surely do in South Asia is to issue a formal apology for the genocide of erstwhile East Pakistanis (now Bangladeshis) in one of the worst pogroms since the genocide during WW2.
 

Jackdaws

Experienced member
Messages
2,759
Reactions
1 1,583
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India

Absence of backchannel diplomacy: UK think-tank sees further heightening of Pak-India tensions​


LONDON: The International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) has said that there is a wide scope for misunderstanding and misperceptions between India and Pakistan in the absence of an official dialogue and backchannel diplomacy.

In it’s latest report on South Asia addressing issues in specific in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) and Afghanistan, the IISS has said that any attack from either side would raise the risk of the conflict escalating into a new crisis and the situation “remained strained, and Kashmir a potential flashpoint” towards the end of 2020.

The report said that India clamped down on every kind of communication and activity after revoking the status of occupied Kashmir but restored some of the services and released Kashmiri leaders “amid heightened international media criticism.”

The report said: “The Indian government was keen to showcase a return to near normality in the region, including carefully scripted visits for groups of Delhi-based foreign envoys. “But stringent laws remained in place prohibiting protests and allowing for preventive arrests and detention for up to two years without trial.

“Some political activists remained in detention (even though most had been released by June), curbs on media reporting continued and slow 2G internet speeds were the norm. Local political parties (other than the BJP) remained inactive.”

The London-based think tank said that in Narendra Modi’s first term, he ignored Bharatiya Janata Party’s agenda on gobbling Kashmir, focused on development of India and initiated the resumption of dialogue with

Pakistan during Nawaz Sharif’s government but “with Modi’s landslide general-election victory in 2019, the appointment of a powerful new home minister and heightened tensions with Pakistan under Prime Minister Imran Khan, the second Modi government sensed an opportunity to deliver early on its electoral pledge on Kashmir” by revoking articles 370 and 35A. This move attracted strong criticism from Pakistan.

The IISS said that India’s position that there can be no dialogue with Pakistan on Kashmir was problematic as it increased risks of continuity of tensions leading to a bigger conflict. In Afghanistan, the report said that Pakistan has repeatedly assured the US of its cooperation in the peace process and of its willingness to use its influence over the Taliban in a positive manner.

The report said that “some US and Afghan officials remained sceptical of Pakistan’s short and long term intentions” but in a visible attempt to show Pakistan’s support for the Afghan peace process Pakistan’s powerful Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa visited Afghanistan on June 9 for meetings with Afghan leaders, during which both sides reiterated Pakistan’s support for the process.

The IISS report said that Pakistan was not the only neighbour to retain an active interest in Afghanistan. The report claimed that despite the economic hardship and international political and financial pressures it faces, Iran has expanded its regional influence by establishing ties with the Taliban and China, India and Russia are invested in Afghanistan and their role is of paramount importance for the success of the Afghan peace process.

Rahul Roy-Chaudhury, the head of South Asia at the IISS, commented: “South Asia’s geo-politics in 2021 will be shaped by US president-elect Biden’s relative neglect of South Asia (due to domestic COVID and economic priorities and his foreign policy focus on China); prospective political transition in Afghanistan marked by greater influence by Pakistan and lesser Indian influence; a further heightening of India-Pakistan tensions, with potential for escalation; continuing Sino-Indian tensions resulting in the emergence of an unprecedented ‘two-front’ challenge for India with both China and Pakistan. In effect, in 2021, South Asia is likely to see the resumption of ‘hard power’ geo-politics amidst dramatically weakened economies due to COVID.”

I reckon the downfall of Modi will be his duffer trigger happy Home Minister Amit Shah. Modi is by and large illiterate and doesn't think too much. Almost all the acts drawing international criticism are the brainchild of Amit Shah.
 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan

Turkmenistan committed to promoting socio-economic development of Afghanistan​

Turkmenistan is committed to promoting the socio-economic development of Afghanistan, Trend reports with reference to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan.

Turkmenistan's commitment is shown in infrastructure projects initiated by Turkmenistan, including the construction of social facilities on the territory of Afghanistan on a gratuitous basis.

The construction of the TAPI gas pipeline, electric power and communication lines along the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan route, as well as railway lines connecting Turkmenistan with Afghanistan and other countries in the region is important for the Afghan economy.

The representatives of Turkmenistan and Afghanistan have signed a Memorandum of Understanding concerning Land Acquisition for the Afghan portion of the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project.

The Turkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan–India Pipeline (TAPI), also known as Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline, is a natural gas pipeline being developed by the Galkynysh – TAPI Pipeline Company Limited with the participation of the Asian Development Bank.

The pipeline will transport natural gas from the Galkynysh Gas Field in Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan and then to India. Construction on the project started in Turkmenistan on 13 December 2015.

The length of the Turkmen section of the TAPI pipeline, the construction of which was launched in December 2015, will be 205 kilometers (the main operations are carried out on the 120th kilometer). The pipeline will pass through the Afghan cities of Herat and Kandahar (816 kilometers), through the cities of Quetta and Multan across Pakistani territory (819 kilometers), and reach the city of Fazilka in India.

The pipeline's design capacity is planned to be 33 billion cubic meters of gas per year, and the project's cost - about $8 billion.

 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan

Will Joe Biden Push Iran and Pakistan Closer Together?​

Political ties between Iran and Pakistan are warm, but their relationship has grossly underperformed in the economic and security domains.

Shortly after Joe Biden’s win in the U.S. presidential election, Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif traveled to Islamabad for two days of talks. Political ties between Iran and Pakistan are warm, but their relationship has grossly underperformed in the economic and security domains.

That is partly owing to Donald Trump, who withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), in 2018 and reimposed draconian sanctions, while adding a raft of new penalties relating to terrorism and human rights. But Trump will soon be gone, and his replacement, Joe Biden, has vowed to re-enter the JCPOA.


Zarif and his Pakistani counterpart discussed ways to expand trade and economic cooperation. In theory, sanctions relief resulting from a revived JCPOA could help to realize their goals. But there is reason to doubt that Iran-Pakistan relations will significantly improve during Biden’s presidency.

First of all, it is far from guaranteed that Biden will be able to re-join the JCPOA. The current Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, is a political moderate who negotiated the Iran deal from 2013-15 but is due to leave office next year. Iran’s reformers have been losing popularity, and it is likely Rouhani will be replaced by an anti-American hardliner.
Moreover, the Iran deal is now quite unpopular with Iranians, who have not seen the sort of economic benefits that they expected. And trust in the United States is low, given that Trump abrogated the JCPOA unilaterally, even though Iran was complying with its terms, and proceeded to cripple the Iranian economy amid an escalating pandemic.

There is also the risk that Trump will pile on more pressure and provoke retaliation from Iran before he leaves office. He reportedly considered a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities soon after the election. Such tactics could trigger a military confrontation, greatly complicating a U.S. return to the JCPOA.

Added to that, Trump is apparently planning a “flood” of lame-duck sanctions before January. Iran might respond by dialing up its nuclear activities in further violation of the JCPOA. Tehran started breaching the agreement in 2019 when the United States revoked oil waivers. While those steps are currently reversible, continued infringements could ruin the deal.

Even if the JCPOA does survive, resuscitating it will be a fraught and drawn-out process. Biden has vowed to pursue a follow-on agreement that addresses Iran’s ballistic missile program, use of regional proxies (such as Hezbollah), and sunsets in the original deal which see limitations on Iranian nuclear activity expire.

Any attempt to rein in Iran’s defensive capabilities by constraining its missile program or use of proxies, while addressing nuclear sunsets, may well be rejected by Tehran. Iran might also demand compensation from the United States for re-imposing sanctions, which would likely be a non-starter in Washington.


Then there is the tricky issue of the United States’ regional partners, principally Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, who were very uncomfortable with the initial nuclear deal and would surely be displeased with an attempt to revive it. Added to that, Iran will not be a priority for the Biden administration as it tries to grapple with the coronavirus health and economic crises.

On the plus side, the Democratic Party is more united behind the JCPOA than it was in 2015. Almost all of the party’s presidential candidates pledged to return to the deal. However, the Senate will likely remain in Republican hands, potentially throwing congressional obstacles in Biden’s way.
To help the next president navigate through this minefield, analysts have proposed a sequenced approach to resuscitating the agreement. The United States and Iran would gradually return to compliance with the JCPOA by 2021, when Rouhani leaves office. Then they could proceed to broader talks about missiles and regional security.

But restoring the JCPOA is no panacea. The deal only lifts ‘secondary sanctions’ that prohibit third parties from doing business with Iran. It does not remove ‘primary sanctions,’ which apply to American companies but also affect non-U.S. entities by restricting their ability to trade in dollars.


This helps explain why commerce between Iran and Pakistan remained low even after the nuclear deal was implemented. In 2015 the two countries pledged to boost trade to $5 billion by 2021, but they never got close to achieving that goal. If history is any guide, Pakistan would only see meager economic benefits from JCPOA sanctions relief.

Of course, there are other factors constraining trade, including high tariff barriers in Iran and woefully inadequate transport connectivity between the two countries. Moreover, years of economic mismanagement have left Pakistan with a chronic trade deficit. Efforts to boost exports have been further hampered by the coronavirus economic slump.


Another obstacle may come from Iran’s nemesis, Saudi Arabia, which has close economic and security ties with Pakistan and exerts considerable influence there. Saudi pressure apparently blocked the progress of a long-delayed and now-defunct gas pipeline between Pakistan and Iran. While Saudi-Pakistan ties are waning, somewhat, they remain strong.

Worse still, for Islamabad, its arch-enemy India would likely benefit more from a revival of the JCPOA than Pakistan would. Before Trump withdrew from the deal, India imported significant amounts of oil from Iran and also moved forward with gas and infrastructure deals, such as the Chabahar port project. Those deals have stalled but might be revamped.


Closer ties between India and Iran could also mitigate Tehran’s support for the Kashmir cause. In recent years, the Iranian supreme leader and other officials have been more supportive of Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir. But a renewal of Indian trade and investment may force Iran to moderate its tone.

The read-outs from Zarif’s meeting in Islamabad were revealing for what they did not mention. While the Pakistani statement referred to Kashmir, there was no explicit reference in the Iranian text. In previous bilateral visits, the two sides pledged to connect Chabahar with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). But there was no talk of CPEC this time.


With a revival of the JCPOA on the horizon, Iran will not want to antagonize Delhi by courting its main strategic rivals in Beijing and Islamabad. Tehran must tread carefully, as it is currently negotiating a strategic partnership with China at the same time as Chinese and Indian troops are locked in a protracted stand-off on the disputed Himalayan border.

A restoration of the JCPOA could actually inflame tensions between Pakistan and Iran. If India capitalizes on sanctions relief to re-enter the Iranian market and improve its political relations with Tehran, we may see a resurgence of old Pakistani fears that India is using Iran as a launch-pad for intelligence operations inside Pakistan.


Those fears were seemingly confirmed in 2016 when alleged spy Kulbhushan Jadhav was arrested in Pakistan after entering the country via Iran. And, since then, Pakistani concerns about Indian covert operations have only increased. The government recently issued a dossier detailing Delhi’s apparent links to various terrorist groups.

In this feverish environment, sparks could fly on the Iran-Pakistan border. Both countries have long accused the other of harboring militant groups. Terror attacks have sometimes led to cross-border shelling and could result in further violence if Islamabad sees an Indian hand in Iran-based terrorist activity.

Afghanistan is another possible flashpoint. The two countries were on opposing sides in the 1990s, when Pakistan backed the Afghan Taliban and Tehran supported their adversaries, the Northern Alliance. Since then, Iran has cultivated closer ties to the Taliban, while cooperating with Pakistan on the peace process.

But they are not entirely on the same page. Iran is more eager than Pakistan to see a broad, inclusive government in Kabul that is not monopolized by the Taliban. Indeed, Tehran opposed the peace settlement signed in Doha in February 2020 as it excluded the Afghan government.

However, Pakistan and Iran might collaborate more closely if Biden pursues a regional security dialogue as part of his follow-on agreement to the JCPOA. Because Islamabad has good political relations with both Tehran and Riyadh, it has helped mediate between the two rivals to defuse regional crises in recent years and could do so again.

But, while the Biden era might see a modest improvement in Iran-Pakistan ties, major progress is unlikely.

Rupert Stone is a freelance journalist working on issues related to South Asia and the Middle East. He has written for various publications, including Newsweek, VICE News, Al Jazeera, and The Independent.

 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan

Iqbal's Teachings Bridge Between Pakistan, Iran: Raza Nazri​

Iranian Consulate General Muhammad Raza Nazri on Tuesday said that the teachings of Allama Iqbal were like a bridge between Pakistan and Iran and both the neighbors shared a great history of helping each other​

LAHORE, (APP - UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 24th Nov, 2020 ) :Iranian Consulate General Muhammad Raza Nazri on Tuesday said that the teachings of Allama Iqbal were like a bridge between Pakistan and Iran and both the neighbors shared a great history of helping each other.

He was addressing a seminar organized by Punjab University on "Allama Iqbal and relations between Pakistan and Iran" at Al Raazi Hall here.

PU Vice Chancellor Prof Niaz Ahmad, Pro Vice Chancellor Prof Dr. Muhammad Saleem Mazhar, DG Khana-e-Farhang Ali Akber Razai Fard, faculty members and students participated in the event.

Mr Raza Nazri said that the teachings of Allama Iqbal had played important role in strengthening the relations between the both countries. He said that Iqbal's teachings had left strong effects on the world.

He said that Iqbal was popular at every city, village and town of Iran, adding that Iqbal was a great preacher of unity of the Muslims and in the light of his guidance, the Muslim Ummah should unite themselves.



On the occasion, PU VC Prof Niaz Ahmed said that Pakistan and Iran were like a family. He said that the Muslim world must integrate their resources and utilize them for the betterment of humanity.

He said that the Muslims must review the international scenario and strengthen relations with each other. He said that both the countries would have to solve their problems themselves as nobody from outside would solve their problems.

He said, "Although the Muslims are facing a lot of challenges but we also have a lot of resources to cope with these challenges." He said the PU was also establishing the Regional Integration Centre with such aims and objectives.


 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan

What’s behind the growing Azerbaijan-Pakistan-Turkey friendship?​


All three Muslim countries continue to back each other on matters of national interest.​

When a country fights a war for its territorial integrity, it counts on every form of support it can get - especially military and diplomatic.

Last year’s conflict in the South Caucasus between Armenia and Azerbaijan put a spotlight on Baku’s close relations with Pakistan and Turkey.

Turkish-made drones helped Azerbaijan push out Armenian forces from the Nagorno-Karabakh region, which was at the center of the military escalation.

Simultaneously, Pakistan openly backed Azerbaijan’s position to defend a region recognised internationally as part its territory.

“Lending a voice of support in a regional conflict in normal times is one thing. But when a country is actually at war then who stands with it attains a much greater importance - even if it's just diplomatic backing,” said Khalid Rahman, the head of Institute of Policy Studies, an Islamabad-based think tank.

Azerbaijan, Pakistan and Turkey have continuously backed each other on various international forums on national interest matters such as Kashmir, Cyprus and Nagorno-Karabakh, he said.

This was evident in this week’s meeting between their foreign ministers in Islamabad. A joint declaration expressed concern over Indian attempts to “change the demographic structure of Jammu and Kashmir” and called for resolving the “Cyprus issue.”

Since the 1970s, the island of Cyprus has been divided into Greek Cyprus and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Successive Pakistani governments have backed Anakra’s position on the issue.

Azerbaijan, a Shia Muslim and Turkic-speaking country, has had close ties with Pakistan and Turkey since it became an independent state after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Pakistan was second after Turkey to recognise Azerbaijan as an independent country in the early 1990s. At the same time, Pakistan is the only country which does not recognise Armenia - a step it has taken in solidarity with Baku.

Armenia on its part, has pushed back against Pakistan in the past. In 2016 it blocked Islamabad’s attempt to become an observer at the Russia-led Collective Security Treaty Organisation, a post-Soviet military bloc.

“One thing that binds Azerbaijan, Turkey and Pakistan is that all of them are Muslim-majority countries. This was something that the three sides stressed upon in their joint declaration as they assured each other support on their core interests,” said Rahman.

While Ankara has already backed Baku with military gear, Islamabad is also looking to strengthen military ties.

Just earlier this month, the air chiefs of Azerbaijan and Pakistan met and discussed joint pilot training and military exercises.

Pakistan and Turkey already have substantive defence cooperation. Turkey is building MILGEM-class war ships for the Pakistan Navy, and Ankara has bought 52 Mashahk training aircraft from Pakistan.

For Prime Minister Imran Khan’s government, Baku’s support on the Kashmir issue is a much-needed public relations boost.

In May last year, Azerbaijan President
Ilham Aliyev expressed concern at India’s human rights violations in the disputed Kashmir region.

“India has continuously tried to present Kashmir as a non-issue at international forums. But Azerbaijan is one country which has all along stood with Pakistan,” said Rahman.

In 2019, New Delhi unilaterally rolled back the nominal autonomy of Kashmir, the only Muslim-majority state in the country. A part of Kashmir is also controlled by Pakistan.

“Even if Azerbaijan does not have a major say in global politics, its stance on Kashmir is a matter of concern for New Delhi,” said Rahman.

 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,209
Reactions
101 1,891
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan

Pakistan reaffirms support for Afghan peace process

PESHAWAR: Chief of the Army Staff Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa has said that Pakistan would continue supporting the ongoing intra-Afghan dialogue as peace in the neighbouring country means peace in Pakistan.

Talking to officers here at Corps Headquarters on Friday, Gen Bajwa highlighted the dividend of border control measures.

According to an Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) statement, the army chief was given an update at Corps Headquarters on the security situation, border management including fencing, capacity enhancement of Frontier Corps and police in merged districts as a result of transition to stability.

Praising officers and men of Peshawar Corps, the COAS lauded efforts of law enforcement agencies, including FC and police, for bringing stability to the tribal districts.


Hailing sacrifices of local populace for peace and their earnest support to the armed forces in the war against terrorism, Gen Bajwa said that ongoing consolidation efforts shall take hard-earned gains towards enduring peace and stability.

On arrival at Peshawar, the COAS was received by Corps Commander Lt Gen Nauman Mahmood.

Published in Dawn, January 16th, 2021

 
Top Bottom