Persistent (Marxian) dilemma

Pak-Saudi relations: History repeating itself

Sometimes history is made to repeat itself. Once again Saudi royal and business elite is red-carpeted across Islamabad – a loud international and domestic signal – just when Pakistan finds itself at an existential crossroads. So it was in the Soviet war days, when Riyadh matched CIA funding dollar-for-dollar (later doubling it), and the Salafi-Wahabi madressa phenomenon saved the jihad but later mutated to bring much sectarian and security tragedy to Pakistan. The religious right has since cemented itself at centre stage, and little, if anything, remains of the Pakistan from before Zia’s proxy jihad novelty. And in going back to the Saudi embrace – with its implications home and away – when it must finally and forcefully chose between a religiously influenced or secular personality for the state, Pakistan now seems oscillating from tragedy to farce in Marx’s interpretation of history repeating itself.

The signals are important. Within no time Islamabad reversed its three-year position on Syria. And now when it echoes Saudi calls for regime change in Damascus, Islamabad positions itself alongside al Qaeda affiliates, heavily Wahabi funded, fighting for the fall of President Bashar al Assad’s regime there. How that suits a country itself in the middle of a savage war with al Qaeda and Taliban, and how it is being seen internationally, will win Pakistan few points anywhere. Anywhere except Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council. Significantly, this comes when the Saudi position and its obsession with Islamic extremism has drawn criticism even from Washington. America’s shale oil revolution has finally rid it of Gulf oil compulsions, and the Obama administration has all but reversed course and come down very hard on Riyadh for its funding and arming of terrorist groups in Syria.

Iran is, obviously, upset. Remember this is a country that weighs its positions very carefully. It did not flinch in the years of sanctions against its nuclear programme, constantly manoeuvring to keep its economy from collapsing. And it did not compromise the anti-Israel resistance (Iran-Syria-Hezbollah) even when the might of the US, EU, GCC, Turkey, and Islamic militants from 40 countries came down on it. So when Iran’s interior minister talks of a cross border raid to reclaim their border guards, it is an acknowledgement that the old arrangement no longer holds in a world where new realities and alliances are emerging. The ‘N’ leaguers will, no doubt, talk of trade and arms deals and investment bonuses to offset diplomatic and security hindrances. But we have seen before how the greater good has allowed indulgences in the great game, and should know by now which paths not to take. So far, the government’s response to the most serious crises has betrayed a detachment from reality. Little surprise, then, that in seeking alliances too it chooses a side that is fast losing global relevance.