Latest news with #BaghdadPact
NDTV
26-05-2025
- Business
- NDTV
The Story Of Turkey-Pakistan 'Brotherhood' And Why It Runs Deep
That the Turkey-Pakistan brotherhood runs deep is a fact amply underlined by the Turkish response to the recent military tensions between India and Pakistan. But what makes this alliance so strong is not just diplomacy, but history and tradition. Not only had the waning Ottoman Khilafat (or Caliphate) movement influenced the formation of Pakistan, but the shared tradition of the Hanafi school of Sunni Islam, culturality, and moderate Sufism is such that the two countries often fondly call each other 'Kardeslers', meaning "brothers" in Turkish. The fact that both Turkey and Pakistan were also in the same 'blocs' during the Cold War era - the Baghdad Pact (later Regional Cooperation for Development, and then Economic Cooperation Organisation), the Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO), or even Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC) and D-8 being examples - helped them geopolitically cement their underlying religio-cultural-historical connection. The 1965 And 1971 Wars In 1951, Turkey and Pakistan signed the Treaty of Eternal Friendship. That led to Ankara progressively upping its support to Pakistan in all its wars with India. If the 1965 war saw Turkey supporting Pakistan diplomatically, by 1971, that had turned into material support as well in the form of aircraft assistance. Now, in the latest four-day conflict between the two countries, Turkey is believed to have supplied over 350 drones to Pakistan, along with military advisors and operatives to use the same. The mysterious landing of a Turkish C-130, followed by a visit by Lt Gen Yasar Kadioglu (Chief of Turkish Intelligence) in Pakistan days before Operation Sindoor, also raised suspicions. All this is in addition to the already signed deal to allow for upgrading of Pakistani F-16s at Turkish facilities and supply four stealth corvettes, 30 T129 ATAK helicopters, Kemankes cruise missiles, etc. The Pakistani Prime Minister, Shehbaz Sharif, has personally thanked the Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, for his "strong support and unwavering solidarity" during the Indo-Pak conflict. A Very Close Association For the two countries, their once-rhetorical support for each other has now decidedly turned into a more strategic one. Just as Islamabad readily concurs with Ankara on Northern Cyprus and refuses to recognise the Armenian genocide, Ankara backs Islamabad on the plebiscite line on Kashmir as well as its bid to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group. But this is not a new shift by any measure. In his memoir, In the Line of Fire, former Pakistani President and dictator Pervez Musharaff fondly recounted how he spent his childhood in Ankara and "their [the people's] very visible love and affection for Pakistan and Pakistanis". It's also worth noting how the Indian Embassy road in Ankara has been renamed Cinnah Caddesi, meaning Jinnah Avenue. A Simultaneous Slide It was Turkey's oscillating and contradictory relationship of the 'state' with Islam that had inspired Muhammad Ali Jinnah - and Pervez Musharaff, decades later - to view the country as a model nation that Pakistan must emulate. However, both countries' regressive slide towards puritanism has occurred almost in tandem - in Turkey with the rise of Recep Erdogan, and in Pakistan with the tightening of the vice-like grip of religious narratives. If a more secularist and progressive Kemal Mustapha Atatürk had inspired Pakistani leaders like Jinnah, Ayub, Yahya or even Musharaff, religious hardliners like Erdogan, who rail brazenly at the "West", are the latest poster boys in Pakistan today. Surely, the bitterly contested domestic politics of Turkey, with the Progressives in the opposition and the religious conservatives under Erdogan, has a role to play too. Both benefit much more from batting on behalf of a "brother muslim nation" like Pakistan. The sheer distance and relatively lower commercial angularities with India are not enough for it to prefer Delhi over Islamabad. A Rival To Sheikhdoms Bonhomie with Pakistan is also rooted in Turkey's own ambition to emerge as a leader within the Ummah, or the Islamic World, which is hitherto dominated by Saudi-led Sheikhdoms. Given how India has built stable relations with such Sheikhdoms, the non-Arab majors like Turkey and Pakistan, which were historically treated as "lessers" within the Ummah, are now seeking to stitch a rival "bloc" involving other non-Arab nations, such as Malaysia, Iran and the perennially contrarian but Arab, Qatar. The deliberate exposé of the Khashoggi murder by the Turkish authorities was designed to embarrass the Saudis, underlining the internal rift within the Ummah. Also, with the US, India and Sheikdoms working conjointly on many fronts, Pakistan is left with only Turkey, along with China, to afford it some bragging rights. By standing up for Pakistan, Erdogan wants to project the imperialist grandeur of "Pasha" - the highest ranking official harking back to the Ottoman era - something the Turkish President desperately seeks to revive. The Indian Approach However, for India, Turkey's indulgence of Pakistan has resulted in Delhi asserting its own anti-Turkey view on Northern Cyprus, conducting naval exercises with Turkey's rival, Greece, and even becoming Armenia's largest arms supplier. The Indian reaction is a more recent phenomenon and a fallout of the Erdogan era. The Turkey-less India-Middle East-Europe-Economic Corridor, aimed at countering Ankara's rival geostrategic initiative of 'Iraq Development Road', which shortchanges India, is part of New Delhi's approach. In a way, Erdogan's own electoral considerations, the solidification of India's relations with Arab Sheikdoms, Afghanistan (increasingly a pain point with Pakistan now), the US and the forever sectarian Iran, will ensure that Turkey and Pakistan continue to deepen their jointmanship, something that is bound to irk Delhi. As of now, the overwhelming nationalistic fervour in India has resulted in calls to de-prioritise Turkey as a destination for tourism and other exchanges. But that's barely enough to push Turkey to revisit its stance. Supporting Pakistan makes more sense to the calculative and ambitious Erdogan. The dearth of 'Turkish Delight' for India ought not to surprise anyone. (Lt. Gen. Bhopinder Singh (born 20 March 1946) is the former Lieutenant Governor of The Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Pondicherry and an Indian Army officer who has been awarded the PVSM.)
Asharq Al-Awsat
18-02-2025
- Politics
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Middlemen Are Trump's ‘Alternative' for Statesmen
US President Donald Trump's engagements, as well as his statements to the media, have sparked concern in many corners of the world, including Western Europe, where most countries are NATO allies. This alliance had been established on the basis of a "military doctrine" to counter the Soviet Union, which Western nations saw as antithetical, ideologically and economically, to Western values, culture, and interests. A powerful communist rival that sought to expand its influence and export its model globally. NATO was one of three alliances that Washington formed to "contain" the communist threat posed by the Soviet Union and Communist China: NATO in Europe, the Baghdad Pact in the Middle East (which later became the Central Treaty Organization, CENTO), and the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO). Over the years, and throughout most of the Cold War, the countries of these three regions, and others, were split between the "allies" of Washington and its "adversaries" who relied on Soviet and Chinese support. Even after the establishment of Israel, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the emergence of a major nationalist state in its place, the Russian Federation, the historical alignments of the period broadly remained the same. In the Middle East, President Trump's recent positions, most notably his state intention to displace the people of Gaza to Jordan, Egypt, and other countries, have shocked many of Washington's allies and friends in the region. It is well known that the Democrats lost the last elections due to their cowardice and lack of scruple in the face of a fanatical, ideological, and religious Republican populist campaign, which was orchestrated by some of the staunchest supporters of "Greater Israel" behind the scenes: Sheldon Adelson and his family, Rupert Murdoch's vitriolic media empire, and the oligarchs of the new media... However, Donald Trump did not merely return to the White House; under his leadership, the Republicans also regained control of both houses of Congress, and he has built a conservative majority on the Supreme Court. As a result, Trump feels that the American people have given him an absolute mandate to do what he wants: even restructuring institutions, violating laws and norms, and dismantling the issues of broad foundations that underpin a sound democracy and ensure accountability and the peaceful transfer of power. That is the domestic scene, where the disoriented Democratic opposition seems to still be reeling from its defeat in November. Globally, things are no less alarming following the flood of Trump's unrestrained executive orders. The Arab world was shocked not only by the cruelty of Trump's proposal for Gaza, but also by his insistence on it, even after it was met with universal rejection from every actor concerned - with the exception, of course, of his Likudist partner and instigator. Several Arab countries are now taking action in the face of an increasingly worrisome situation that threatens an avalanche of regional complications. Washington's relations with the Arab world are part of a broader global pattern. Responsible figures from within the American institutions, particularly in defense and intelligence, have begun to sound the alarm, warning of the threats that the administration's new course poses to Washington's relationships and long-term strategic interests. Some Americans were stunned by Trump's unprovoked "antagonization" of their two neighbors, Canada to the north and Mexico to the south. This began with his stated desire to annex Canada and launch a new "economic war" against Mexico, after his presidency's opening act had been the "border wall." As we have seen and continue to see, economic warfare through tariffs has become a weapon from the past that Washington wields in the present against any leader or state that insists on independence. Equally shocking was Trump's unilateral insistence on acquiring Greenland, a vast island belonging to Denmark, despite the fact Denmark, both a trade partner and a NATO ally of the US, has categorically rejected the idea. He also turned his attention to Panama, making a claim to the Panama Canal, which connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. At the same time, lawmakers in Congress, generals at the Pentagon, experts in research centers, and officials in military alliances (including NATO) have condemned several recent Trump appointments. One is Peter Hegseth, a right-wing commentator on Murdoch's Fox News who was appointed Secretary of Defense. Another is former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, a defender of Russian President Vladimir Putin and former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who was appointed Director of National Intelligence! Adding to the "absurdity," US Vice President J.D. Vance made hostile remarks about the European Union last week. Meanwhile, the Trump administration, particularly through billionaire Elon Musk, has been openly supporting far-right parties in Europe, including the neo-Nazi Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the anti-immigrant Reform Party in Britain, antagonizing Washington's two most strategic allies in Europe. The European picture was made even more bleak as Trump and his administration reversed course on Ukraine. He stressed that he trusted Putin and that he wanted to make a deal, even if it meant forcing Ukraine to cede some of its territory to Russia. In Asia, Trump took a coercive and domineering posture when receiving his guest, India's hard right Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who is supposed to be among the closest allies of the US on the continent and whose role would be particularly relevant in the event of a major confrontation with China over trade or Taiwan. Modi was "forced" to agree to purchase more US oil (!), American-made cars, and advanced F-35 fighter jets (which New Delhi had not sought), along with modifications that would allow India to buy more US nuclear reactors. In light of the above, there can be no doubt Ishaq al-Mawsili was right: "Every era has its state and its men."
