NOVANEWS
Canadian writer and author, Eric Walberg, in a recent interview with Qods News Agency tries to answer why Saudi Arabia – instead of helping Palestinian people and solving regional problem – has allied with Israel and supported terrorist groups in the region?
“The idea behind the Saudi-Pakistani-US understanding that lead to Afghan collapse in the 1990s and on to 9/11 was/is a Saudi-led-hegemony in the Muslim world (acceptable to the US), where Pakistan would preside in Central Asia. What are the results of a century of an Islamic rule in Saudi Arabia, and 70 years in Pakistan? In short precious little as a guide to other Muslim nations,” Walberg said.
I’m sorry to say, Walberg should have studied some objective sources before coming to the above conclusion. The resistance against a non-religious Soviet occupation was a historic reaction from Afghans just like their ancestors to earlier foreign occupations, such as, British, Hindus and Greeks. The US took advantage of Afghan struggle to destroy its Cold War adversary with the help of its puppet Muslim elites left in power by the British colonial power in Indo-Pak and Persian Gulf region. Once that was done and some Afghan leaders refused to allow US to exploit country’s strategic location and natural resources, the Saudi-Pakistan-US created Taliban militia to replace the anti-US Afghan leaders. Pakistani interest in the whole sordid affair was/is to install a “friendly regime” along its northern border so it could concentrate on fighting India in the east, which has always been an “existential” threat to Pakistan. Pakistan has already fought three major wars with India and lost its Eastern province in 1971.
Both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are NOT Islamic states by any standard. Saudi Arabia, named after an Arab warlord with Jewish family roots, was helped by the British colonial power to establish an anti-Islam, pro-West rule in Ottoman province of Najad, which houses two of Islam’s most sacred structures, Ka’aba (Makkah) and the Prophet’s Mosque (Medinah). This was done to counter any revival of the so-called “anti-West political Islam” in the future.
Pakistan was snatched from the ‘British-Hindu jaw’ by tens of millions of Muslim subjects of the British Raj on the dream that they would create an independent multi-religious state governed by Islamic Shari’ah and Muslim tolerance toward non-Muslims as was practiced by Muslim rulers for nearly 1,000 years in the Indian sub-continent before the arrival of British and Dutch colonialists in the 17th century. However, after the death of the Father of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah in 1948, the Muslims’ dream was hijacked by the pro-western politicians and military leaders.
Calling Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or any of the 57 Muslim majority nation-states, Islamic state, is an insult to Islamic Shari’ah. Saudi Arabia is a family dictatorship; Pakistan is a Feudal-Army ‘democracy’, while Iran is a ‘Theocracy’.
I’m sure, the American strategic were not stupid enough to believe that the newly-born with not much military power Pakistan could “preside in Central Asia” surrounded by military giants like India, China and USSR.
Walberg, also, seems to believes in the Jewish/Zionist anti-Muslim propaganda by equating Mossad’s 9/11, and the US-Israeli created al-Qaeda and ISIS with Muslims and Islam.
A great majority of Saudi-Pakistani leadership is not only allergic to Islamic Laws, but have shown there unwillingness to support suppressed Muslim minorities in India, Bosnia, Chechnya, Chinese Turkistan, Britain, United States, Palestine, Philippines, etc.
However, I do agree with Walberg that the Islamic Republic is the only state among the 57 Muslim states which supports, morally and financially, Palestinian struggle against the 67-year-old Jewish occupation of their ancestral land. Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Zionist-controlled West have made Iranians pay a huge price for this.
“The idea behind the Saudi-Pakistani-US understanding that lead to Afghan collapse in the 1990s and on to 9/11 was/is a Saudi-led-hegemony in the Muslim world (acceptable to the US), where Pakistan would preside in Central Asia. What are the results of a century of an Islamic rule in Saudi Arabia, and 70 years in Pakistan? In short precious little as a guide to other Muslim nations,” Walberg said.
I’m sorry to say, Walberg should have studied some objective sources before coming to the above conclusion. The resistance against a non-religious Soviet occupation was a historic reaction from Afghans just like their ancestors to earlier foreign occupations, such as, British, Hindus and Greeks. The US took advantage of Afghan struggle to destroy its Cold War adversary with the help of its puppet Muslim elites left in power by the British colonial power in Indo-Pak and Persian Gulf region. Once that was done and some Afghan leaders refused to allow US to exploit country’s strategic location and natural resources, the Saudi-Pakistan-US created Taliban militia to replace the anti-US Afghan leaders. Pakistani interest in the whole sordid affair was/is to install a “friendly regime” along its northern border so it could concentrate on fighting India in the east, which has always been an “existential” threat to Pakistan. Pakistan has already fought three major wars with India and lost its Eastern province in 1971.
Both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are NOT Islamic states by any standard. Saudi Arabia, named after an Arab warlord with Jewish family roots, was helped by the British colonial power to establish an anti-Islam, pro-West rule in Ottoman province of Najad, which houses two of Islam’s most sacred structures, Ka’aba (Makkah) and the Prophet’s Mosque (Medinah). This was done to counter any revival of the so-called “anti-West political Islam” in the future.
Pakistan was snatched from the ‘British-Hindu jaw’ by tens of millions of Muslim subjects of the British Raj on the dream that they would create an independent multi-religious state governed by Islamic Shari’ah and Muslim tolerance toward non-Muslims as was practiced by Muslim rulers for nearly 1,000 years in the Indian sub-continent before the arrival of British and Dutch colonialists in the 17th century. However, after the death of the Father of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah in 1948, the Muslims’ dream was hijacked by the pro-western politicians and military leaders.
Calling Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or any of the 57 Muslim majority nation-states, Islamic state, is an insult to Islamic Shari’ah. Saudi Arabia is a family dictatorship; Pakistan is a Feudal-Army ‘democracy’, while Iran is a ‘Theocracy’.
I’m sure, the American strategic were not stupid enough to believe that the newly-born with not much military power Pakistan could “preside in Central Asia” surrounded by military giants like India, China and USSR.
Walberg, also, seems to believes in the Jewish/Zionist anti-Muslim propaganda by equating Mossad’s 9/11, and the US-Israeli created al-Qaeda and ISIS with Muslims and Islam.
A great majority of Saudi-Pakistani leadership is not only allergic to Islamic Laws, but have shown there unwillingness to support suppressed Muslim minorities in India, Bosnia, Chechnya, Chinese Turkistan, Britain, United States, Palestine, Philippines, etc.
However, I do agree with Walberg that the Islamic Republic is the only state among the 57 Muslim states which supports, morally and financially, Palestinian struggle against the 67-year-old Jewish occupation of their ancestral land. Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Zionist-controlled West have made Iranians pay a huge price for this.
