In a heavily commercialized and securitized world, a country’s foreign policy is mostly about securing its own interests. Realpolitik usually wins the day, putting ideology out to pasture. In that context, the normalization of diplomatic ties between UAE and Israel has more to do with geopolitics than caring about human rights in Palestine. This cozying up has been denounced by many in the Muslim world, but the broader issue is the decline in moral leadership since at least the end of Cold War.
The regional environment is changing, and the Gulf rulers are having to respond on their own. They claimed a rising perceived threat from Iranian influence, but Trump’s Middle-East policy was seemingly more intent on selling defense equipment. The Americans pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal and took out General Soleimani, but that’s about it. The US was already retrenching from the Middle East, and even Trump couldn’t reverse it. In Israel, Emirati rulers find less a friend and more a common foe against Iran.
But in looking out for itself, Abu Dhabi has put other prominent Muslim-majority countries in a bind. UAE is only the third Muslim country to formally recognize Israel after Jordan and Egypt, and the Trump administration has fired the warning shot that more countries are in the pipeline. Debate has now shifted to who is next. There is talk about Oman and Bahrain following suit, but the speculative spotlight is shining brighter on the Saudis.
The Saudis have so far not commented. After all, being a custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, how can the Saudi King be seen to be openly appreciative of this diplomatic union? Some observers suggest that because the Kingdom hasn’t outright denounced this development, it amounts to a tacit endorsement. If it is so, this neutral policy on Israel should serve well in currying favor with the miffed US Congress.
Turkey and Iran are among a handful of major Muslim countries branding Emiratis as sellouts on the Palestine cause. Where Pakistan stands is rather unclear. Pakistan Foreign Office’s ambivalent statement on the subject has surprised many. Perhaps they felt that a rejection would annoy the American and Emirati benefactors during an era of diplomatic disquiet? There are other interpretations as well, such as testing the waters.
The interest in establishing ties with Israel goes back at least Musharraf’s rule. The opportunity looked obvious at that time, something that may still be plain today. It’s mostly in security than in economic domain. For instance, the growing evidence of Israel-India defense partnership hurts Pakistan’s security interests in the region. Taking a softer line on Israel lessens the impact of that camaraderie.
Besides, nothing would please the US establishment more. And this is a critical thing, at a time when US is betting on India to take on China in the Indo-Pacific region. The arming of India has the potential to render Pakistan’s security interests as a collateral damage. Since Pakistan has limited economic clout with the US, can a diplomatic opportunity to turn DC into a neutral referee simply be brushed aside?
But the risk of blowback is also real. Decades of anti-Israel rhetoric means that mass protests will erupt domestically and seriously weaken, if not topple, the democratic facade in Islamabad. There will also be a damaging loss of face in the moderate Muslim world. Besides, Pakistan shares a direct and long border with Iran. Joining an alliance that is aimed at undermining Iran’s stability is fraught with serious risks.
In the end, no one expects Pakistan to suddenly recognize Israel. There is no foreign pressure as such, either. But foreign policy is prone to shifting sands overseas. Pay more attention and craft a coherent response.
Comments
Comments are closed.