Pakistan and the Malaysia Summit Opportunity foregone?
Hassan Aslam Shad
December 20, 2019
Pakistan backing out of the Kuala Lumpur
Summit was no-nonsense and it has dented Pakistan's foreign image in a way that
will stay there for quite some time. Pakistan's process of revitalization of
relations with Iran, Qatar, Malaysia, and many other Muslim nations abruptly
came to a halt.
By the time of the
publication of this article, an unprecedented Summit (Summit) in the Muslim
world will be underway in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. It will be attended by world
leaders including Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamed, Turkey’s Tayyip
Erdogan, Iran’s Hassan Rouhani, and Indonesia’s Joseph Widodo.
A notable omission
from the Summit will be Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan as well as any
other dignitary including Pakistan’s Foreign Minister.
Pakistan’s last-minute
decision to bail out from the Summit left indelible marks on Pakistan’s foreign
policy posture in the Muslim world. The implications of this may be far more
than what Pakistan’s establishment and government are possibly able to fathom
at this stage. This is serious and damage control will take some effort.
So how did we get here?
The September UNGA Session
Arguably, the first
signs of the Summit led by Turkey, Malaysia, and Pakistan emerged during the
days of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) session in September this
year. In the UNGA session, India’s actions in Jammu & Kashmir were
criticized by Mahathir Muhammad and Erdogan. Media reports indicate that it was
during this UNGA session that the seeds of a new Muslim block were sown by
Mahathir, Erdogan and Khan. It is back then that reports emerged about a Muslim
media channel to combat Islamophobia.
Muslim world’s festering wounds
Earliest reports
indicate the Summit was planned as an alternative to the OIC (though denied later).
Let’s have a look at some reasons that prompted the holding of the Summit in
the first place.
A
parallel, albeit miniature, alternative to the UN system in the Muslim world is
the Organization of Islamic Countries or OIC established in 1969
Let’s be clear on one
thing. Muslim countries with a predominantly Muslim population have been at the
receiving end of a plethora of conflicts (inter-state and internal), social and
political turmoil as well as discontent. This all started after WWII but has
gained significant traction in the last couple of decades. Add to this the
never-ending clash between forces of tradition and modernism.
Caught in the midst of
these are two festering wounds in the Muslim body politic: Palestine and
Kashmir. The recent Rohingya persecution in Myanmar has given further credence
to the perception of widespread Islamophobia in the Muslim world.
Shifting sands in the
global order
The global order too
is in a rapid transition. The United Nations (UN) project has been rendered
largely toothless in the face of unilateral state actions. A reluctant
superpower, US, is flouting international norms and ceding geo-strategic space
to China and Russia.
The US’ hegemony has
been dented by embarrassing losses in asymmetric theaters of conflict e.g.
Afghanistan. US-China rivalry has unseated the established paradigm of
inter-state relations. New multi-polar power centers are emerging in the tussle
for international influence. The international order is in a state of constant
flux.
The Muslim world too
is at an inflection point. Muslim countries have generally derived their
geostrategic, military and economic heft from the US. A reluctant, rather
detached US is making them reassess their international identity. This is prompting
Muslim countries to hedge their bets on alternative power centers (Russia and
China). A mishmash of competing global narratives is emerging on the
international horizon.
The Muslim search for identity
A parallel, albeit
miniature, alternative to the UN system in the Muslim world is the Organization
of Islamic Countries or OIC established in 1969.
The OIC is the classic
case of a supine organization that has left indelible marks on the Muslim
conscience.
Let’s look at some
cold hard facts: the OIC has 57 member states and represents around 1.7 billion
Muslims or 22 percent of the world population. That’s one end of the spectrum.
The other end of the
spectrum is frightening: OIC has failed to make any significant strides in
resolving conflicts in the Muslim world (and not just Kashmir and Palestine).
These include the Iran-Iraq war; the Saudi/UAE and Yemen conflict; and the
recent blockade of Qatar by Saudis and their allies.
For
Pakistan, India’s abrogation of the temporary status of Kashmir and Saudi
Arabia and UAE’s lack of effective support to Pakistan after the August 5
abrogation of J&K by India wasn’t taken lightly by Pakistan
Although sitting atop
70% of the world’s energy resources, OIC member states have a meager (shameful)
8% of the global GDP. A dire lack of scientific and academic progress stares
them in the face. Not a single institution from the Muslim world figures in the
list of top 100 global educational institutions. Despite their staggering
numbers, Muslims are no more than froth on the seabed.
The weakening Saudi pivot
Saudi Arabia has been
the lynchpin of Islamic identity for both historic and political reasons. This,
and the push provided by petrodollars, explains the Saudi clout in OIC,
especially since the 1970s when Saudi Arabia assumed a key role in policy
formulation.
But the levers of
power are no longer in Saudi hands. They have suffered a loss of moral
authority, caused by regional conflicts with Qatar and Yemen. That the Saudi
rivalry with Iran has made it cozier with Israel has further dented its
standing.
For Pakistan, India’s
abrogation of the temporary status of Kashmir and Saudi Arabia and UAE’s lack
of effective support to Pakistan after the August 5 abrogation of J&K by
India wasn’t taken lightly by Pakistan. On the other hand, Turkey and Malaysia
(and later, Iran) took a firm stand favoring Pakistan. These countries sided
with Pakistan despite strong backlash from India, even while losing economic
opportunities.
It is possible that in
heat of the moment a decision was taken by a betrayed Pakistan at the behest of
Malaysia and Turkey to consider alternatives to the OIC. Pakistan possibly
miscalculated that like the international order where China is fast filling up
space “ceded” by the US, Muslim worlds’ equivalent would be Turkey and Malaysia
filling up the space ceded by Saudis. But Pakistan forgot that the Saudis
wouldn’t be too happy seeing the baton of leadership pass from their hands to
either Malaysia or Turkey. The inclusion of Qatar and Iran in the Summit would
have been the icing on the cake and something non-negotiable for the Saudis.
Prime Minister Imran
Khan and the Chief of Army Staff’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia and UAE,
respectively, is reportedly to allay Saudi concerns regarding the Summit. This
explains why no Pakistani dignitary will be attending the Summit.
Could things have been
done differently?
Yes, very much.
First, if an
alternative to OIC was indeed contemplated, it was a bad idea. Not because the
OIC has been successful as an organization or has done anything commendable in
its 50 years history to resolve any issues faced by the Muslim world. Far from
that. But rather because OIC is what it is: a bloc representing 57 Islamic
countries.
For the Summit to have
been a success it would have required across the board acceptance in, and broad
participation by, all those 57 countries. This wasn’t done or no effort made to
do so.
Pakistan’s
own interests lie in using its pivotal geostrategic position to bring together
a fragmented Muslim world and in the process jump starting its fledgling
economy
Similarly, the idea
floated by the Summit Organizers to have permanent 5 members who would have
played a “central role” along the lines of the five permanent members of UN
Security Council (UNSC) wouldn’t have gone down too well with the Arab
countries. No Arab country, especially that with economic clout like the
Saudis, would have stayed a silent spectator.
Another tactual
blunder was that no invitation to attend the Summit was sent to Saudi Arabia,
UAE and other Arab countries such as Egypt and Jordan. Even if any such
invitation was sent, it was sent belatedly when doubts would have risen in the
minds of Arab leaders about the intentions behind the Summit. Again, not good.
What Pakistan, Turkey,
and Malaysia ought to have done right around the time the Summit was planned
was to have taken all Arab countries on board to allay their fears and
concerns. This would have meant dispatching emissaries from Pakistan, Turkey,
and Malaysia to the Arab world and explaining that Summit is intended to
supplement the OIC rather than re-invent the wheel. And this takes me to the
last past of what possibly the Summit could have focused on instead of taking
up the entire gamut of “ills” facing the Muslim world.
Too much on the plate?
The organizers of the
Summit took up a rather ambitious agenda: “the first step toward finding
solutions to the Islamic world’s ills”. Areas to discuss include “displacement
of Muslims worldwide, food security, national/cultural identity, Islamophobia,
technology, security, and trade, reviving “Islamic civilization, finding
solutions to problems afflicting the Muslim world and forming a global network
between “Islamic leaders, intellectuals, scholars, and thinkers”. A broad wish
list indeed.
The ‘political will’
required to translate these initiatives into tangible outcomes is very
difficult if not impossible when one considers the multi-polar world where
Muslim countries are geopolitically and geostrategically aligned with world
powers (US, China, Russia).
Instead, the Summit
should have narrowed down on key workable objectives. This could have meant
reaching consensus on other issues such as economic revival in the Muslim world
through a common banking system that could provide a lifeline to Muslim
countries with a struggling economy such as Pakistan.
Other possible areas
could have been discussing ways and means of resolving burning disputes between
power centers led by Saudi Arabia, UAE versus Iran and Qatar and putting an end
to the Yemen and Syrian wars. The Summit could also have been the forum for
softening the edges of Malaysia and Turkey’s posture towards the Arab world.
As technology and
education have never been the forte of Muslim countries, setting up centers of
research and academic excellence could have been a breath of fresh air in the
Muslim world.
Pakistan could have
played a central role in all this had it played its cards well at the right
time by roping in both Turkey, Malaysia, Iran and Qatar on the one side and the
Arab world on the other.
Pakistan’s own
interests lie in using its pivotal geostrategic position to bring together a
fragmented Muslim world and in the process jump-starting its fledgling economy.
Lest we forget, it is the weak economy that was the reason behind Pakistan
having been pressurized by Saudi Arabia and UAE to back out from the Summit.
Something that Pakistan had no choice but to oblige.
Pakistan’s backing out
from the Summit at the last minute has put it in a precarious position.
Recently Pakistan had taken up upon itself the challenge of bringing Saudi
Arabia and Iran to the negotiating table. Prime Minister Imran Khan’s resolve
to this effect is commendable. If there is any country that can achieve this,
it is Pakistan. But if Pakistan was hoping that it would be able to accomplish
this by creating an alternative bloc of Muslim countries then this was a bad
idea and a non-starter.
Pakistan’s Foreign
Office should learn a lesson or two from this debacle and avoid putting
Pakistan in such embarrassing situations in the future. This can hurt
Pakistan’s credibility in the Muslim world – something it can ill afford
particularly at this crucial juncture.
Hassan Aslam Shad is the
head of practice of a leading Middle Eastern law firm. He is a graduate of
Harvard Law School, U.S.A., with a focus on international law and corporate
law. Over the years, Hassan has written extensively on topics of law including
public and private international law and international relations. Hassan has
the distinctive honor of being the first person from Pakistan to intern at the
Office of the President of the International Criminal Court, The Hague. He can
be reached at: veritas@post.harvard.edu. His Twitter handle is: @HassShad. The
views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily
reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.
