Plenary session 6

 

 

 

 

A theme of the final session was the need for close interaction between Gulf states and those in the region’s immediate periphery. Ali Muhammad Al Anisi, Chairman of the National Security Agency of Yemen, stressed the need for a comprehensive approach to the region’s security.

 

The absence of democracy, economic problems and unemployment all fed into extremism and terrorism. A regional collective security framework should encompass respect for national sovereignty and a vision that included economic development, he said. This required employment, education and expanded opportunities, and dealing with sectarianism and tribal conflicts. Any formula that did not take the interests of the region into account would meet the same fate as the defunct Baghdad Pact. A regional collective security arrangement would need to address long-standing problems that would otherwise provide grounds for intervention. The decision of states to choose their own social systems should also be respected, and the mistrust that contributes to the arms race must be overcome through sustained cooperation.

 

Focusing on the Israel–Palestine issue, Al Anisi called for respect for rights and justice, and an end to double standards. If Israel did not comply with United Nations resolutions, the erosion of trust and confidence in the UN Security Council would have negative consequences for international peace and security. The Middle East region would never enjoy peace and stability if the rights of others were not respected and if ‘some superpowers’ supported Israel only.

 

Al Anisi called for the problems of the Horn of Africa to be addressed, as it is a hotspot for intervention and a source of refugees who put a burden on Yemen and other neighbours. Without assistance from the international community, Somalia would join Afghanistan in becoming a haven for terrorists. He called for the establishment of a permanent institution to manage such conflicts.

 

General Ehsan Ul Haq, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee of Pakistan, underlined the close and multi-faceted bonds of civilisation, history, ethnicity, culture, faith, economy and expatriate communities that tied Pakistan to the Gulf. He highlighted the international issues at stake in this strategically important region of the world and said strategic interests of extra-regional powers needed to be harmonised with internal interests. Regional states must also create a better consensus among themselves, he said.

 

Among issues impinging on regional security, General Ehsan noted the increasing questions that have been raised about Iran’s nuclear programme, the unresolved problems of Iraq, the threat of terrorism, resentment over the unresolved Palestinian problem, and energy and maritime security. Terrorism knew no borders or religion. Efforts to stabilise Iraq must be focused simultaneously on achieving peace and security in Afghanistan, where Pakistan had contributed heavily to the fight against terrorism and had paid a heavy price. Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy must be respected, and sanctions would be a ‘disaster’; but it must also observe its international obligations. Iran should be included in discussions on how to stabilise Iraq. Efforts should also be intensified to resolve the Middle East’s problems, including Palestine, and to find a comprehensive approach to regional security.

 

External powers should support collective security for the Gulf region, General Ehsan argued, but the Gulf states should also pursue it on their own. Discussions had been too focused on challenges and not enough on compromise solutions. The Organization of the Islamic Conference had developed a consensus approach towards Palestine, Kashmir and other disputes. He suggested that a future security arrangement could emerge from a process of mutual consultation, and that the Manama Dialogue represented a step in this direction.

 

Dr Mowaffak Al Rubaie, National Security Adviser of Iraq, said his country was going through a paradigm shift from an ossified order to a new set of rules. Iraqis thus asked the world to exercise strategic patience while their country endured the sacrifices that were necessary during this process. Iraqis had paid much in blood and sweat to regain their freedom and democracy. The country was developing a new identity, and had to consider to ‘to whom do we belong’. The answer could be the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), but this would take time to evolve.

 

While Iraq’s immediate threat came from al-Qaeda, the real long-term threat came from the re-emergence of elements of the former regime, which had connections to organised crime, Al Rubaie said. But there was plenty of good news in Iraq: in most areas, people were leading normal lives. The purchasing power of ordinary Iraqis had risen 28-fold, and Iraq had conducted three democratic elections. The nature of the conflict was one of competition among three communities for political power and economic gain. Localised violence in northwest Baghdad and the southwest of Anbar Province was being generated by extremist Sunni and Shia elements, and was fuelled by regional states which were afraid of a departure from the old order.

 

Al Rubaie agreed with some elements of the Baker–Hamilton-led Iraq Study Group report, including the suggested acceleration of the process of improving the capabilities of Iraqi security forces and engaging with neighbouring countries, which Iraq itself was already doing. But he described other recommendations as ‘half-baked’ and deplored any temptation on the part of the US to ‘cut and run’, which would only serve to boost al-Qaeda’s strength. He added that Iraq did not want to link its security to the problems of Lebanon, Palestine or anywhere else in the world.

 

The way forward for Iraq was internal reconciliation, including consideration of a general amnesty, procedures for federalism and a review of de-Ba’athification, Al Rubaie said. There could be no trade-off between democracy and stability. Iraq’s leaders realised that there was no military solution to security issues in Iraq; what they needed first was the authority to deal with the problems. Reconciliation was needed both at the national level and at the regional level. For the former, Iraq was holding tribal and religious conferences. For the latter, regional security dialogue was needed to combat terrorism, Iraq’s biggest enemy. International reconciliation was also needed, not only involving the United States, but also drawing on European support. If concerned parties did not join forces quickly to fight and control the forces of al-Qaeda, its infrastructure would spread to encompass neighbouring territories and beyond.

 

In the ensuing discussion, Abdulaziz Sager, Chairman of the Gulf Research Center of Saudi Arabia, asked if, in light of Pakistan’s security arrangements with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan would agree to help the Gulf states to deal with the new threat from Iran and be part of security discussions involving the GCC, America and Iran. He also asked about perceived double standards regarding the US–India nuclear deal and about Pakistan’s ‘failure’ in Afghanistan. General Ehsan reiterated Pakistan’s vital interest in the Gulf region, where it had collective security arrangements with nearly all countries, and had faith in the wisdom of the countries of the region to handle any crises. With regard to civil nuclear cooperation, General Ehsan called for no discrimination and said Pakistan had not been the first to proliferate. In Afghanistan, he said Pakistan was committed to peace and stability and to helping the international forces, noting that his country had suffered more from the turmoil there and contributed more forces than any other country.

Sager suggested that Yemen also needed to address internal security dimensions, including the trafficking of arms, its high birth rate and growing Shia question. In response, Al Anisi said Yemen was one of the first countries to suffer from terrorism in modern times and that fighting terrorism was a national necessity. The government entered into dialogue with multiple parties, including people who had been misled. To address the environment that bred terrorism, Yemen had cooperated with donor organisations to channel aid to improve the position of the poor. Al Anisi challenged accusations that Yemen was financing the arms trade in Somalia and said the government had spent a large sum of money to buy back weapons, including those used against aircraft. Yemen had also stopped brokers from importing arms left over from the collapse of the Soviet Union. Yemen is also playing an active role, in coordination with the GCC, to define collective security and to defend its 240km coastline.

 

Dr Toby Dodge, IISS Consulting Senior Fellow for the Middle East, asked Al Rubaie about Iraq’s plans for reconciliation: with whom was the government talking, what were the government’s aims and what were the interlocutors demanding? Following up, IISS Senior Fellow for Gulf Security Dr Mamoun Fandy asked how reconciliation could be fostered if parties felt they were under accusation. Al Rubaie replied that there was no red line with regard to national reconciliation; as long as they were not agitators, the government would accept any interlocutors, including elements of the former regime. Everything could be on the table for negotiation. The main issue concerned the control of national resources. Al Rubaie added that passion and forgiveness were well entrenched in Islamic beliefs. Iraqis were asked not to forget, but to forgive.

 

Salameh Nematt, Washington Bureau Chief of Al Hayat International, asked how Iran and Syria, which had helped to undermine Iraqi security, could play a constructive role. He suggested Europe had also contributed to Iraq’s troubles by not playing a supporting role. Al Rubaie said 85% of the foreign insurgents in Iraq had come across the Syrian border after having ‘de-planed’ at Damascus. With regard to the eastern border, the government had asked Iran to support the elected central representatives and to stop aiding terrorism.