A tale of two Quads

A confluence of convergences

AT PENPOINT

One of the more surprising developments has been the development of a Quadrilateral, a sort of Western Quad, which counterbalances the more prominent, more formal, Eastern one. In the West, the increased cooperation between Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkiye was visible during the recent crisis set off by the US and Israeli bombing of Iran. In the East, there is the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue of the USA, Australia, Japan and India, which is an older platform.

There are some similarities between the two Quads, as well as differences. First, they are both dedicated to keeping open waterways and thus the free flow of oil from West to East. The West Quad has developed a very recent interest in the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s crude oil passes. Saudi Arabia uses the Strait for exporting much of its oil, though it does have the ability to manage some exports though the Red Sea, and the Suez Canal, to Europe. The Eastern Quad also has a deep interest in the Strait of Hormuz, especially Japan, India and Australia, which depend on it for varying degrees of their energy needs, and indirectly because all are oil importers.

The second similarity is the USA. The USA is itself a member of the Eastern Quad, and is an important component of AUKUS, the trilateral alliance with Australia and the UK as members, which is focused on the Australian Navy’s submarine fleet. While it is not a member of the Western Quad, all four of its members are allies at the bilateral level, though Turkiye is also a member of NATO.

The Eastern and Western Quads have certain differences, however. The Eastern Quad is partly against China. The Western is not against China. Indeed, Pakistan has strong links with Beijing. Turkiye too has recently developed ties because of the Belt and Road Initiative. Saudi Arabia sees China as one of its best customers. Egyptian ties with China date back a long time, and precede the Ramadan War. (One of the most important engagements in the war, when Israeli armour was theatening Cairo, was fought at the Chinese Farm, where the Israeli advance was halted. It was fought around an experimental Chinese farm.)

Is the Western Quad in any way an entity capable of development, or is it simply a tool of US diplomacy? At the moment, it is acting to fulfill the needs of the USA to provide a channel through which to interact with Iran. Perhaps the advantage of the Western Quad is that it provides a variety of countries which can take the lead.

Perhaps one reason for the Iranian willingness to talk to Pakistan is that it has a Shia minority, one which has some interaction with Iran through ziaraat and education. There are a substantial number of holy sites particular to the Ahle Tashi’i in Iran. As for education, even now, though there is a proper network of Shia madaris, the crowning achievement of a Shia alim’s education is still to be had from a period in Qum.

Pakistan and Iran were also part of CENTO along with Turkiye. Presumably that Cold War alliance overcame the hostility between those two countries which goes back to the rivalry between the Ottomans and the Safavids, with about three centuries of intermittent war between the two countries ending only in 1823. There are also no Shia in Turkiye, after a vigorous and persistent persecution of Shias by the Ottomans over the centuries. Most of the better known instances occurred in Arab lands, but they were also suppressed in Anatolia. As a result, only about 10 percent of the Turkish population is Shia. That is about the proportion in Saudi Arabia, and there are even fewer in Egypt.

Pakistan is the most active in bilateral relations, with a Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement signed with Saudi Arabia, as well as cooperation with Turkiye in a number of defence production areas, particularly in drone technology as well as in shipbuilding. Pakistan has obtained Turkish MILGEM-class corvettes for its Navy, and has expressed an interest in obtaining the Altay tank for its Army. The Altay has achieved a high-level of indigenization, as has the Al-Khalid MBT, of which more 400 are in service in Pakistan.

While Egypt and Pakistan have not got any major projects together, the Egyptian Air Force does operate 30 Karakoram-8 jet trainers, and both the EAF and PAF operate the F16. (So does the Turkish Air Force, while Turkiye also has an F16 rebuild facility). An interesting Turkish project is the Kaan, intended to be a stealth fighter, got a fillip when Turkiye was bumped off the F35 project. When the Kaan is fully developed, it will be an alternative to be considered along with the Chinese F-35. The American F-35 is not only dependent on US permission, which will come at a high operational cost, but costs anywhere between $80 million and $100 million per unit.

The rise of the Quad is a little like the OIC. If there are benefits in unity, the inevitable question arises of why there has to be a coalition of polities. Why not a single polity?

However, that will depend on Turkiye’s own position. It has long recognised Israel, doing so in 1949, being by far the first Muslim-majority country to do so. However, former Israeli PM and now Leader of Opposition, Naftali Bennett, whose political position is even further than Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s, has said that after Iran’s Shia crescent, including the former Al-Assad regime in Syria, the Iraqi government and the Houthis of Yemen, a Sunni axis is forming under Turkish leadership, which includes Syria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Hamas, which will be Israel’s next enemy.

Israel is engaged in two related actions, which flow from its being a settler colonialist project. First, it is looking to expand. Witness its stubbornness over its Lebanon campaign, which shows how it intends to expand its territory. Second, it needs a new enemy. After Iran, the story will not be over. Turkey has ticked all the boxes. It has recognized Israel and established diplomatic relations with it. It has even joined NATO. However, because of his support base, its leader Recep Erdogan has expressed views critical of Israel, Bennett has equated Turkey with Hamas.

Pakistan should immediately listen to the warning bells that are going off. It is part of a Quad of Sunni states, it too will become a target for US and Israeli ire. Its having a nuclear weapon is enough of a danger signal to Israel to work on the USA to be ready to attack it. Pakistan cannot give up its nuclear weapon without falling under the India jackboot, which makes India anxious that it be forced to do so. Is Turkey going to be Pakistan’s early warning, or is Pakistan Turkey’s. Either way, so long as Israel enjoys such huge clout in Washington, it is going to be inevitable. Just as India and Israel are friends, Greece and Israel are even greater friends. The Greek lobby has an even stronger presence in Washington than India, and is likely to join it in trying for a US attack on both Turkey and Pakistan, in conjunction with regional allies.

The basic problem remains the same. Palestine may be a Holy Land for three religions, but Muslims have a more strenuous objection than Christians to the Jews establishing Israel there, by expelling most of the indigenous population. Muslim governments can only reconcile themselves to Zionist occupation of Palestine by brutal realpolitik. Their peoples are implacably opposed to this. No one asks them what they want, and in the few democracies this is one among a number of issues.

The rise of the Quad is a little like the OIC. If there are benefits in unity, the inevitable question arises of why there has to be a coalition of polities. Why not a single polity?