The
GCC Summit was convened today in Qatari capital of Doha. In a communique, the
leaders of GCC called for political solution in Syria and Yemen. They condemned
the militias currently operating in Libya, and voiced support for the Libyan
elected national council as the legitimate body to govern the country. On Iran,
the leaders supported a negotiated end to the nuclear impasse and reiterated
their support of the UAE in its claim over the three islands of Abu Musa and
Greater and Lesser Tunbs.
Photo
credit: The GCC leaders convening in Doha, Qatar; 9 December 2014 (AFP)
9 comments:
the Gobal Council of Conspiracy or the so called GCC has nothing else to do than taken anti-Iranian stance whenever it holds meetings. It seems they believe Iran is weak and isolated and as such they can utilize the situation to attack it verbally. What they don't seem to know is that the relative security they are experiencing is thanks to a stable Iran. The moment Iran feels this security is not appreciated by the GCC, I believe the petro-Arabs will face some tough time.
What do you mean that GCC's security is thanks to a stable Iran? What happens to GCC if Iran is not stable? Do you mean an unstable Iran is dangerous to them, so they should help stabilize Iran? Please elaborate.
Iranians are full of hyperbole or RAJAZ. Your first comment relates to that. For 35 years Iran has been unstable and run like an occupied country, why else does the regime need sepah or basij or have such high rate of corruption because regime does not see themselves as belonging to the country. Khamenei tried running Iran in a relatively normal way with Khatami but did not like it...In this environment GCC has been allowed to grow to be prosperous and militarily powerful. Remember one word from Saudi Arabia and France and US refused to sign agreement in Vienna.
PS: I am Iranian.
@Nader, I am the original commentator. You have understood my comment correctly. I am saying that the stability of the GCC is dependent on the stability of Iran and vice versa. I think if Saudi Arabia one day becomes unstable, that is of no good for Iran's stability as Saudi Arabia is a major country in the region. So I believe the stability of Egypt, Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia as major hubs in the region are of great importance to the stability of the entire region, no matter what political ideology each country is following or which global power they team up with. These four countries are just too important to get unstable and as such no one will benefit from it at the end of day. The oil exportg, trade and economic growth of the region is also dependent on stability of these four countries. As such GCC is not making a wise move by claiming Iranian territories and making hostile moves against Iran. Instead a more friendly posture would build the necessary bridge for increasing trade and commerce ties which would be in the interest of everyone.
I believe this region needs a new regional grouping, I would call it Gang of Four: Iran, Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, in order to move forward with a framework for stability and growth. The problem today is paying too much attention to "small city nations" and giving them a role which they do not deserve in reality. This false realm is the root cause of the problems you face in the region, but by putting the Gang of Four in a new political bloc and around the table on a regular basis, they can proactively settle many of the regional issues.
Thanks much. Your original comments in fact contained threatening and unfriendly language toward the GCC, precisely the language you say in your latter comments that it should not be used for the sake of regional stability. I agree.
The language might be unfriendly but never threatening in other sense than we do "predictions" of geo-political events initiated by moves of the different players in the region and the globe. But bear in mind these are "amateur analysis" and "predictions" and nothing else.
Having said that it is important to realize the sequence of events. UK sends ships to Bahrain, GCC makes direct statement against territorial integrity of Iran and GCC creates a common navy with HQ in Bahrain...as an amateur or professional analyst you have to put the whole sequence together to see whether this is going into the right direction (growing trade & commerce) or towards creating lines of division and friction. If you ask me it is currently not going in right direction:
http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/middle-east/53994-141210-gulf-states-to-create-regional-police-navy-to-fight-terrorism
I still hope the big muscles (Iran, Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia) take their responsibility and create a regional security council dealing with major security issues as responsible states in the region. If you really look at this suggestion you can see its uniqueness as it is based on recognizing the size, power and influence of all these four states at the same time and in a mutual manner. I hope the Obama administration with its focus on diplomacy can de-escalate the tension which is now driven by moves made by UK and GCC.
AnonymousDecember 10, 2014 at 3:45 PM
Its a nice idea but so long as the current regimes are in power in these three countries there is no chance of that happening,these three countries are firmly in the pro nato/zionist camp,one only has too look at the meddling of all three in syria or turkeys zero problems/neo ottomanist foreign policies.In order for your idea to come to pass those three nations would first have to become genuinely independent non aligned nations rather than the pro western semi independent vassal states that they are now.
Anonymous 3:23 AM
those three countries prefer not to be close to Iran's government ...as does most of the world.
AnonymousDecember 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM
I think you`ll find that "most of the world" has no problem with iran,in fact probably the best example of this was irans presidency of and hosting of the 2012 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement attended by the heads of 120 nations including 24 presidents, 3 kings, 8 prime ministers and 50 foreign ministers,so much for your claim to the contrary
Post a Comment