Raisi’s Pakistan visit: Should budding Beijing-Tehran-Islamabad bonhomie concern New Delhi?

It is the visit of the year, being watched closely by friends and enemies alike. But the landing of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in Pakistan at such a fraught time may be trouble in spades or could be an opportunity for a diplomatic signal by Pakistan. Much depends on how it is going to be played. The visit is over, but the repercussions are still uncertain.

President Riasi chose to spend an entire three days in Pakistan, also visiting Lahore and Karachi, where the authorities announced a holiday. Stringent security measures were clearly in place, given the high level of threat. The president wanted a public meeting but was denied one, given the severe security threats in each of these cities.

A voluminous joint statement has been issued, in which very serious concerns have been highlighted. Some of these are doable, and some are not. In the latter class is the question of the proposed Iran-Pakistan pipeline, which was once supposed to be extended to India on Iran’s suggestion in 1999 and was termed the ‘peace and friendship’ project.

Just two years after it was first proposed. At the time, Iran was actually on the good side of the US, being one of the participants in the Bonn Conference on Afghanistan and providing $500 million to stabilise the new government. But soon opposition began again, with Saudi Arabia offering oil supplies and an oil terminal.

The US soon changed its mind and offered to back electricity supplies from Tajikistan. India withdrew, citing very high pricing and security issues, as the Baloch stepped up attacks on the Sui gas pipelines. Pakistan is now in the unenviable position of having to pay a hefty penalty of $18 billion. The deadline of March 24 has already passed. Pakistan simply cannot pay, though it desperately needs the gas. And to put it even more simply, competitive pricing is unviable unless India is also part of this deal. Pakistan says it has requested a waiver from the US. That is unlikely to happen.

Consider that India has a waiver only for food and aid to Afghanistan through the Iranian port of Chahbahar. To further profitably run Chahbahr, it also needs more. Don’t forget that Iran has sanctions from the US, the European Union, and the UN. Meanwhile, an interesting snippet. Russia has reportedly offered to fund the initial $160 million for the 80-kilometre Pakistani section. Pakistan hopes China will offer. It might. But not directly. Meanwhile, an Iranian delegation is attending a BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) meeting in Moscow to discuss the Middle East situation.

‘Brotherly’ language is wearing thin

The other focus of the joint statement is on terrorism. It is the highest form of irony that both sides referred to terror organisations in Afghanistan, conveniently overlooking that their main grouse is the terror outfits in each other’s states. In this, the ‘brotherly Islamic state’ language is wearing thin.

This is not just about the recent attacks by Iran on Jaish-ul-Adl camps in Pakistan or the latter’s response with an air attack. True, both stopped back from the brink and stated that they had not attacked the other’s citizens. But it is an established fact that terrorists from Pakistan have conducted several strikes on Iran, with the Rask attack in April killing some 11 Iranian security forces.

At the same time, Pakistan has accused Iran of funding sectarian groups, with the Zainabiyoun brigade, an Iranian group designated as terrorist, for recruiting Pakistanis for operations in Syria. That was just a week ago, and it would have worsened relations. In fact, just following the strikes, Pakistan’s Counter-Terrorism Department (CTD) arrested a suspect for the 2019 assassination attempt on a top Pakistani cleric belonging to the outfit.

There is a caveat, though. Tehran believes that these activities are at the behest of the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, all of whom have reason to bring down the Shia power. Earlier, a series of memos from the CIA described how Israelis posed as Americans and recruited the Jundullah (the earlier version of JuA). President Riasi has therefore focused on cooperation in terrorism, which, translated into realpolitik, means that Tehran wants Islamabad to stop its territory being used for such activity. That’s highly unlikely.

Of trade, smuggling, and barter

Meanwhile, both sides are trying to ‘develop’ the border areas on both sides with markets and trading zones. It’s not just the insurgent groups that both have to contend with. There are a range of smuggling operations, including highly lucrative (and open) fuel and human smuggling that has security forces on both sides making a very large buck.

Some time ago, some 40 officials of the Frontier Corps were arrested for corruption in Balochistan, while protests against the centre in Gwadar also called for local representation in control over the border. The interference by security forces is well known, while Iran itself has blamed the SF for backing terrorist entry.

Meanwhile, the professed desire to increase trade to $10 billion remains a pipedream in a barter system, even if the pipeline goes through. As of now, the markets are already awash with Iranian products. The US, meanwhile, is already warning of trade relations being disrupted by sanctions. The bright side for Pakistan. Connectivity is already real on the ground.

A historic breakthrough took place as Pakistan’s army, run by the National Logistics Corporation (NLC), travelled 5,300 km to reach Turkey via Iran. That was in 2021. That doesn’t really violate sanctions. Meanwhile, both are part of the Belt and Road Initiative, and the Turkey-led ECO (Economic Cooperation Organization), which includes much of Central Asia and Afghanistan. Matters are moving, sanctions or not.

The ’K’ word

Finally, there is that puzzling statement on Kashmir. At the press event, PM Sharif raised it, while President Raisi quietly sidestepped it. The joint statement said briefly, “Both sides highlighted the need to resolve the issue of Kashmir through dialogue and peaceful means based on the will of the people of that region and in accordance with international law.”

There’s no reference at all to the UN resolutions. Iran is simply not interested. It has enough enemies on all sides without alienating a ‘friendly’ like New Delhi. But there is trouble ahead for India.

A bloc of sorts is beginning to emerge between Iran, Russia, China, Turkey, and Pakistan. Turkey has always been at odds with the West, despite its NATO membership, while the others have all been hurt badly by sanctions. All are suppliers of military equipment to Moscow and Belt and Road Initiative members (though Russia is not quite part of it), not to mention a series of other groupings that China has cobbled together with Central Asia.

Iran is no enthusiastic partner for such a bloc. It also has issues with the Saudis, who are being wooed by China. But China is driving what it calls a ‘wave of reconciliation’ between them, which was effectively destroyed by the Gaza war.

It is entirely likely that China is pushing Pakistan and Iran into just such a move, essentially giving itself an outer ring of countries that are friendly to it. Notably, the US had to approach China to ‘call off’ Iran in its war of attrition against Israel.

China also gets cheap oil from Iran. Pakistan is a kind of spare wheel, badly dented but still useful due to its geographic location. Any hardening of this bloc is extremely undesirable for India, and it may have to look hard at its approach towards Iran in terms of restarting oil purchases (Iran was once among the top-three suppliers) or at least persuade the US to allow brisk trade through Chahbahar. The US is unwittingly or otherwise allowing the creation of a bloc that could be extremely inimical to itself. It is time to cut those strings.

The author is Director (R&A) at the Centre for Land Warfare Studies. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.