Turning Qatar into an Island: Saudi cuts off its nose to spite its face
by James M Dorsey on 18 Apr 2018 1 Comment

There’s a cutting-off-the-nose-to-spite-the face aspect to a Saudi plan to turn Qatar into an island by digging a 60-kilometre ocean channel through the two countries’ land border that would accommodate a nuclear waste heap as well as a military base. If implemented, the channel would signal the kingdom’s belief that relations between the world’s only two Wahhabi states will not any time soon return to the projection of Gulf brotherhood that was the dominant theme prior to the United Arab Emirates-Saudi-led imposition in June of last year of a diplomatic and economic boycott of Qatar.

 

It would also suggest that chances are minimal that the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) that groups Oman, Kuwait and Bahrain alongside Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE would revert to its role as a regional integrative body. So do unconfirmed reports that the UAE plans to follow in the kingdom’s footstep and build a nuclear waste site of its own at the closest point to its border with Qatar.

 

UAE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash appeared to confirm the Saudi plan, gloating on Twitter that Qatari “silence on the canal project is proof of their fear and confusion.”

 

The message that notions of Gulf brotherhood are shallow at best is one that will be heard not only in Doha, but also in other capitals in the region. The 200-metre wide, 20-metre deep channel would erase a border that has been closed since the imposition of the boycott and was unlikely to re-open any time soon.

 

Built a kilometre from the Qatari border, the channel would be able to accommodate merchant and passenger ships of up to 295 metres long and 33 metres wide, with a maximum draught of 12 metres. Adding insult to injury, the nuclear waste dump and military base would be on the side of the channel that touches the Qatari border and would effectively constitute a Saudi outpost on the newly created island.

 

The plan, to be funded by private Saudi and Emirati investors and executed by Egyptian firms that helped broaden the Suez Canal, also envisions the construction of five hotels, two ports and a free trade zone.

 

The $750 million project would have the dump ready for when Saudi Arabia inaugurates the first two of its 16 planned nuclear reactors in 2027. Saudi Arabia is reviewing proposals to build the reactors from US, Chinese, French, South Korean contractors and expects to award the projects in December.

 

The Saudis’ cutting-off-the-nose-to-spite-the-face aspect kicks in with the fact that the channel would not only destroy Qatar’s one land border and create a glaring symbol of regional division rather than integration. It would also draw a dividing line between two interpretations of Wahhabism, an ultra-conservative Sunni Muslim worldview developed by Mohammed ibn Abdul Wahhab, an 18th century preacher, at a time that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has vowed to return the kingdom to an unidentified moderate form of Islam.

 

Qatar’s more liberal Wahhabism of the sea contrasts starkly with the Wahhabism of the land that Prince Mohammed is seeking to reform. The crown prince made waves last year by lifting a ban on women’s driving, granting women the right to attend male sporting events in stadiums, and introducing modern forms of entertainment like music, cinema and theatre – all long-standing fixtures of Qatari social life and of the ability to reform while maintaining autocratic rule.

 

As a result, the Saudi plan to physically separate the kingdom from Qatar cuts it off from the most logical model for Prince Mohammed’s plan to wean the kingdom off adherence to the most restrictive form of Wahhabism that has shaped Saudi history since the late 18th century and constituted the legitimizing basis for the creation of the modern Saudi state.

 

A traditional Gulf state and a Wahhabi state to boot, Qatari conservatism was everything but a mirror image of Saudi Arabia’s long-standing puritan way of life. Qatar did not have a powerful religious establishment like the one in Saudi Arabia that Prince Mohammed has recently whipped into subservience, nor did it implement absolute gender segregation.

 

Non-Muslims can practice their faith in their own houses of worship and were exempted from bans on alcohol and pork. Qatar became a sponsor of the arts and hosted the controversial state-owned Al Jazeera television network that revolutionized the region’s controlled media landscape and became one of the world’s foremost global English-language broadcasters.

 

Qatari conservatism is likely what Prince Mohammed would like to achieve even if that is something he is unlikely to acknowledge. His initial measures – lifting the ban on women’s driving and attending male sporting events; rolling back the powers of the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice or Mutaween, the religious police; and his introduction of long forbidden forms of modern entertainment – are in line with the conservatism of Qatar or for that matter the UAE, even if the Emirates do not share a Wahhabi heritage.

 

Qatar’s advantage has been that it projects the ability to change without completely dumping ultra-conservative religious precepts that have shaped culture and belief systems. It projects a vision, like the one Prince Mohammed is pursuing, of a less restrictive and less choking conservative Wahhabi society that grants individuals opportunities irrespective of gender. “I consider myself a good Wahhabi and can still be modern, understanding Islam in an open way. We take into account the changes in the world,” Abdelhameed Al Ansari, the then dean of Qatar University’s College of Sharia, a leader of the paradigm shift, told The Wall Street Journal in 2002.

 

Without doubt, Prince Mohammed’s social, economic and religious reform drive constitutes recognition of changes needed to turn the kingdom into a cutting-edge 21st century country and ensure the survival of his family’s autocratic rule. However, if built, the channel would suggest that geopolitical supremacy has replaced ultra-conservative, supremacist religious doctrine as a driver of the king-in-waiting’s policy. It’s a message that graphically projects division and polarization rather than regional cooperation and exploitation of synergies.

 

Courtesy

https://mideastsoccer.blogspot.sg/2018/04/turning-qatar-into-island-saudi-cuts.html

User Comments Post a Comment
High time we abandoned these identity traps
Karti
November 21, 2014
Report Abuse
Col. Hariharan provides a succinct overview of the lingering political issues in Sri Lanka politics. At the outset, recognizing Sri Lanka as a sovereign nation, Bharat has rightly chosen not to interfere in the internal affairs of the island nation in Indian Ocean. It is time to take this non-interference a step further to constitute a positive collabortive enterprise with both Bharatm under NaMo and Sri Lanka under Mahinda Rajapaksa to take proactive steps to create Indian Ocean Community, United Indian Ocean States as a Free Trade Zone and with maritime security for sealanes linking the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean.

This IOC will be a counterpoise to European Community and become an engine for socio-cultural-economic growth of the region to unprecedented heights. Bilateral and multilateral projects such as Colombo-Madurai rail-road link connecting with the Trans-Asian Railway and Highway Networks (linking Bangkok with Vladivostok) will provide for economic multiplier effects and unite the Bharatam Janam and Sri Lankans. Mahinda Rajapaksa should live up to the ideals of his name-sake of 3rd millennium BCE, Mahendra, the Bauddha Bhikku son of Emperor Ashoka and work with NaMo to form the Indian Ocean Community with a common Mudra, currency and a Free Trade Zone.

The moment of reckoning has arrived. The two statesman, Mahinda and Modi can charter a new path for resurgent IOC, Hindumahasagar Parivar in a Dharma-Dhamma continuum exemplified by the Ramasetu which links Talaimannar and Dhanushkodi as an eternal monument for protection of Dharma-Dhamma. Valmiki called Sri Rama vigrahavaan dharmah. It is for this reason: Sri Rama built the Setubandha to restore dharma in the region.

That memory will take the statesmen forward to the destiny of the Indian Plate marching majestically northwards at the rate of 6 cm. per year jutting into the Eurasian Plate creating the glacier-rich Himalayas which continue to grow about 1 cm higher every year creating the largest water-tower of th globe and yielding 5 mighty perennial rivers: Brahmaputra, Mekong, Irawadi, Salween, Yangtse, Huanghe.

This celebration of IOC should offer a clear, emphatic alternative -- a strategic geopolitical track -- abandoning the identity traps of Dravida or Eelam the results of petty-politicking. We are all Bharatam Janam of the Rashtram, the United Indian Ocean States. A good start will be for NaMo and Mahinda to declare Gulf of Mannar, Sethusamudram as Historic Waters, a tradition that transcends the UN Law of the Sea defining territorial waters.

Kalyanaraman
Rameshwaram Ramasetu Protection Movement
Kalyanaraman
November 21, 2014
Report Abuse
Communal politics have been the bane of Sri Lanka. The tamils mainly the christians who were the blue eyed boys of colonialism ( after they felt they lost there power after independence) instigated this concept of self rule with a similar response of communal politics from the rest of the communities. The separation they demand is not acceptable to the sinhalese because it is based on a provincial basis that was created to divide the sinhala communities after the rebellion of 1818. The North and East are part and parcel of the Kandyan kingdom. With 60% of the Tamils living in Sinhala areas attempts to create a mono ethnic separated areas only create another civil war with the Sinhalese demanding their Expulsion of the Tamils. The answer is good governance to a;ll people. The previous conflicts have all been led by Poltical violence instigated by both Tamil and Sinhala politicians. The majority of the people had nothing to do with it.
The article fails to address the question of the part played by the mossad which infiltrated RAW, Trained and armed both the LTTE and army and helped in the protraction of the war and also the Catholic church. As much as indian involvement is acknowledged which is against all norms of world order the conversion of this conflict into a geopolitical exercise by more powerful countries cannot be ignored. The present sectarian violence in the middle east has the same template as the war in SL. Powerful countries have interests which does not change , Today it is reflected in the form of Human Rights violations.to achieve their aims.
India , SL and the SAARC must be aware of the threats to the security of the area. Communal demands must be not encouraged but good governance and rule of law must be encouraged. In that sense the Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims of SL must unite to demand their basic human rights. this cannot be addressed in terms of communities .
vas
November 21, 2014
Report Abuse
vas presents a bigoted sinhalese viewpoint. lets neutralize with a different storyline. independent Ceylon removed voting rights for the estate Tamils. it forced Sinhalese as the sole official language in ceylon. it prevented Tamils from entering university through quotas. it settled Sinhalese in Tamil areas to change the demographic composition. it started riots attacking Tamils and their property. ceylon will never remain united. Its doomed for continued turmoil. now the country faces Sinhala Muslim problems. kalyanaraman meanwhile is a brahmin with little influence amongst his own people. j
he speaks for no one in his state except his own caste. how pathetic. meanwhile the sinhalese are a christian people welcoming their pope with bent knees and open hands just after their elections. they all have christian last names.
muthu
November 25, 2014
Report Abuse