Posted by: bklunk | February 6, 2007

Explain This For Me

slam3 from politics shares this interesting item. As social scientists, what explanations can we offer for this effort on the part of Pakistan and Turkey?

Pakistan and Turkey Collaborating?

In a recent article, it stated that Pakistan and Turkey are willing to work together to promote peace throughout the Middle East. The Pakistan’s President General Pervez Musharraf and Turkish Ahmet Necdet held a news conference on Monday February 5, 2006, announcing their collaboration with each other in promoting peace within the Middle East. General Pervez Musharraf stated at the news conference that ” We are aiming to contribute to efforts to bring peace to our region, to the world and the Muslim world.” With this peace effort between the two states, it would probably help resolve some of the religion problems that has been ongoing in the Middle East for a number of years.

The two nations might make this work, if each one of the nation would keep their words in keeping peace. It’s hard to work well with one another, especially when there isn’t any trust in the relationship. Most nation would act on their own self-interest, making cooperation very difficult to achieve. With many problems within the Middle East, the Muslim nations need more states willing to help with the peace effort.

technorati tags:, ,

Blogged with Flock



  1. While I do think that it’s a step in the right direction for these two countries to come forth and say that they plan to work together to achieve peace in the Middle East, and I do not mean to be pessimistic, I do not think that this is the answer to the conflict that exists in the Middle East. There is still far too much distrust within the countries themselves for there to be really helpful collaboration between different countries. I also think it will take the agreement of countries that are more involved in the conflict to really make peace seem possible, because I just don’t see how the efforts of Pakistan and Turkey can fix problems in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Israel, Palestine, etc. So, while I do think that any effort to bring peace to the Middle East, especially by the Middle Eastern countries themselves, will be helpful and sets a good example, there is still so much more to work out before we can actually hope to see that peace.

  2. I think I am going to take a more optimistic view on this issue that the last poster. As soon as I had finished reading the article I thought to myself that it sounded a little like the beginnings of the EU. The EU obviously banded together for a different set of reasons, but I see this first step as maybe an attempt at banding together the Middle East. There is a lot of poverty and hardship in the Middle East however there is also a great deal of wealth to be had in resources and business there; the most obvious example is oil. If these countries start to bind themselves together then their well being becomes wrapped up in each other which could be the necessary step to provide peace in the region. I am optimistic that this is the beginning of a step in the right direction, a direction which, if followed through, will be good for both the Middle East and the world.

  3. I would be interested to see what type of measures these two countries take in their promotions of peace for the region. At this point, any local influence that promotes peace would seem beneficial, because of the complexities of ethnicity and religion that are apparently the roots of conflicts in the region. Any efforts might benefit from focusing on the things held common between citizens of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Turkey. However, upon reading this, I feel some distrust in assertions made by Musharaff. This is mostly because (and perhaps I misunderstand the dynamic of the region at present) my understanding is that a large contribution to the alleged Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan was or is supposed to be fighters coming, unimpeded, from Pakistan (by way of Waziristan). Musharaff has acknowledged that border guards have been lax at times, and there are also the suspicions of alliances between the secret police of Pakistan and the Taliban. Especially because of the Pakistani president’s recent open acknowledgement of potential border crossings, his assertions about peace are possibly dubious at present. Yet, that acknowledgement could indicate a readiness to be more diplomatically open about the workings of the region, which he surely understands very well.

  4. I really like this idea of peace agreements, but to me there is a major roadblock that may stand in the way of the great outcome of peace.
    That roadblock is that even though this peace agreement sounds good, there is a possibility that it might not become a reality. Anyone can say to someone else that they are going to promote peace, but sometimes it just doesn’t happen. The idea, to me, sounds a little idealistic. In reality, there might be some radical people/groups that will not be willing to promote the peace between the two countries and that could cause some major problems.
    But overall, I really like the idea of this peace agreement and I hope that it works out for the best and the greater outcome of peace.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: