Four Arab states leading Qatar boycott say initial demands void, vow more measures

[webfact]

Four Arab states leading Qatar boycott say initial demands void, vow more measures

 

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir (2-L), UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan (L), Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry (2-R), and Bahraini Foreign Minister Khalid bin Ahmed al-Khalifa (R) meet to discuss the diplomatic situation with Qatar, in Cairo, Egypt, July 5, 2017. REUTERS/Khaled Elfiqi/Pool

 

CAIRO (Reuters) - The four Arab states leading the boycott against Qatar said late on Thursday that Doha's refusal of their demands to resolve a Gulf diplomatic crisis is proof of its links to terror groups and that they would enact new measures against it.

 

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Bahrain released a joint statement carried by the countries' state media saying their initial list of 13 demands was now void and pledging new political, economic and legal steps against Qatar.

 

The Qatari government sabotaged diplomatic efforts to solve the rift, the four states said, and its refusal affirmed its continuing sabotage of the region's stability and security.

 

Any measures taken by the four states would be aimed at the Qatari government but not its people, they said, without elaborating on when the new steps would be announced or what they would entail.

 

Foreign ministers from the four states convened in Cairo the day before after the expiry of a 10-day deadline for their demands to be met. They condemned the tiny Gulf nation's response as "negative" and lacking in content.

 

Since last month, the countries have cut diplomatic and transport ties with Qatar, which they accuse of supporting terrorism and allying with regional foe Iran. Doha denies the charges.

 

Among their demands were orders for Qatar to curtail its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, shut down the pan-Arab al Jazeera TV channel, close a Turkish military base in Doha and downgrade its ties with Iran.

 

(Reporting by Ali Abdelaty; Writing by Ahmed Aboulenein and Katie Paul; Editing by James Dalgleish and Jonathan Oatis)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-07-07

[tomwct]

Just shut the flow of goods except basic food items! They will meet the demands! Also threaten to Boycott the Soccer game

they bought with bribe money!

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, tomwct said:

Just shut the flow of goods except basic food items! They will meet the demands! Also threaten to Boycott the Soccer game

they bought with bribe money!

They've already done that as much as they could. Turkey and Iran are now supplying Qatar. And none of the states embargoing Qatar have any appetite for a fight with those 2 parties.

[coulson]

Ridiculous. Qatar made steps to negotiate and it's called sabotage?

[coulson]

Just shut the flow of goods except basic food items! They will meet the demands! Also threaten to Boycott the Soccer game
they bought with bribe money!

Who are you telling to boycott the world cup? Saudi, UAE, Egypt & Bahrain? That could only improve the tournament as it stands they are not permitted to enter the country anyway.

Since you're on about bribery, who's more at fault for the FIFA scandal? Russia, Brazil, S.A. all riddled with dirty money. 2022 just went to the highest bidder because it was UP FOR SALE

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32897066

[darksidedog]

It is much less a case of Qatar sabotaging the diplomatic efforts, than of the demands being made being utterly ridiculous and totally unacceptable. To try to suggest Qatars refusal is "proof" of it supporting terrorism will not be believed by any other than those dumb enough within those four countries. And as for the accusers, maybe the whole world should boycott Saudi Arabia, until it improves its human rights.

[retarius]

The bullies look a bit weak don't they? A bit dumb sending an public ultimatum and not having a back up plan.

[ELVIS123456]

I wonder if Qatar will actually hold the 2022 World Cup.  Qatar has a history of corruption and supporting Islamic terrorists, so much so that the main Arab States are imposing boycotts, and threatening to escalate. Maybe what we are seeing is the beginning of moderate Muslim States deciding to 'correct' those that support and shelter Islamic terrorists.  Hope so - the western world needs this happen, one way or the other.  

 

[ilostmypassword]

7 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

I wonder if Qatar will actually hold the 2022 World Cup.  Qatar has a history of corruption and supporting Islamic terrorists, so much so that the main Arab States are imposing boycotts, and threatening to escalate. Maybe what we are seeing is the beginning of moderate Muslim States deciding to 'correct' those that support and shelter Islamic terrorists.  Hope so - the western world needs this happen, one way or the other.  

 

You mean moderate Arab states like Saudi Arabia? And how exactly does Qatar's corruption differ from that of its neighbors? And Qatar is the only nation in the Gulf that supports terrorists? And that word terrorist has become a very slippery one. According to the Saudis, atheists are terrorists. The Saudis and others know that "terrorist" is a magic word that will elicit the response they want in gullible or complicit westerners.

And do you realize that the Trump administration has just inked a deal to sell Qatar 12 billion dollars worth of high tech fighter jets? I guess that makes the Trump administration terrorist supporters, too?

Edited July 7, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[DaddyWarbucks]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

You mean moderate Arab states like Saudi Arabia? And how exactly does Qatar's corruption differ from that of its neighbors? And Qatar is the only nation in the Gulf that supports terrorists? And that word terrorist has become a very slippery one. According to the Saudis, atheists are terrorists. The Saudis and others know that "terrorist" is a magic word that will elicit the response they want in gullible or complicit westerners.

And do you realize that the Trump administration has just inked a deal to sell Qatar 12 billion dollars worth of high tech fighter jets? I guess that makes the Trump administration terrorist supporters, too?

Spot on.

A concise, factual reply to nonsense.

[Caps]

So..what with the billions of dollars of fighter jets to Qatar and the 100 billion plus weapons deal to the Saudis is looks like the US is supporting all types of terrorism 

Edited July 7, 2017 by Caps
spelling

[DaddyWarbucks]

2 minutes ago, Caps said:

So..what with the billions of dollars of fighter jets to Qatar and the 100 billion plus weapns deal to the Saudis is looks like the US is supporting all types of terrorism 

Nothing new in that scenario.

[nahkit]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

refusal of their demands to resolve a Gulf diplomatic crisis is proof of its links to terror groups

 

Among their demands were orders for Qatar to curtail its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, shut down the pan-Arab al Jazeera TV channel, close a Turkish military base in Doha and downgrade its ties with Iran.

So hosting a Turkish military base is proof of links to terror groups?

 

If that's the case then shouldn't Turkey be on the terror watch list?

[impulse]

3 hours ago, ELVIS123456 said:

Maybe what we are seeing is the beginning of moderate Muslim States deciding to 'correct' those that support and shelter Islamic terrorists.  Hope so - the western world needs this happen, one way or the other.  

 

If only they were moderate.  They're despotic dictatorships fueling (and funding) the radical Islamic players.

 

I agree that the only solution to the problem is in the Islamic community itself.  But it's pretty much impossible to expect those regimes to share the wealth with their people to alleviate the abject, soul crushing poverty and the lack of a future for those who weren't born into the right families.

 

[Kasset Tak]

Yeah, look who is talking... Saudi Arabia, home country of Bin Laden and has been proven to be a proud sponsor of Al Queda and ISIS in the past!

[Morch]

4 hours ago, retarius said:

The bullies look a bit weak don't they? A bit dumb sending an public ultimatum and not having a back up plan.

Originally, the demands were not made public. This was probably intended as giving some maneuvering space. They were leaked later on, some reports say by Kuwaite, others claim Qatar.

 

I have no idea what you consider a "back up plan", or why you imagine the possibility of Qatar refusing demands was not taken as one possible outcome. If some versions are to be believed, then the demands were intentionally made to be rejected.

[Morch]

5 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

They've already done that as much as they could. Turkey and Iran are now supplying Qatar. And none of the states embargoing Qatar have any appetite for a fight with those 2 parties.

 

That's your opinion. In reality, they can tighten the screws more - pressuring neighboring states, kicking Qatar from the GCC, applying sanctions to countries dealing or aiding with Qatar. Granted there will have to be a certain amount of double standards and looking the other way (US presence, for example) but further pressure is probable.

 

Turkey cannot supply Qatar by air forever. A short term emergency measure, yes, a long term arrangement, not so much. Increasing dependence on Iran will come with a price, and may not sit all too well with the US.

 

The last bit doesn't have much to do with reality. Iran does not currently have any agreement or obligation to defend Qatar, and the assumption that it will jump to Qatar's defense is not based on much. The military Turkish presence in Qatar is minimal, and will not serve as much of a deterrence (or effective protection) if push came to shove. There are two things keeping Qatar safe - US military presence and no one really interested in a major gulf war at this time.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, coulson said:

Ridiculous. Qatar made steps to negotiate and it's called sabotage?

 

Qatar didn't make steps to negotiate. There were negotiations, of sort, handled by Kuwait. How much is Kuwait invested in sorting things out is debatable. Plenty of agendas and parties here.

 

It can said that the demands were formulated to be rejected, and that might as well be true. Another view is that they were opening positions, and that leaking them to the media was meant to sabotage chances of agreement being reached.

 

Qatar adversaries will say "sabotage", Qatar will claim SA & Co. never intended to negotiate and that demands were unacceptable. Not necessarily conflicting narratives even, as both can be true. The blame game is nothing new.

Edited July 7, 2017 by Morch

[coulson]

 
Qatar didn't make steps to negotiate. There were negotiations, of sort, handled by Kuwait. How much is Kuwait is invested in sorting things out is debatable. Plenty of agendas and parties here.
 
It can said that the demands were formulated to be rejected, and that might as well be true. Another view is that they were opening positions, and that leaking them to the media was meant to sabotage chances of agreement being reached.
 
Qatar adversaries will say "sabotage", Qatar will claim SA & Co. never intended to negotiate and that demands were unacceptable. Not necessarily conflicting narratives even, as both can be true. The blame game is nothing new.

Wrong choice of words on my part.

They were willing to negotiate, but with an ultimatum designed to be rejected is pointless. And it took a while for the grievances to make light of day.

While the world urged all parties to talk, the reality is they are wanted out of the GCC and this was the best time to try.

[Morch]

10 minutes ago, coulson said:

 

Wrong choice of words on my part.

They were willing to negotiate, but with an ultimatum designed to be rejected is pointless. And it took a while for the grievances to make light of day.

While the world urged all parties to talk, the reality is they are wanted out of the GCC and this was the best time to try.



 

 

 

Again, guess we'll never know for sure if they were really up for negotiations or not. Same goes for who actually leaked the demands. Suffice to say that even within each supposed party there are various factions with different interests and scores to settle.

 

I dunno that they are wanted out of the GCC as such. Seems the ideal goal was to bring Qatar under control, so kicking it out of the GCC doesn't fit. But if a more realistic goal was to beat Qatar (economically, politically) hard enough first, then maybe yes.

 

Being in the GCC there can be some measure of control applied, Qatar as a free agent - who benefits?

 

 

 

Edited July 7, 2017 by Morch

[connda]

Translated: "We want your gas fields in the gulf, therefore we'll label you terrorists even though you are funding ISIS just like we are, but we know if we can get that 'terrorist' label to stick, the West will allow us to invade your country and take your developed natural gas infrastructure as our spoils of war."  

Reality.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, connda said:

Translated: "We want your gas fields in the gulf, therefore we'll label you terrorists even though you are funding ISIS just like we are, but we know if we can get that 'terrorist' label to stick, the West will allow us to invade your country and take your developed natural gas infrastructure as our spoils of war."  

Reality.

 

Translated: "I've no idea what I'm on about, but that's no excuse for skipping a "West" bashing" opportunity".

 

The same "West" arms Qatar as well. The same "West" parks it's airplanes and troops in Qatar. 

The main gas field in question cannot be fully developed without Iran's consent. Don't think they'll play along.

[connda]

10 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Translated: "I've no idea what I'm on about, but that's no excuse for skipping a "West" bashing" opportunity".

 

The same "West" arms Qatar as well. The same "West" parks it's airplanes and troops in Qatar. 

The main gas field in question cannot be fully developed without Iran's consent. Don't think they'll play along.

Excellent analysis!  Kudos. 

Edited July 7, 2017 by connda

[Dumbastheycome]

And  now  the  arrows   fly

take   care

Not the  target   nor the   bowman

is  at  greatest risk  to  die

[Morch]

15 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

And  now  the  arrows   fly

take   care

Not the  target   nor the   bowman

is  at  greatest risk  to  die

 

No arrows, no shooting. Sorry.