891982 ). Siding with Pakistan over the Bangladesh crisis, Riyadh warned
India not to take undue advantage of its good relations with the Muslim
world. The Kingdom reiterated this position in the UN and its permanent
representative flagged that the UNSC had “passed resolutions reaffirming
the right of Kashmiri people to self-determination” (Mudiam 1994 , 90).
The UN never invoked the idea of self-determination for Kashmir, but
Saudi Arabia sought to expand the plebiscite provision tailored to Pakistani
needs selectively. According to Riyadh, there were no reason for India to
‘attack’ East Pakistan except for its desire to ‘dismember’ Pakistan and
‘tarnish (its) Islamic creed” (Saliba 1972 ).
Similar position was adopted by others who were leaning towards
Pakistan over Bangladesh, and in the words of one observer, “[t]here was
no question where the sympathies of Jordan and Saudi Arabia lay ....
(both) strongly denounced the Indian aggression as treacherous and con-
trary to all international conventions and human values” (Saliba 1972 ,
131). Indeed, Gulf Arab monarchs, especially Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and
the UAE collected a sum of US$200 million, not an inconsiderable
amount in 1971, for Pakistan to help “repulse the Indian invaders” (Saliba
1972 , 131).
If these bilateral efforts were insufficient, Riyadh took the lead in the
OIC. Meeting in Jeddah in early 1972, the third meeting of Islamic for-
eign ministers declared “its full support for Pakistan, its territorial integ-
rity, national sovereignty and independence and urged all peace-loving
nations which respect moral values to support the Muslim nations in
maintaining peace and security of the Islamic territories and Muslim peo-
ple and to uphold the principle of non-interference in their internal affairs
in accordance with human values and the principles of the United Nations
Charter.” Pretending to be oblivious to the ground realities in South
Asia, they pledged to “send a delegation of conciliation composed of six
members of the Conference, Algeria, Iran, Malaysia, Morocco, Somalia
and Tunisia to Islamabad and Dacca to bring about reconciliation between
estranged brothers” (OIC 1972 ). At the same time, recognizing the large
number of Pakistani prisoners of war held by India, Islamic foreign min-
isters issued a veiled threat and urged India “to stop all acts of hostilities
and to take all necessary steps to repatriate without delay all prisoners of
war and civilian detainees in accordance with the Geneva Conventions” so
that “the existing relations between Muslim States and India might not be
affected.”
PAKISTAN FACTOR