February 2, 2026

Kashmir: A Battleground for Middle Eastern Rivals

080219-07-Kashmir-India-Middle-East
Kashmir: A Battleground for Middle Eastern Rivals

Kashmir: A Battleground for Middle Eastern Rivals
Protest in 2018, Srinagar, Jammu & , Kashmir, India (Faizan Ahmad Sheikh via Shutterstock)

The Wahhabi influence is not new to Kashmir as followers of this Islamic practice have been there since the last 100 years.


Kashmir: A Battleground for Middle Eastern Rivals

By James M. Dorsey
Senior Fellow
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies


Thought that sectarianism was a pillar of the Saudi-Iranian rivalry? Think again, think Kashmir where the two countriesโ€™ geopolitical rivalry and Turkish ambitions cross sectarian lines.

With Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey competing for Indian Kashmiri hearts and minds, Iran and Turkeyโ€™s embrace of Kashmiri nationalism is winning them sympathy among both Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

The two countriesโ€™ perception of Kashmiri aspirations as nationalist rather than religious gives them a fighting chance to counter long-standing Saudi influence in the troubled South Asian region.

The Kashmiri competition, like Kazakhstan where a Saudi-inspired apolitical and loyalist strand of ultra-conservative Islam has gained popularity, suggests that crown prince Mohammed bin Salman has not given up on religion as a soft power too despite who seeking to root his legitimacy in newly found Saudi nationalism rather than the kingdomโ€™s ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam.

Prince Mohammed, since coming to office in 2015, has significantly cut back on funding and converted the kingdomโ€™s major funding vehicle, the World Muslim League, into a group that sings his praises and propagates tolerance and inter-faith dialogue.

Nevertheless, the crown prince  views the promotion of Madkhalism, a particular Saudi strand of ultra-conservatism that preaches absolute obedience to the ruler and sees the kingdom as the model of Islamic governance as a way of countering Iranian activism and the notion of an Islamic republic that recognizes a degree of popular sovereignty.

Saudi Arabia invested an estimated US$100 billion in funding of religious seminaries, cultural and higher educational institutions, media organizations and in a handful of countries militant groups as part of a more than 40-year religiously cloaked, globally waged covert war with Iran.

More recently, Turkey has sought to lay claim to leadership of the Muslim world by funding mosques and other institutions across the globe and seizing up Islamic causes like Jerusalem.

The funding, coupled with diplomatic pressure, also aims to counter the far-flung, embattled empire of Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic preacher who lives in exile in Pennsylvania and whom Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan accuses of having staged a 2016 failed military coup.

Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkeyโ€™s identification of Kashmir as a battleground points to the increased importance they attribute to South and by extension Central Asia.

In a twist of irony, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan appears to be embracing the Sufi Menzil sect, one of the largest and most powerful Sufi orders in Turkey, that is far more liberal than Saudi Arabiaโ€™s ultra-conservatism but shares with Madkhalism a rejection of politics.

Menzil Sufis have filled vacancies in the government bureaucracy and security services created by Mr. Erdoganโ€™s mass purge in the wake of the failed coup of alleged followers of Mr. Gulen, according to journalist Timur Soykan, who recently published a book on a more controversial Sufi order.

Like Madkhalis, Menzils, with a history of support for the Turkish state and its military, potentially could serve as anti-dotes to Iranian Shiitesโ€™ activism in places like Kashmir where Iran is targeting the Shiite minority who account for 15 percent of the regionโ€™s population.

Iran and Turkeyโ€™s emphasis on nationalism rather than religion compensates to some degree for Saudi Arabiaโ€™s first starter advantage, allowing Iran in particular to make significant inroads in Kashmir.

Portraits of Iranโ€™s late spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, loom large on billboards in Shiite neighbourhoods whose streets are named after Shiite martyrs. Saudi Arabiaโ€™s execution in 2016 of a prominent Shiite cleric sparked anti-Saudi protests in Kashmir.

Unlike Iran, Turkey, eager to expand economic cooperation with India, has restricted its focus in Kashmir to verbal support in international fora rather than the funding of mosques and/or schools. That has not stopped separatist groups from embracing Mr. Erdogan even if that doesnโ€™t challenge Saudi influence on the ground.

Indian journalist Asit Jolly estimated as far back as 2011 that 15 percent of Kashmirโ€™s population was  affiliated with some 700 Saudi-inspired ultra-conservative mosques. A Sufi organization put the figure ten times higher.

Ahl-e-Hadith, South Asiaโ€™s oldest Saudi-backed religious group, is believed to have funded some 150 schools, colleges, orphanages, clinics and medical diagnostic centres in Kashmir.

โ€œPractically every village along the picturesque, poplar-lined, 60-km stretch northwest of Srinagar towards Gulmarg has one or more Ahl-e-Hadith-funded mosques. The new mosques and their attendant madrassas make for a contrasting picture with the hundreds of dilapidated mosques built over centuries in the age-old Sufi tradition,โ€ Mr Jolly reported.

โ€œThe Wahhabi influence is not new to Kashmir as followers of this Islamic practice have been there since the last 100 years. But the phenomenal growth in their influence and their far and wide reach now can be attributed only to the funding the local โ€˜Ahle Hadithโ€™ have got from Saudi Arabia in the last 30 years,โ€ said an Indian intelligence official more recently.

Added analyst Abhinav Pandya: โ€œKashmir is becoming the ground zero for a new geopolitical race for influence: Iran and Turkey have deep, sometimes overlapping interests, Saudi Arabia wants to ensure a return on its financial and ideological investmentโ€ฆ The question is whether these statesโ€ฆwill weaponize those supporters in a future proxy conflict between themselves, or between separatists and India itself.โ€


Originally published by LobeLog, 08.02.2019, based at the Institute for Policy Studies, a program of Open Society Foundations, under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported license.