• Monday, November 18, 2019

India being propped up as a counter-weight to China: Nasser Janjua

Discussion in 'Strategic & Foreign Affairs' started by RangeMaster, Mar 28, 2017.

  1. RangeMaster

    RangeMaster FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,307
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2016
    Ratings:
    +1 / 3,463 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    [​IMG] Nasser Khan Janjua. PHOTO: APP
    ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has voiced serious concerns over growing strategic partnership between India and the United States saying the ‘logistic exchange pact’ between the two countries has put the vision of ‘Asia’s century’ in serious jeopardy .

    “Inter-state tensions in the region and significant investments in blue water navies by countries like India have brought oceans into focus as sensitive security space,” said Lt Gen (retd) Nasser Khan Janjua, the adviser to the prime minister on national security, on Monday while speaking at a national maritime conference.

    India all set to host maritime meet with Pakistan
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Janjua underscored the importance of maritime security and said the vision of ‘Asia’s century’ was under stress as “security architecture and strategic stability of the region has come under stress”.

    In this regard, he pointed towards the Indo-US logistics exchange agreement, through which “India and the US have carved out space to pre-position themselves on this ocean. “India is being propped up as a counter-weight to China through geo-political, geo-economic and geo-military moves,” he said.

    Federal Minister for Defence Production Rana Tanveer Hussain, who was the chief guest at the event, said it was not surprising that Pakistan’s competitors were opposed to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and were already seeking to sabotage the multibillion-dollar project.

    “It is of utmost importance, therefore, that we be fully-prepared to deal with any and all challenges that may arise as these opportunities unfold, not the least in the maritime arena,” he said.

    Other speakers called for a broad-based national maritime policy, modernisation of navy, and expansion of diplomatic engagement with the ‘littoral states’ of the Indian Ocean for peace and security and capitalising on the opportunities created by CPEC.

    A set of 25 wide-ranging policy recommendations was issued at the conclusion of the conference on ‘Maritime Security in the Indian Ocean: Challenges and Prospects for Pakistan’, which had been jointly organised by the Centre for Pakistan and Gulf Studies (CPGS), the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (KAS), and the National Centre for Maritime Policy Research (NCMPR).

    The conference, which was attended by policymakers, legislators, maritime experts, and academics, further supported the idea of identifying the Indian Ocean as ‘Afro-Asian Ocean’ to give a sense of ownership to the littoral states since the ocean is bound by two continents.

    Deconstructing the India-US strategic deal

    The conference was held to analyse the challenges in the realm of maritime security emanating from militarisation and nuclearisation of the Indian Ocean and power projection by states maintaining presence in the area.

    The daylong conference also discussed emerging alliances in the region and threats to CPEC, in addition to non-traditional challenges like terrorism, piracy, food security and environmental concerns.

    It also underscored importance of overcoming national ‘sea-blindness’, because of which maritime issues have remained neglected in the national priorities, and developing a culture of ‘sea-positivity’.

    Unveiling the recommendations of the conference, the CPGS President Sehar Kamran said: “Maritime security is a pivotal aspect of Pakistan’s national security, and must be acknowledged as such.

    “A comprehensive and long-term maritime security policy with a futuristic approach based on projected requirements for the coming decades in both civilian and military maritime sectors is the need of time.”

    Sehar said fulfillment of the vision of ‘Asian Century’ needs a focus on 3Cs – connectivity, cooperation, and communication. She specially thanked the PPP Co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari for helping in ‘initiation of the CPEC’ and said it underscored how the PPP protected national interest in a non-partisan manner.

    It was suggested that the existing national maritime policy should be reviewed to make it more inclusive and forward looking so that it could address trade, economic, environmental and security elements for the protection and projection of Pakistan’s maritime interests.

    It proposed to establish the National Maritime Authority and allocation of necessary resources for expansion, development and establishment of new ports particularly along the Makran coast.

    The conference put special emphasis on development and modernisation of the Pakistan Navy as the guardians of the maritime boundaries.

    “Pakistan should increase and modernise its naval fleet, and pursue technological advancements in sea-based deterrents to ensure an assured second strike capability, especially in the context of the growing threats in the Anti-Aircraft Operations Rooms (AAOR) by our belligerent neighbour.”

    Former naval chief Admiral Muhammad Sandila raised the issues confronting development of the Gwadar deep seaport. “Until those challenges are addressed, Gwadar is not going to take off. CPEC minus Gwadar would be just an extension of the Karakoram Highway.”

    Ministry of Defence’s former additional secretary Rear Admiral Mukhtar Jadoon cautioned that the available resources were inadequate to meet the maritime security dictates.


    The conference recommended greater diplomatic engagement with littoral states in Afro-Asian Ocean Region to promote mutual trust and cooperation in development of the region, besides enhancing Pakistan’s access to African markets.

    It called for a review of the UN Resolution 2832 that declares the ocean as Zone of Peace to address the concerns of littoral states particularly about its nuclearisation. “Pakistan must take the initiative in strongly opposing the increased instability produced by the introduction of nuclear weapons by India.”

    It was proposed that India may also be roped in to the connectivity net as it was identified as the only way forward towards promoting peace and stability in the region and ensuring the security of investments like the CPEC.

    Other recommendations related to promoting investments, skills development, equitable distribution of opportunities created by the CPEC, and improved governance and security within Pakistan.

    Former deputy chief of naval staff vice admiral (retd) Iftikhar Ahmed said: “If we have the requisite infrastructure and enabling environment at Gwadar and the region, Gwadar will surely emerge as the economic hub of the region.”

    He said the Iranian port of Chahbahar poses no challenge to Gwadar and the two can complement each other.

    Rear Admiral (retd) Pervaiz Asghar pointed to threat of India’s naval expansion, but also drew attention to non-traditional threats. He asked for “a coordinated and unified response to an array of common non-traditional threats that are increasingly becoming the norm.”

    Published in The Express Tribune, March 28th, 2017.
     
  2. WaLeEdK2

    WaLeEdK2 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    5,214
    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Ratings:
    +7 / 6,824 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Canada
    The US has a containment of China policy. If you break up Pakistan then that's the biggest blow for China. Hence the Indian involvement in Pakistan's security situation.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  3. Tshering22

    Tshering22 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    17,878
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Ratings:
    +19 / 21,068 / -15
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Hardly.

    We have our own bilateral issues with China which are more related to insensitivity rather than downright ideological war.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  4. I S I

    I S I SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    7,596
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Ratings:
    +4 / 11,057 / -30
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  5. mrrehan

    mrrehan FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    347
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2015
    Ratings:
    +0 / 230 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Australia
    Is Trump leading the US on a warpath with Iran?
    Source: Al Jazeera News

    On a spring morning in 2016, a retired four-star general, who was forced out of his job by then-President Barack Obama, spoke before defence and foreign policy experts gathered just blocks from the White House.

    The 65-year old speaker, with silver hair and puffy eyes, was blunt. For all the dangers al-Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, known as ISIS) pose in the Middle East, he warned that the Iranian regime "is the single most enduring threat to stability and peace".

    He recalled that as commander of US troops in the Middle East, the first three questions he would ask his subordinates every morning "had to do with Iran and Iran and Iran".

    "We only pray, the rest of us outside this town, that someone good is listening here," he told the Washington crowd, as he issued an ominous prediction: "The future is going to be ghastly", and that "the next president is going to inherit a mess".

    Nine months later, James Norman Mattis returned to the US capital as defence secretary of President Donald Trump.

    As the man who oversees the 1.3 million US troops, manages Pentagon's $582.7bn budget, and directs military policy, Mattis has Trump's ear. The US president fondly calls him "Mad Dog Mattis", although the former general refers to himself as "Chaos", his Marine call sign.

    Supporters said he is best suited for the defence job because of his combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as his "strategic mind". Former US defence chief Robert Gates called him a "warrior-scholar".

    But critics said Mattis' fixation with Iran, combined with the president's hostility towards the oil-rich Gulf state, could lead the United States into a replay of Iraq - only this time with a much more "disastrous" consequence to the region.

    Media reports had suggested it's the same eagerness for confrontation with Iran that prompted Obama to fire Mattis as Central Command chief in 2013, at a time when the US and other world powers were trying to engage Tehran and secure a nuclear deal.

    Now Obama is out and Mattis is back.

    Already, the war of words between the US and Iran has intensified in the first three weeks of Trump's presidency, with Mattis calling Iran "the single biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world", after Tehran confirmed it tested mid-range ballistic missiles.

    Trump himself weighed in on the controversy, posting on social media that Iran "is playing with fire", as he ordered new sanctions on 13 Iranian individuals and 12 companies. When asked if a military action is possible, he replied, "Nothing is off the table."

    In response, Tehran fired more test missiles, with one commander of the Revolutionary Guard warning that "if the enemy falls out of line, our missiles will pour down on them".

    Iran also warned of "dark days to come" in the case of a military attack.
    Saeid Golkar, an Iran expert at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, told Al Jazeera: "Unfortunately, the relationship between America and Iran is getting very dangerous.

    "I think people in the Trump administration will try to make Iran do something stupid," he said, warning of further US actions, such as more sanctions and support for regime change in Tehran.

    What is also alarming is the bluster coming from the Trump White House, Trita Parsi, founder and president of the National Iranian American Council, told Al Jazeera's Nick Clark.

    "If you only have the ability to dial it up, but not dial it down, that is what is most worrisome right now because it could, unfortunately, lead to a military confrontation," he said, as he called on US officials to establish direct contact with Iranian officials to ease the tension.

    So far, none of the senior Trump officials have made any public effort to talk with Tehran.

    Like Trump and Mattis, National Security Adviser Michael Flynn - a former military spy chief - is known as an anti-Iran hardliner. Following the recent missile tests, Flynn came out swinging, with the headline-grabbing statement that the White House is "putting Iran on notice".

    As Trump's campaign adviser in 2016, Flynn had not been shy in expressing his views on Iran, decrying its "consistent bad behaviour", while calling Obama's nuclear deal "wishful thinking".

    Flynn also insisted in his Head to Head interview with Al Jazeera's Mehdi Hasan that Iran was "intent on having a nuclear weapon", despite proof to the contrary from Iran experts.

    Trump's chief strategist, Stephen K Bannon, is no different from Flynn. Before joining Trump's campaign, he ran the right-wing website Breitbart, which regularly publishes articles critical of Iran.

    As member of Congress, now-CIA chief Mike Pompeo had also advocated bombing Iran's military facilities, calling Iranian officials "serial nuclear cheaters".

    Amid this backdrop of hostilities, Mohammad Ali Shabani, Iran Pulse editor of Al-Monitor website, said the possibility of a military standoff "seems far-fetched at this point.

    "One should understand that statements and tweets do not constitute foreign policy," he told Al Jazeera.

    Shabani said Tehran's "regional strategic depth" and the "complete lack of an international consensus on such a potentially disastrous adventure" should dissuade Trump and his men from going after Iran militarily.

    "This is not to mention the domestic US side, where you have a public that is unlikely to stomach another quagmire that would make Iraq and Afghanistan look like a walk in the park," said Shabani.

    As for Iran, it is "trying to be a rational actor in foreign policy", and its officials are "very careful not to give excuse" for the US to launch an attack, said Hamid Reza Gholamzadeh, English editor of Tehran-based Mehr News Agency.

    "The two sides are just testing each other," he told Al Jazeera. "President Trump is trying to bully Iran to take action. Iran is not going to act radically to cause war between the two countries."

    But even without military confrontation, Gholamzadeh said Trump's rhetoric and the recent ban on Iranians entering the US have already alienated many Iranians and united them against the new US president.

    On Friday, hundreds of thousands of Iranians marched nationwide to mark the 38th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution and denounce Trump.

    Meanwhile, Hillary Mann Leverett, Middle East adviser to Presidents George W Bush and Bill Clinton, told Al Jazeera's News Hour that there is a "misimpression" among many American strategic planners that because of US military dominance, it can impose its will "wherever it chooses to", including in Iran.

    "But what they don't understand, and what has happened over and over again, whether it's Iraq, Afghanistan, even Vietnam, is that we are not there. We are not in Iran.

    "We don't have much at stake as those who actually live there. So, even a weaker party like Iran, compared to the United States, it has so much more at stake in the Middle East that it can really repel what the US may try to do it."

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/02/trump-leading-warpath-iran-170203105946707.html
     
  6. Indika

    Indika SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,328
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Ratings:
    +5 / 4,133 / -15
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    This is called pot calling kettle black. Does the military general think rest of the world are idiots. What is china propping up pakistan for ?
    break up pakistan and then what?have you ppl ever thought about that? have a problem that is 10 times worse than ISIS in syria.
    Even pakistan cant handle a situation with afghanistan, now if a nuclear country breaks then it is apocalypse now.
    It is pretty hard to argue with ppl who have tunnel vision and when it becomes so narrow it is as good as being blind.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  7. third eye

    third eye ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    18,211
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Ratings:
    +25 / 24,328 / -11
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Interesting , why would India get ' roped in' ?

    The USSR broke.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  8. Indika

    Indika SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,328
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Ratings:
    +5 / 4,133 / -15
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    there is a lot of difference when good guys and bad guys go mad/broke. Chances of bringing good guys back to sanity exist but...

    Fact is if not for its manufactured enmity towards India, it is still the best bet for china. Other route is through myanmar and again if India does not play truant then china will have a secure supply chain. China simply wants India in so as to assure itself the supply chain will not get disturbed.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  9. cocomo

    cocomo FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,170
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,683 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    India's admission to the SCO should be rejected for playing a proxy to foreign Anti-SCO power.
     
  10. third eye

    third eye ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    18,211
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Ratings:
    +25 / 24,328 / -11
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Rejected by whom ?