China Delivers First Batch of Military Aid to Afghanistan

[Khan_21]

Your argument is based on the assumption .

- US will leave : I am sorry to break it to you but no they are not leaving, we have a strategic security agreement with them and we will provide bases to their military for decades to come, like South Korea model.

- Whatever conclusions you infer from the Torkham incident is your right, but you are right that AF is not a banana republic, you act against our interests, we will return the favor like another sovereign state.

- lastly I agree with you that civilians on both sides suffer, and that comes back to my central thesis, which is peace will only come with AF-PK government have genuine conversation with each other and address each other's grievances.

Conflict between AF-Pak has no winners, we are both losers in the end.

/Peace

.

The only loser in Pak- Afg conflict is Afghanistan . Who depends upon Pakistan for health , education , transit trade and basically everything from A-Z ? If afghanistan were to vanish tomorrow we would be much better off . Can you say the same for afghanistan where there is dearth of hospitals , universities and millions of your kind come here even for normal check ups and odd jobs ?

There is no hate from Pakistani side for Afghan people . Can you say the same for afghan people with respect to us ? Your public hates us . There is no conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan . Its a one sided conflict where Pakistan has no interest whatsoever while Afghanistan living in its delusional world tries to get some sort of parity with Pakistan . The fact that Afghans mention the term Pak-afg in the same sentence is just to seek parity with Pakistan . I have seen how insecure your analysts are in your media when discussing Pakistan . Its everything they wanted Afghanistan to be but counter with facts like '' 5000 year old history '' '' ghairatmand kaum '' and what not . One of your analysts on Tolo news even said that Our expressways , motorways , Islamabad , Hayatabad and Karachi were made possible because afghans showed them how to live . Afghanistan is doomed and there is no one else to blame but yourself .

 

[pakistani342]

Your argument is based on the assumption .

- US will leave : I am sorry to break it to you but no they are not leaving,

Sorry to break it to you but the US has already left
The token presence will continue to ensure the Kabul government does not collapse

we have a strategic security agreement with them and we will provide bases to their military for decades to come, like South Korea model.

Again reading history is very important: Pakistan was a party to two strategic agreements: CENTO and SETO at the height of the cold war -- that did not mean the US sided with Pakistan in its quarrels with India, as Pakistanis foolishly thought the US was bound to. Further: Afghanistan simply does not have any locus standi vis-a-vis Pakistan [notice the difference is statements McCain et. al. gave in Islamabad vs Kabul]

And please: Afghan embarrass themselves by comparing Afghanistan to Korea -- have you been to South Korea or are familiar with South Korea's development trajectory? I assure you people roll their eyes if not on your face when you make that comparison. Afghans should find a better analogy. To give you some example of what the world order looks like: Madeline Albright once quipped that Pakistan would be on par with Congo, had it not been a nuclear power -- now extend that to Afghanistan.

- Whatever conclusions you infer from the Torkham incident is your right, but you are right that AF is not a banana republic, you act against our interests, we will return the favor like another sovereign state.

But how:
a. by throwing a tantrum at the UNSC
b. by crying foul on social media?
c. If you mean that you will support the TTP -- well you are already doing that and the yes -- this nuisance will continue -- it might also behoove people to study how external actors supported the PKK in Turkey -- the results are there for people to inspect: other than nuisance value it did not have a critical impact on security and/or economy

- lastly I agree with you that civilians on both sides suffer, and that comes back to my central thesis, which is peace will only come with AF-PK government have genuine conversation with each other and address each other's grievances.

The key is differential suffering -- how many deaths can Pakistan sustain and brush off to safeguard what it sees as it's national interest?

Conflict between AF-Pak has no winners, we are both losers in the end.

I think the more accuracy statement would be that it is not cost free -- but it can certainly have winners: just see how India fared by supporting the Mukti Bhani -- Pakistan Lost, India Won --> India went on to prosper -- Pakistan payed a disproportional price. India has continued to pay a minor price for Pakistan's belligerence but there is simply a scale difference between the two.

Now extend that to the differential price a country like Afghanistan will have to pay -- a look at the the 1990s will give you a glimpse. Remember Afghanistan of 1980s was a far stronger a far more robust entity than the one you have today -- now you have 80 TV channels but not a single decent engineering college -- not a single decent business college (the AAU MBA program is a disgrace)

And the favor will be returned, yes AF will suffer much higher than Pakistan but Pakistan will feel the heath as well.

---> Again, agree: that is the only formulation of the strategic calculus of the GHQ that seems to make sense (other than sheer incompetence of course)
---> And again, I am at a loss to understand how this has any relevance -- again refer to above illustrations on what the implications are for Afghanistan (and also Pakistan)


--->For Pakistan the violence levels are drastically down [the opposite is true for Afghanistan] -- the violence levels have plummeted in Pakistan [Pakistan's economic status has recently been upgraded - which actually looks like it will have a short term negative effect on FDI].
----> Plus you can see the case of 1980 and 1990 for Turkey and Pakistan and 1960s for India (Bangladesh) and the ultimate offender is Iran [the speed at which the sanctions regime has been repealed has been surprising even to me]

Sadly another generation that will have to live with the consequences of policy making of the generals like Durrani Sahib on both sides.

----> But that generation will be Afghan -- the choice is Afghanistan's -- Remember Japan, Germany, and the like have surrendered -- they surrendered when the cost outweighed some flimsy nationalistic pride. Pakistan's ask is far more reasonable and not without precedent -- Sovereignty is not a binary concept but rather a continuum
----> Pakistan's generation will suffer from decreased opportunities -- but Afghanistan's generation will be lost from what drives today's world: education, healthcare, etc.
----> Also note the GHQ is the only party that has institutional experience at what it is purportedly trying to do -- the Afghan institutions are embryonic

 

[GR!FF!N]

so, @A-Team ,what you guys are getting from China?Anything exotic???

 

[Arsalan]

There you go, just by conversing less than 30 minutes we have reached some simile of an "agreement"

Genuine, frank and maybe difficult dialogue is the way forward as I have always believed.

If the Germans and the French can get along, we as hell can do the same, and this also goes along for the Pak-India relationship, stop being eternal enemies

Make love, not war

/Peace

The problem is that WE always seem to come to some sort of agreement and it is not long before you are making the smiliar statements in some other threads

@Spring Onion

Anyway, lets agree once more that both sides had a role in the mess ups and it will be only these two sides who will have to act to clear all that mess.

 

[A-Team]

The problem is that WE always seem to come to some sort of agreement and it is not long before you are making the smiliar statements in some other threads

@Spring Onion

Anyway, lets agree once more that both sides had a role in the mess ups and it will be only these two sides who will have to act to clear all that mess.

Well you and I are the converted ones, (converted some others too lately ) but as you see from @Spring Onion comments he got converted after our brief conversation. So in summary statements and argumentation are needed to showcase the folly of our current predicament and then offer solution which usually converts the objective ones here in PDF

so, @A-Team ,what you guys are getting from China?Anything exotic???

Afghan NSC shared the details but I have not looked at it but I understand this the start of long list of shipments to come.

 

[Signalian]

1. For China, better late than never. China has played little or no part in Afghanistan since 2001, considering that ISAF/NATO have taken the lead with Pakistan as an ally for logistics and support to start with.
China is a global player and Afghanistan is eating out of NATO hands. China has to make its presence felt globally now.

2. If the weapons are sophisticated then China also gains an entry into Afghanistan to train ANA troops on these weapons. This may not be welcomed by ISAF/NATO or India.

3. Chinese can also compete with India to provide more weapons at low prices to establish its market and monopoly in Afghanistan. This will breake Indian influence, which can benefit Pakistan. India cannot compete with China in this race as China has more weapons, aircrafts, tanks, artillery in storage to be given a throw away prices or free than India

4. Northern Alliance and ANA in Chinese influence is better than Indian influence.

5. China as mediator between Pakistan and Afghanistan is welcome than any other country. China needs to establish its foothold in Afghanistan first.

ANA is still weak and incompetent as compared to its rivals in Afghanistan. The problem is, although China doesnt dictate how and when to use its weapon, but the inexperienced ANA can lose these weapons to its rivals.