Def.pk op-ed: Mutual Blackmail, ETO for Afg, Pak and Ind

[VCheng]

...........................


Something which the OP has failed completly to factor in his protect "American interests" in th neighbourhood under the guise of improving our neighbourhood.

Like it or not, USA will protect its interests in the region, as well as elsewhere. I am merely taking fact that into account with any bias.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

When Pakistani policy makers say Kashmir is the core issue of between India and Pakistan and peace can't prevail without solving it(and mind you, if we go by Pakistan's policy vis-a-vis Kashmir, by solving it they mean Kashmir accession to Pakistan), then I have to assume they reflect the wish of Pakistan's population.

It may indeed be an issue 'close to the hearts' of many Pakistanis, but those same politicians make many more promises about 'ending corruption, development and economic prosperity' to Pakistanis than they do statements about Kashmir.

BTW, if Kashmir was not 'an important issue for many Indians', the GoI (and many Indian commentators) would not argue that the GoI can never compromise on Kashmir because the 'Indian electorate will never let them'. If Kashmir was not important for the average Indian, why would the average Indian oppose the GoI allowing a UN led plebiscite in J&K?

 

[lem34]

Focus people!!



But participating states at Istanbul will also need to acknowledge that Afghanistan’s stabilisation lies principally and fundamentally in actions taken within that country.[/COLOR][/B] That means stepping up efforts to spur the process of reconciliation with the Afghan insurgency and accelerating the search for a political solution to end a war that has brought so much grief to Afghanistan, the region and its people.
[/SIZE][/FONT]


Something which the OP has failed completly to factor in his protect "American interests" in th neighbourhood under the guise of improving our neighbourhood.

self delete

---------- Post added at 07:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:02 PM ----------

Like it or not, USA will protect its interests in the region, as well as elsewhere. I am merely taking fact that into account with any bias.

and ignoring other facts on the ground

---------- Post added at 07:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:03 PM ----------

Like it or not, USA will protect its interests in the region, as well as elsewhere. I am merely taking fact that into account with any bias.

Pakistan need not be complicit with america if it dont suit and what you suggested in op does not suit

 

[President Camacho]

I heard or read somewhere that afghans were prepared to give up osama to an international court composed of a number of nations. In any event the americans could have got Osama by other means.

That was not for 9/11. It happened only once, right after the embassy bombings. Taliban for once decided to hand over Osama to Saudi Arabia, but when the time came, they retracted.

 

[lem34]

That was not for 9/11. It happened only once, right after the embassy bombings. Taliban for once decided to hand over Osama to Saudi Arabia, but when the time came, they retracted.

Bit off topic but :

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over | World news | guardian.co.uk

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That was not for 9/11. It happened only once, right after the embassy bombings. Taliban for once decided to hand over Osama to Saudi Arabia, but when the time came, they retracted.

That is incorrect - there are Western news reports (including the NYT) reporting on Taliban officials offering to negotiate the transfer of OBL and others to a third country for trial.

The US chose to ignore those offers and wage a war that turned out to be extremely costly in lives and resources, and was unnecessary.

 

[President Camacho]

Bit off topic but :

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over | World news | guardian.co.uk

Somehow, I knew you would mention that, but the first time Bush demanded OBL from Taliban, the Taliban flalty refused. Then Taliban got bombed. Then Taliban said please stop bombing and we will send OBL to Saudia... (Just like they handed him over after embassy bombings?)


What do you think happened?

And no, US is not uninvited in that region.

That is incorrect - there are Western news reports (including the NYT) reporting on Taliban officials offering to negotiate the transfer of OBL and others to a third country for trial.

The US chose to ignore those offers and wage a war that turned out to be extremely costly in lives and resources, and was unnecessary.

Yes, I am aware of those offers of negotiation. Those offers came on the condition that first the US stops bombing, then the US provides the Taliban with evidence of Osama's direct involvement.

But that is not so relevant, as is the fact that the Taliban at first flatly refused to handover OBL, and that the offers came only after bombs began to rain in that area.

 

[lem34]

El presidento notwithstanding what you say we are going off topic. We would like better relations with india and afghanistan. However we would also like good relations with iran and china.

We do not need americans as you well know and accept in our neighbourhood. We cannot and will not now assist in a safe facing excercise for america whilst at the same time allow them economic benefit with a proxy without our pound of flesh. At the moment in the deal as suggested by op america and india gain far more than other regional actors who by nature of location-religio-cultural-historical affinity with afghanis are more closely attuned to the wishes of afghanis

 

[VCheng]

.................. We cannot and will not now assist in a safe facing excercise for america whilst at the same time allow them economic benefit with a proxy without our pound of flesh. ..................

Noble and patriotic sentiments for sure, but exactly HOW are you going to get your "pound of flesh", and from whom?

 

[President Camacho]

El presidento notwithstanding what you say we are going off topic. We would like better relations with india and afghanistan. However we would also like good relations with iran and china.

We do not need americans as you well know and accept in our neighbourhood. We cannot and will not now assist in a safe facing excercise for america whilst at the same time allow them economic benefit with a proxy without our pound of flesh. At the moment in the deal as suggested by op america and india gain far more than other regional actors who by nature of location-religio-cultural-historical affinity with afghanis are more closely attuned to the wishes of afghanis

Of course, it is always the best to stay on topic, and stay focused.

See, I raised the point that the US is not uninvited, because that point holds a key that unlocks the door to every player in the region. India too has been injured because of Taliban's free, though wild, hand in Afghanistan. And US and India are not the only countries that a wild Afghanistan had effects on.

In essence, I personally feel that resurgence of any similar government in Afghanistan will be beneficial to none, even though desired very strongly by some in Pakistan.

So you see, it is not just about whom you need and whom you do not need. And the gains and relations, my friend, are not related just 'location-religio-cultural-historical' affinity. These are just romantic terms ushered to calm public opinion in the ally countries.

If those term ever held any water, then Iran and Saudi Arabia would be closest of allies. India and Pakistan would be very close "friends". India would have a proxy in the form of Guyana and Surinam. Etc etc etc.

The hard truth is, allies and friends find each other when the goals are mutual, when there are needs and purposes and consequences to serve and affect both the parties same. Historical/religious/geographic affinity rarely ever have a say in such matters.

 

[lem34]

Noble and patriotic sentiments for sure, but exactly HOW are you going to get your "pound of flesh", and from whom?

Contrary to your assertions its already being done. If pakistan bent to american diktat you wouldnt get all the propaganda that pakistan and its agencies have suffered in the last 6 months. You cant be blind to that surely.

 

[lem34]

Of course, it is always the best to stay on topic, and stay focused.

See, I raised the point that the US is not uninvited, because that point holds a key that unlocks the door to every player in the region. India too has been injured because of Taliban's free, though wild, hand in Afghanistan. And US and India are not the only countries that a wild Afghanistan had effects on.

In essence, I personally feel that resurgence of any similar government in Afghanistan will be beneficial to none, even though desired very strongly by some in Pakistan.

So you see, it is not just about whom you need and whom you do not need. And the gains and relations, my friend, are not related just 'location-religio-cultural-historical' affinity. These are just romantic terms ushered to calm public opinion in the ally countries.

If those term ever held any water, then Iran and Saudi Arabia would be closest of allies. India and Pakistan would be very close "friends". India would have a proxy in the form of Guyana and Surinam. Etc etc etc.

The hard truth is, allies and friends find each other when the goals are mutual, when there are needs and purposes and consequences to serve and affect both the parties same. Historical/religious/geographic affinity rarely ever have a say in such matters.

El presidento you know too well that india and america can not achieve what they hope to achieve without at the very least pakistans full support. ideally china and iran should also play a part. I am just suggesting india should be involved but instead of america we should give more importance to countries in the neighbourhood. my asssertion is that we do not reward america because they have little to offer. They have already stated they are withdrawing, they will at least reduce troops, why should their companies come and benefit from tapi and what not? india, iran and even china have money if thats what we wanted america for. Explain why we need americans when they have stated they are withdrawing and cannot sustain their military footprint?

 

[ashokdeiva]

El presidento you know too well that india and america can not achieve what they hope to achieve without at the very least pakistans full support. ideally china and iran should also play a part. I am just suggesting india should be involved but instead of america we should give more importance to countries in the neighbourhood. my asssertion is that we do not reward america because they have little to offer. They have already stated they are withdrawing, they will at least reduce troops, why should their companies come and benefit from tapi and what not? india, iran and even china have money if thats what we wanted america for. Explain why we need americans when they have stated they are withdrawing and cannot sustain their military footprint?

Brother the thing is that, USA can not destroy a country to kill one man and go home with out rebuilding the country. Either India, Pakistan, China, All of Middle East should have stoped USA when they attacked Afgan, but we did not and now why should the burden of rebuilding Afgan should fall on Pakistan, India, and Asian neighbours alone. US should sheed more money into Afgans development and that we can not ensure if USA quits now. They will not be take acountability once they leave Afgan.

I hope you are politically a ealder brother to me, YOu should be knowing already what I have posted in this message.

 

[lem34]

Brother the thing is that, USA can not destroy a country to kill one man and go home with out rebuilding the country. Either India, Pakistan, China, All of Middle East should have stoped USA when they attacked Afgan, but we did not and now why should share the burden of rebuilding Afgan should fall on Pakistan, India, and Asian neighbours alone. US should sheed more money into Afgans development and that we can not ensure if USA quits now. They will not be take acountability once they leave Afgan.

I hope you are politically a ealder brother to me, YOu should be knowing already what I have posted in this message.

Ashokbhai America is bust. They want to send their companies in to make profits. They dont have any money to invest.

 

[President Camacho]

El presidento you know too well that india and america can not achieve what they hope to achieve without at the very least pakistans full support. ideally china and iran should also play a part. I am just suggesting india should be involved but instead of america we should give more importance to countries in the neighbourhood. my asssertion is that we do not reward america because they have little to offer. They have already stated they are withdrawing, they will at least reduce troops, why should their companies come and benefit from tapi and what not? india, iran and even china have money if thats what we wanted america for. Explain why we need americans when they have stated they are withdrawing and cannot sustain their military footprint?

I never said it will be achieved without Pakistan's support. Support of Pakistan is imperative for peace and normalization of the region.

However, may I ask you why is it that we should give more importance to the regional countries, than we should to the US? I am not for or against it, just curious about your point of view.

About why should their companies come and benefit in TAPI - If it were not for the US, there would be no reconciliation process going on today. It would still be Taliban in Afghanistan, and a lot of other problems around.

However, if you are of the idea that now that the US is leaving, we should jump on whatever is there and not allow the US to come back, then it would be a gross misunderstanding. The US has a history of not letting its investments go in vain. Secondly, India is very much aware that without the US's presence, it barely stands a chance to gain any significant presence in Afghanistan.

Pakistan will never want India to have any sort of presence in Afghanistan. To make sure that the situation does not turn one-sided and gets ugly for all, it is very important for all the nations, and specifically the US, to have influence over the major economic activities taking place in the region.

Greater the number of participants, the better it will be for Afghanistan.