Russia went into Syria upon the request of Syrian president Assad.
1- In past Soviet Union came to Afghanistan on the request of Afghan Government of that time, Pakistan and USA and other allied forces who intervened uninvited during that time
2- Russia tookeover Crimea after the fall of pro Russian Government of Ukraine
3- Iran intervene in Iraq and Syria at the request of these two governments
4- Turkey started its operation in Syria without any request by Syrian government to safeguard their territorial integrity and national interest
5- USA, Germany, UK all are in Syria uninvited
So the point is in current time request or no request countries are taking decisions to safeguard their Sovereignty and Interest
So the question of more importance should be: Is it in our interest to extend our Anti-terror operations in regions controlled by ISIS near to our boarder for limited time period ....??
Then it played an active military role using its Armed Forces to help Assad gain territory which was lost to an array of factions operating inside Syria. I am not aware what demands Russia could have put in front of Assad for this purpose and Assad complied.
Before any active military role we would be required to create a certain POLITICAL environment inside Afghanistan and in the region, as far as demands by Russia or by regional country is concerns
we would not in position to fulfil any demand beyond the scope of regional cooperation.
Our sole purpose should be to dislodge the ISIS and its associated groups from regions of Pak-Afghanistan boarder and beyond therefore cooperation from countries who are sharing boarder with Afghanistan would be required.
If Russia is to be requested by Pakistan to play a part(military and non-military) in Afghanistan , there are a few factors to me considered immediately;
Russia and Iran has already fought against ISIS in Syria and danger of spill over of ISIS to Central Asian region should be compelling enough for Russia to act rather wait for the request by some other country ISIS should be the common enemy to all of the countries
So rather a request by any particular country it SHOULD BE A COMMON OBJECTIVE for all countries sharing boarder with Afghanistan
1. Russian demands. 2. USA's on going deals with Pakistan over Afghanistan supply route etc . 3. Chinese reaction . 4. Indian influence in Afghanistan and reaction regarding Russian intervention.
1- I have already commented about point one
2-
Should continue as long as possible for us to sustain as per the requirements of regional environment, the idea is to raise the importance of regional cooperation and stability than mutual understanding in isolation of the region
3- As long as it serve the economic interest of China, Chinese support will be there
4-
For us its a problem which need to be worked and resolved, but our action of regional cooperation could put Indian in a situation where it will have to take clear position
I am going to discuss one factor from above, Russia is aligned with Northern Alliance.
Every asset have its useful life, now Taliban are gaining areas in Northern Afghanistan as well which I find difficult to understand how is possible without and support infrastructure.
one more thing most of NA is the beneficiary of current political setup of Afghanistan which is heavily supported by USA so its difficult to think that Russian during this long period of 18 years has not hedged the risk
So is USA, India and Iran.
This is going to be the first hitch. Northern Alliance is an enemy of Pakistan and poised towards the North-West mountain region of Pakistan, Chitral region.
1- Iran has establish links with Taliban, Mullah Mansoor family is still in Iran.
2- Secondly 18 consecutive years in government must have diminsh the skill of fighting of Northern alliance otherwise they could have eliminated Taliban with the help of USA from Afghanistan
3- In any such situation Indian would be required to chose the side and I am sure India will chose USA
Hopefully, T-129 can operate in these heights. One of the major reasons of planning to put a new army division in Swat area is to deter NA. Even if Russia doesn't get involved militarily, its diplomatic inclination in past towards NA could pose a problem with Pakistan. Soviet Union has a past history with Syria, so Russia had no problem choosing sides in mideast (Syria).
agreed therefore engaging Russia is necessary
China's concern is CPEC, the belt runs in the area of KPK and Baluchistan. Had China not felt that Pakistan can secure it borders (against IS/AQ/Talibs/TTP) and internal threat of terrorism, China would have demanded and pressurized Pakistan to allow Chinese troops in KPK and Baluchistan to safe guard Chinese interests, CPEC is not a small investment. Had China felt a threat from USA in Afghanistan, it could have pressurized Pakistan to shut down ISAF support long ago. Although the regional instability and threat from Afghanistan is evident to China also, yet it doesn't actively get involved militarily or diplomatically inside Afghanistan.
it not about the ability of Pakistan to defend the CPEC, its about the elimination of the perpetual risk continuously dangering business and social environment in Pakistan, without eliminating the risk from the region Pakistan would not gain any economical benefit from CPEC Chinese convey can come and go we could provide security to them but what about the economic activities in the form of investment from Chinese business community which is suppose to follow after the completion of current projects ....??
We can not bear full fruits of CPEC by just acting as SECURITY GUARD. We are required to create secure economic environment in Pakistan and in the region.
In Syria, USA/NATO had to forcibly intervene and show presence while using proxy factions. Its different in Afghanistan, here the USA and NATO have made a foot print since 2001, its 18 years now.
therefore at first we (like Iran, Russia) are required to create political class willing to work with regional block independent from militancy of Afghanistan, like Hekmatyar who lived in Iran during exile we also have relations with him and his group has laid down arms a per agreement with Afghan government
It's difficult to bring a third super power (Russia/China) into the equation, unless Pakistan itself feels a threat to its existence like Assad felt in Syria. So far Pakistan doesn't feel that threat.
Both Russia and China are already in Afghanistan with there define policies which are different from the past no one is confronting USA but keeping the situation in check
Militarily and economically, Pakistan is stronger than Syria in all aspects. Just like Russia helped Syrian Government in Syria, the ISAF is helping Afghan Government in Syria.
ISAF mission in Afghanistan has ended now its USA forces and some other countries under resolute support mission but the forces under this structure is not enough to resolve the current and potential danger in Afghanistan in the form of ISIS
ISAF will not let Afghanistan go into the hands of war lords,
it is already in the hands of warlords just read what Abdul Rasheed Dosttam has done with one of the governor of a province of Afghanistan
till USA is sitting in Afghanistan and backing the Afghan Government and Military.
I think next year Presidential election of Afghanistan will be held and as per the current situation of Afghanistan it is difficult to assume that election wold play any constructive role
in the future of Afghanistan.
USA exited Iraq a few years back (Saddam is dead), it could have done the same with Afghanistan(OBL dead), but USA doesn't plan on leaving Afghanistan. We know the reasons. Its a token force, not even enough to conduct offensives and capture strongholds inside Afghanistan.
because of low number of US forces and frail status of Afghan forces a vacuum in Afghanistan exist which ISIS and other elements are filling and mounting danger to regional countries security situation.
Even if the warlords are given assistance by ISAF and ANA, the Talibs are keeping them at bay. The control of regions inside Afghanistan is contested time and again, the talibs don't give up easily. ISAF wants ANA to functional and effective, but ANA is not up to the standards. After the lost cause of containing Talibs, now the ANA is directed towards shelling and firing on Pakistani troops building the wall, securing the border. Purely diplomatically, SCO is one of the ways to bring a consensus on Afghanistan.
In a most simplest way and to summarise the post think it in this way
Afghanistan itself is a problem which required to be fixed rather than fixing issues of Afghanistan
Putting Pakistani troops on ground for continuous operations inside Afghanistan is a big topic.
not just Pakistani troops but regional element of all the countries sharing boarder with Afghanistan supported by Russia and China
