India Entraps the US in Afghanistan

[rajeev]

you are aware that india also takes loans from said financial organizations as well? Development projects are fine, but funding and arming terrorists against Pakistan is not. US needs our cooperation, and indian activities in afghanistan are annoying to us and must be checked decisively and fittingly.

My last message was intended for the crazy and courageous Pakistanis and not for sane guys like you. My apologies if I hurt your feelings!

Yes, India taking loans is for development tasks but the condition is way different. Its credit ratings and economic condition are simply better than most developing countries.

India is buying lot of Gold from IMF. India already bought 200 tonnes just a week back and now they are in talks to buy another 200-250 tonnes of Gold. This should solidify India's currency strength. There is also speculation in the market that China plans to buy all the gold mined in its country and may add 1000 tonnes of gold to its reserve to boost its yuan.

Pakistan basically stared into bankruptcy last year and thankfully to active support from IMF and US, Pakistan has escaped bankruptcy. Pakistan is yet to increase the tax rate to balance the conditions that existed last year. Most likely with so much terrorism inside Pakistan, the economy might have most likely shrunk. There is not much fiscal policy that is prescribed by the current administration which might devalue its currency and thereby increase the inflation (cost of goods).

Other than the constant claims by Pakistani government, they are yet to provide a shred of evidence provided to anyone. Dont you think, you also getting behind bandwagon does not add any credibility to your own self. You see it is always easy to blame some one else for your own mistakes! TTP is a radical organization which provides no strategic benefit or control to India and hence I dont see any advantage of India supporting them.

India's Afghanistan support is annoying to Pakistan is just as much Pakistan's Kashmiri militant support.

 

[deckingraj]

Although the US President Obama has announced that he will send an extra 30,000 US troops to fight the war in Afghanistan, yet his revised strategy also includes exit strategy as he has indicated that withdrawal of forces will start in July 2011. In this context, on November 15, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton had already revealed, “We’re not interested in staying in Afghanistan” for a long time.and set a start date for military withdrawal.

I just read this much and then stopped the pain of going further... I have no intentions of breaking anyone's bubble but as far as exit strategy is concerned some of the members might be confused....The Americans are not going to leave until and unless their mission is completed...This so called exit strategy is nothing but a clear message to Afghans that they have to step up their own efforts...Here is come interesting news

***********************************************************************************************************************************************************
No exit but strategy is transfer and transition: Mullen

Welcoming President Barack Obama’s new Afghan policy, the top US military commander today said the decision to start withdrawing of troops from the war-torn country in 18 months is not an exit, but it is a strategy of transfer and transition.

“The strategy is not an exit strategy per se, but more about transfer and transition,” Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chief of Staff, was quoted as saying by American Forces Press Service.

In his new Afghan policy, Obama announced to send 30,000 additional US troops to Afghanistan in next six months and a start of withdrawal of forces in 18 months.

“The President is really sending the message that we are not going to be there forever,” Mullen said, adding: “this strategy really focuses on transferring responsibility to the Afghans as quickly as we can.”

Noting that the strategy is based on a very deliberate and educational process, Mullen said: “It has allowed us to explore the breadth and depth of this enormously complex challenge, and in the end, the president has made the decision to add these 30,000 troops.”

Mullen said the voice of the military has been heard by Obama while making his decision on Afghanistan.

“I’ve been at the table in these discussions from beginning to end, and my voice has been heard. I’m very comfortable with that. I’ve provided my advice to the president, and as is always the case, we provide the advice, the president makes a decision, and we all march off and execute that decision,” he said.

The top US military commander termed “big challenge” for Afghan President Hamid Karzai to build up his security forces; besides providing good governance.

Mullen said US forces will be focused on a counterinsurgency, population-centric mode.

“The key goal here is to reverse the momentum of the Taliban,” he said, adding “the insurgency has gotten worse over the past couple of years.”

The Hindu : News / International : No exit but strategy is transfer and transition: Mullen

********************************************************************************************************************************************************

Also worth noting is the Indian reaction to it...

India ‘pleased’ with Obama’s Afghan troop surge

Welcoming the United States’ extended commitments in Afghanistan, India on Wednesday said it was not “complaining” about not finding a mention in the AfPak policy speech of President Barack Obama and was “pleased” that military pressure on Taliban will not be eased there.

“India is not complaining at all,” Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor told reporters when asked if India was feeling “left out” on not being mentioned in Mr. Obama’s speech.

“What you are overlooking is that our Prime Minister has just been there. He received a pretty thorough exposition of the U.S.’ views on the issue and President Obama called him up in Delhi yesterday to brief him further before his public speech in the U.S.,” he added.

Pointing out that India has always maintained that it doesn’t have a direct involvement in Afghanistan, Mr. Tharoor said, “American abbreviation for their policy is AfPak and I see India in neither of those two abbreviations. Afghanistan and Pakistan are the focus of this policy and focus of President Obama’s speech.”

Mr. Tharoor welcomed U.S.’ continued commitment in Afghanistan and said India was “very pleased that pressure on al-Qaeda and Taliban in Afghanistan and on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border will not be eased.”

The U.S. has announced sending 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan for containing insurgency and securing key population centres there.

Mr. Tharoor said that continued military pressure on Taliban and al-Qaeda was an extremely important security component of the challenges faced by Afghanistan.

Refusing to comment on details of the U.S. President’s speech, Mr. Tharoor said, “it (the AfPak policy) is the overall approach of continued engagement and focus on dealing with the every real security dangers faced by Afghanistan.”

Mr. Tharoor said India believed that entire international community has a stake in continued stability of Afghanistan and success of the Hamid Karzai government in establishing his authority through out the country.

He added that India was making contribution in Afghanistan in a different way by building roads, hospitals, clinics and laying down power supply lines there.

The Hindu : News / National : India ‘pleased’ with Obama’s Afghan troop surge

*************************************************************************************************************************************************************


As far as credibility of the article is concerned i happen to see the following line

In this context, first, with help of some so-called Indian Muslims, Indian RAW will increase attacks inside Afghanistan, targeting especially American soldiers with the sole aim to revive old blame game of the west against Islamabad for cross-border-terrorism. Second, RAW is likely to arrange another Mumbai type terror-carnage in India to get the sympathies of America and Europe, and to further distort the image of Islamabad.

I never knew RAW is far more capable than CIA. Also fooled the whole world by planning and executing Mumbai carnage and blaming the so-called non-state actors admitted by Pak herself....I salute the potent evil RAW who killed indians to defame Pakistan

 

[Goodperson]

you are aware that india also takes loans from said financial organizations as well? Development projects are fine, but funding and arming terrorists against Pakistan is not. US needs our cooperation, and indian activities in afghanistan are annoying to us and must be checked decisively and fittingly.

India pledges to help rebuild Afghanistan

NEW DELHI: India on Wednesday warily backed President Barack Obama's surge of 30,000 extra US soldiers for Afghanistan, and pledged to push ahead with aid for the reconstruction of the war-ravaged country.

India, which does not have troops in the ISAF coalition, has provided more than one billion dollars in humanitarian and development assistance to Afghanistan since the Taliban were ousted in 2001.

'India is not complaining at all and we do not wish to be seen as part of the problem,' junior foreign minister Shashi Tharoor told reporters.

'We are dealing with a different part of the solution than is the US military,' Tharoor said.

'We are contributing through development, we are building roads, schools hospitals, clinics and this is the sort of assistance we can provide. Others are taking the security burden.'

Obama called Indian Prime Minister Manmohan by telephone on Tuesday to explain his proposals before announcing the troop boost.

 

[deckingraj]

Some more light on the withdrawal..... I can already see all those if's and but's have started pouring in.....Do other members also see the same or i am reading too much into it???
*************************************************************

Condition-based withdrawal from Afghanistan from July 2011


US President Barack Obama believes that July 2011 is the point when American troops will begin withdrawing from the country with Afghan security forces gradually taking over, the White House said today.

“July 2011 is the point in which the President believes our troops are going to begin to transition out and the responsibility of security is beginning to go in certain places to Afghans, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

“A conditions-based drawdown will begin in July 2011,” Gibbs said.

“We are transitioning, in July 2011, from Americans providing the primary security -- we are giving that responsibility to an Afghan national security force that we have trained over this 18 to 24-month period, putting them in the lead and transitioning our forces out,” he added.

In a speech on Tuesday, Obama announced sending 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and simultaneously announced his decision to start withdrawal of troops.

However, the pace of transition would depend on the conditions on the ground at that time, the White House spokesman said.

Meanwhile, in a testimony before a Congressional committee, US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said: “This approach is not open-ended nation-building. It’s neither necessary nor feasible to create a modern, centralised Western-style Afghan nation state, the likes of which has never been seen in that country.”

The Hindu : News / International : Condition-based withdrawal from Afghanistan from July 2011

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

the point of posting an article is so that it may be read


which part of it do you agree/disagree with