India in Afghanistan : Ministry of EA

[indushek]

Fair enough, what are you willing to do to ensure this outcome?

As seen by the recent events i think GOI is already taking steps. After the London Conference where India was snubbed by all and sundry, i think people in the corridors of power did take time to re visit their initiatives. Part of this is the engagement of Iran on a wider basis (since India lost some of its depth when we sidelined from the pipeline project and voted against Iran in the voting, unnecessary to say but the Uncle's hand is obvious isn't it). I wouldn't go so far as to say that the recent statements by Americans about Iran's role in Afghanistan was a result of our efforts but i think we could have played at least an itsy bitsy role.

In the same way India is also working with Russia on this issue. Since i am just a common man this is what i have understood from the News sources till now. I wouldn't rule out about the event where India might engage directly with the Taliban, since no state would want to do such things open especially when its public stance is different. So let us wait and see what comes in future.

Also i would like to mention one of my personal feelings here. You see if the Taliban return back i don't think they can exert the same influence they had prior to WOT. The reasons for this are many, firstly they must be fatigued by the fighting and killing of a decade which i think is natural for any human being. Next the Northern Alliance by which i mean the karzai govt (its another issue that the old warlords have broken up with each other but a travesty like this could bring them together) wouldn't just give up their positions and step down i mean the International powers would work out some arrangement wouldn't they??

 

[muse]

Interesting post - basically, you suggest that India are doing what they have done before, iran and Russia -- so basically what did that get India? is that an unfair question? Even if you think it is, a would request you consider and provide an answer -- see, if you do what you did before it's pretty likely that you will get the same results.

But keep in mind the end state malaymishra highlighted, can Iran or Russia deliver that?

Everyday, great state status visits with the Indian and everyday the Indian lets it slip through his hands -- see, even the Russian went home and so will the American, after spending a whole lot more than the Russian ever imagined -- and while you may not see it yet, by the time the American leaves, he will leave Pakistan in a much more stronger position.

The end state malaymishra talked about can only be delivered by Pakistan -- yes, that's a tough break, that's why the question was posed, What are willing to do to achieve this end state? One day the Indian may decide to make a grab for great power status, to EARN
that status, and suddenly Pakistanis will have to ask themselves some very serious questions indeed and the world will change.

 

[muse]

and while you may not see it yet, by the time the American leaves, he will leave Pakistan in a much more stronger position

.

With the piece below I want to focus your thinking - I don't mean to suggest that pakistan is getting F15 and M1 - I just want you to see just how unscupulous, just how duplitious Us policy making can be, especially when they really, really need to be - and they need to be - of course they will sell Pakistan down the road, but that's not the issue beacuse the Pakistanis already know this, it's been internalized.

At the end of the day, India needs an outcome, an end state, well Pakistan need an end state as well -- The world will really change when such outcomes, such end states can be negotiated together - see, we have to do something different to get results, outcomes, end states that are different from the miserable emnity that exists now:

Below is from the News International, but if you can find the WSJ piece it is taken from we will all be obliged


US cannot win Afghan war sans Pakistan: US paper


Updated at: 1020 PST, Tuesday, October 26, 2010
WASHINGTON: The US cannot win its war in Afghanistan without neighboring Pakistan, according to US-based Wall Street Journal analysis published on Tuesday.

The newspaper article said about President Asif Ali Zardari that he has aided the U.S. military effort in a way his predecessor Pervez Musharraf, supposedly a pro-American strongman, never did.

So, the US was advised in the article to build on a relationship, quietly and incrementally, not to tear down.

The analysis further said, “Equally helpful would be to stop mindlessly demanding that military assistance to Pakistan go toward fighting the Taliban instead of arming against India. The missing ingredient in Pakistan's counterinsurgency effort isn't the right military tool kit, such as night-vision goggles or Apache helicopters. It's the will of the Pakistani general staff to cooperate more fully in the fight. If that cooperation can be secured by selling conventional weapons such as F-15s and M-1 tanks to Pakistan, so much the better.

“(As for India, it has less to fear from a reasonably well-armed, confident Pakistani army that has strong ties to the U.S. than it does from a poorly armed Pakistan that mistrusts the U.S. and continues to consort with jihadists as a way of compensating for its weakness.)

“Finally, the administration ought to understand that Pakistan's reluctance to defeat the Taliban at any price is a mirror image of our own reluctance. The July 2011 "deadline" to begin withdrawing troops was bound to affect Islamabad's calculations, and not for the better. The sooner we junk it, the better the cooperation we'll get.”

 

[muse]

Al farrar? If you want to cross the river you have pay the ferryman, right? If Pakistan were that ferryman, what use talking with US or Russia or Iran? Right? So what will India do?

My own assessment is that India will be unable to take the steps required and Pakistan will remain unchalleneged, to Pakistan's detriment - similarly Us and other Western powers will make appeaseing noises about a security council seat for India, but so long as dangerous relations such those between India and Pakistan, really India and all her neighbors remain, a security council seat will remain out of reach.

Now, I'm not writing this because I want India to succeed in the present scenario, I certrainly don't, I am hoping that some Indians will at least move past the jingoistic but empty hype and will begin to think seriously about how India may be a player and what it must do to EARN that status and stature.

 

[indushek]

Interesting post - basically, you suggest that India are doing what they have done before, iran and Russia -- so basically what did that get India? is that an unfair question? Even if you think it is, a would request you consider and provide an answer -- see, if you do what you did before it's pretty likely that you will get the same results.

But keep in mind the end state malaymishra highlighted, can Iran or Russia deliver that?

Everyday, great state status visits with the Indian and everyday the Indian lets it slip through his hands -- see, even the Russian went home and so will the American, after spending a whole lot more than the Russian ever imagined -- and while you may not see it yet, by the time the American leaves, he will leave Pakistan in a much more stronger position.

The end state malaymishra talked about can only be delivered by Pakistan -- yes, that's a tough break, that's why the question was posed, What are willing to do to achieve this end state? One day the Indian may decide to make a grab for great power status, to EARN
that status, and suddenly Pakistanis will have to ask themselves some very serious questions indeed and the world will change.

.

With the piece below I want to focus your thinking - I don't mean to suggest that pakistan is getting F15 and M1 - I just want you to see just how unscupulous, just how duplitious Us policy making can be, especially when they really, really need to be - and they need to be - of course they will sell Pakistan down the road, but that's not the issue beacuse the Pakistanis already know this, it's been internalized.

At the end of the day, India needs an outcome, an end state, well Pakistan need an end state as well -- The world will really change when such outcomes, such end states can be negotiated together - see, we have to do something different to get results, outcomes, end states that are different from the miserable emnity that exists now:

Below is from the News International, but if you can find the WSJ piece it is taken from we will all be obliged


US cannot win Afghan war sans Pakistan: US paper


Updated at: 1020 PST, Tuesday, October 26, 2010
WASHINGTON: The US cannot win its war in Afghanistan without neighboring Pakistan, according to US-based Wall Street Journal analysis published on Tuesday.

The newspaper article said about President Asif Ali Zardari that he has aided the U.S. military effort in a way his predecessor Pervez Musharraf, supposedly a pro-American strongman, never did.

So, the US was advised in the article to build on a relationship, quietly and incrementally, not to tear down.

The analysis further said, “Equally helpful would be to stop mindlessly demanding that military assistance to Pakistan go toward fighting the Taliban instead of arming against India. The missing ingredient in Pakistan's counterinsurgency effort isn't the right military tool kit, such as night-vision goggles or Apache helicopters. It's the will of the Pakistani general staff to cooperate more fully in the fight. If that cooperation can be secured by selling conventional weapons such as F-15s and M-1 tanks to Pakistan, so much the better.

“(As for India, it has less to fear from a reasonably well-armed, confident Pakistani army that has strong ties to the U.S. than it does from a poorly armed Pakistan that mistrusts the U.S. and continues to consort with jihadists as a way of compensating for its weakness.)

“Finally, the administration ought to understand that Pakistan's reluctance to defeat the Taliban at any price is a mirror image of our own reluctance. The July 2011 "deadline" to begin withdrawing troops was bound to affect Islamabad's calculations, and not for the better. The sooner we junk it, the better the cooperation we'll get.”

I think i get our point. It is an established fact that Pakistan is a natural and obvious player in this game by result of its shared border and relations with Taliban. I know that at certain point Pakistan has to come into picture as understood by me because i don't think the international community were a bunch of fools when the London conference happened.

Well i need not tell you that why India is trying to make groups in which till now it has tried to exclude Pakistan!!! However if spoken practically India will engage Pakistan if it cannot wring out a strategy without the Pakistani angle. There was a thread recently where some Indian official said that we want to talk to ISI and the Army regarding Afghanistan, may be it is pointer towards future??As i have told i am not a International relations specialist i am just a common man with limited knowledge in this subject.

Now my question to you is unbiasedly can you think of any strategy where India can work around Pakistan?? My idea is engage the Taliban directly and try to bring them on our side, i don't know if this is possible

 

[ambidex]

Ambidex


I think you are confused about support for the Talib - I don't think talib have much support in Pakistan - Talib in Afghanistan do however; have support among Pashtun majorities in Pakistan.

As for India's role in central Asia and in particular in Afghanistanb, it's really a second tier role - I think they are doing a great job with the kinds of things they are a part of, especially with regard to media.

Pakistan's concerns are very different from those of India, Pakistan obviously, sharesa border with Afghanistan, India does not, a majority of Pashtun or Pakhtun, live in Pakistan and have a sense of solidarity with a majority of the Afghan population, who are Pashtun - so the dynamic is very different.

But a question to Indian friends, what is that you hope to achieve in Afghanistan or Central Asia that you think can be achieved at the expense of Pakistan? Is it even a reasonable proposition?

If you think that Pakistani establishment was/is very proactive and hyper power in this region then I am sorry to say that it’s not true. Indian limitations are universal and same applies on Pakistan as far as central Asia is concerned. Your religious/ethnic dynamics has no significance in Geo-political, establishment to establishment level. Such dynamics are tools of manipulation at the times of civil wars or insurgencies for military not during peace. It’s a double edge sword, if Pakistan wants to gain advantage of such dynamics in Afghanistan then I be expecting Pakistani Pashton belt as an out law, uncontrolled, west without sheriff.

Indian investment in infrastructure is to win hearts and minds of masses and stay there as long as she can during peace time. Such kind of support earned will become ineffectual during violent civil wars. I don't want to go in details how PA faced resistance from Pashston tribal landlords. How since independence Pakistani federal has kept those lands satisfied to their sensitivities but not its very own constitutional.

Pakistan was never in a position to afford financial support for Taliban. Only support as said so before WOT was the Pahstun belt, where Taliban was able to displace at whim. This is what they can do right now even when Pakistan is at war against them. The logistical support to Taliban by Pakistan was never worked out specifically, but it was spontaneous to the efforts of Taliban only, due to pours border and easy assimilation into Pakistani side of Pashton Population.

Pakistan as a winner of Afghanistan was a propaganda by some other interested powers but there is no credible proof seen till date how Pakistan might have benefited from that advantage, being Taliban in Power. Pakistan's quick retraction from their support on USA's call reveals many things; one is what you have said that there was no much support within Pakistan for Taliban. Only now since Taliban is weakest, your COAS can talk confidently about strategic depth in Afghanistan; another proof of it. Pakistan supported Taliban diplomatically because there was no harm and there was political mileage in pleasing domestic pashtons population.

Pakistani foot prints of dysfunctional/random and of poor face value Taliban support, exposed during WOT was the excuse India always wanted to quench. Furthermore the rhetoric tone of Pakistani population and media was well evident to fuel what other started to accuse. If I have to say Pakistani sucks in Propaganda then I can say with conviction for sure.

Its all about perception you project, India was a mind reader here not the one with first hand information. Quick decision making of terrorists (presently roaming in Pakistan) to land high jacked Indian plane in Kabul was a handicap situation for India cause Taliban regime was not recognized by us, not because we were considering it as Pakistani puppet regime but on sheer democratic and non democratic merits.
An unclaimed territory even after Taliban was going to be a matter of concern for India since Pakistan has categorically (irrespective of its incapacity to pledge resources) vowed to interfere in Afghanistan. How Pakistan is able to use and afford that strategic depth for good or bad reasons is a question with fine details and Pakistan's own open call. Pakistanis can justify its presence for many genuine reasons but can not impress any other nation including India to stop what they are doing as you said both have different reasons be there and Afghanistan as an independent nation.

Indian presence will ensure over stretching Pakistan, investing both to the lures of a destabilized backyard and prosperous one. It’s a fair and clean game for India especially when she can push Pakistan to its limits without getting her hands dirty or red. Indians do not bear the burden to explain why and what they are doing in Afghanistan.

Its is Pakistan who has to come up clean cause Indian good deeds are clashing with Pakistani Interests and sensitivities.

India at present, cannot inluence events such that it can effect Afghanistan, however; India with Iran and Russia, well that's another question altogether and in Pakistan, that is takjen rather seriously.

Please elaborate on this, i may have very interesting comments to make.

Regards.

 

[BATMAN]

Why so hyped Taliban are friendly with India?

The road,.. India build just across FATA is supposedly the hotbed for terrorists but on Afghan side of the border TTP commit no crime and let indian laborers work, while on Pakistan side they take hostages and cross into Afghanistan on humvees, while Indians continue to work un-bothered..

 

[Bhim]

Why so hyped Taliban are friendly with India?

The road,.. India build just across FATA is supposedly the hotbed for terrorists but on Afghan side of the border TTP commit no crime and let indian laborers work, while on Pakistan side they take hostages and cross into Afghanistan on humvees, while Indians continue to work un-bothered..

That sure is a point to ponder over...

But sadly that is not the case, because the TTP is against the policy of Pakistan Government, just like you and every Pakistani are. The only differnce is they talk the language of bullets where as rest common man can just use the pen.


About the second question of relations with Afghanistan just in case Pakistan refuses, well we already have figured out Pakistan will not allow it, the alternatives are through Central Asia for Road and the Air Cargo. If need be we can send tens of Air Cargo planes daily.