Mullen for making India part of Afghan security review

[was]

Mullen for making India part of Afghan security review

Saturday, October 11, 2008

By Sami Abraham

WASHINGTON: Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen has said that in view of the changing situation in Afghanistan, particularly increased violence along the Pak-Afghan border, there was a need of full review of the US strategy on Afghanistan to broaden its scope to include India in it.

In an interview with an American TV, Admiral Mullen said the Pak-Afghan boarder region has become a safe haven for insurgents "Things have changed enough to warrant a review of our overall strategy there, and in fact, part of the effort is to try to ensure better coordination on both sides of that border," the admiral said.

The strategy review will address better ways to coordinate these efforts, he said, while broadening the focus on Afghanistan to include Pakistan as well as India. Mullen noted that both countries have long historic links to Afghanistan and an important role to play there.

Though the idea of giving Indians a bigger role in Afghan strategy or including them in any joint force to control the Pak-Afghan border has not been discussed formally between US and Pakistani authorities as yet, Pak security officials have always given very cautious response to it even in private conversations. And it was very unlikely that any foreign troops will ever be allowed to put their boats on Pakistani soil, a diplomat told this correspondent on condition of anonymity.

Admiral Mullen expressed the hope that progress in Iraq will continue, freeing up forces to meet additional requirements in Afghanistan. But he emphasised that the challenges in Afghanistan demand more than military might--a point US Defence Secretary Gates reiterated on Thursday to his Nato counterparts.

Admiral Mullen said: "It is not just about boots on the ground.""It is really three pieces. There is the security piece, the development... (and) economic piece as well as the political and diplomatic piece, and all of those things have to come together."

 

[Munir]

We should advise them to offer China, Cuba and Russia to guard Mexico border...

Somehow military and politicians hardly have capacity to see beyond their own mouth.

It has become clear that US is not even close to friend of Pak.

 

[was]

Mullen urges India’s role needed in Afghanistan
Updated at: 0439 PST, Saturday, October 11, 2008
Mullen urges India’s role needed in Afghanistan WASHINGTON: The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff in Afghanistan, Admiral Mike Mullen, has said he feared the situation in the country would worsen, according to reports Friday.

He added that in the great interest of the region, the war on terror should be extended to the involvement of India in connection with the growing insurgency of suspected Taliban militants in the save heavens in tribal areas of Pakistan

In light of the poor economic situation and an intensifying Taliban insurgency, he told US media: 'I would anticipate next year would be a tougher year.'

'The overall development is not going in the right direction,' he said, according to the U.S. newspaper.

Mullen also singled out the booming heroine smuggling in Afghanistan, as well as the opposition by tribal leaders against the central government in Kabul. There were indications, he said, that the status and trends on the two issues 'are going to continue.'

On Thursday, a confidential US intelligent report emerged which painted an extremely gloomy picture of the situation in Afghanistan, a country in a 'downward spiral'. It cast serious doubts on the ability of the Afghan government to curb the growing influence of the Taliban.

Increased cooperation between al-Qaeda militants and the Taliban and an expanding network of militant groups, made the situation extremely complicated, the study said.

this mad yankee is out of his mind

 

[Kasrkin]

Maybe we are too much reading into this, but I know that Americans arent stupid, if there was one 100% certain way completely guaranteed to piss Pakistan off, that would be this; even suggesting that India should have a bigger mandate.

This Admiral has gone nuts, when he says that Pakistan and India have 'historic' ties with Afghanistan he means India has lovely ties because the Afghans have always shared their ‘historic’ hatred and bitterness for Pakistan.

(I feel Jana will be here soon to make a few less than flattering statements about our American friends)

 

[fatman17]

Maybe we are too much reading into this, but I know that Americans arent stupid, if there was one 100% certain way completely guaranteed to piss Pakistan off, that would be this; even suggesting that India should have a bigger mandate.

This Admiral has gone nuts, when he says that Pakistan and India have 'historic' ties with Afghanistan he means India has lovely ties because the Afghans have always shared their ‘historic’ hatred and bitterness for Pakistan.

(I feel Jana will be here soon to make a few less than flattering statements about our American friends)

Pakistan,Iran, CARs, China and Russia have a stake in the security of afghanistan not India which dosnt even have a border linked to afghanistan. the US is clearly fishing for ideas.

 

[Munir]

The US is clearly pressing more and more Zardari to get its plans rolling. So no wonder they try to remove ground under his feet... Same way Musharraf was ditched. The difference is that Musharraf had to be eradicated carefully by removing the links with the army first. Zardari is far more easy. Everyone hates him already.

 

[Kasrkin]

Its not like that, it was Musharrafs time to go, and no one can make the Pak Army drop their links with anyone if they dont want to. Also Army didnt ditch Musharraf, everyone including Musharraf knew that his time had come and that he didnt want to put people (including the Army) in a difficult situation.
He left a complete profession incharge, General Kayani, despite the fact that Kayani is no ones yes-man. Therefore Musharraf was not a selfish man and had the Army's best interests at heart (no matter what his other mistakes might have been)

And dont even get me started on our beloved President Zardari...

 

[muse]

So far we are only expressing indignation and disappointment - and it's not helpful - yes, it is the way we "feel" but so what?

What matters is to look at this as a long term problem. We cannot be seen as an "Enemy" by the US, we may not be a "friend", however; "enemy" is another ball game altogether.

Is Afghanistan the entirety of Pakistan US relations? What is it that is causing Pakistan not be considered part of the solution?

Afghanistan is not the entirety of Pakistan-US relations. The US and every other country in the world wants an end to islamist terror, isn't this so? Pakistan which is a net victim of Islamist terror with daily suicide attacks should want an end to islamist terror more than anyone else, yet it does not appear to be the case, at least in the persepective of the US and it's allies.

Rabzon has posted a link to the recent US working group on Pakistan on the "US - Pakistan relations" thread on the strategic board -- every Pakistani interested must read this report - yes, it is a "think tank" report and not governement policy, but readers who will choose to deny it's influence, to the detriment of Pakistani interests.

This is a long term problem, it requires a flexible spine and supple thinking. Pakistan are close to default, without injection of funds, primarily from the US, the outlook is not pleasant - Pakistan's so called "Islamic" allies have thus far not offered to bail it out and to sustain it - The Chinese and The Russian are extremely hesitant, their number one concern is ISLAMIST TERRROR - and the seeming inablity of Pakistanis to that through their heads.

Yes, it's harsh and Pakistanis like lots and lots of debate, but be fair, how much longer? What evidence do we not have that we hope to have about the true nature of islamist terror, of extremist ideas, of ideas that blaspheme, malign, misrepresent, and have turned the understandiing of Islam from that of faith in God to tool of political terror?? Be honest now, what more do you need?

Pakistanis argue that the Pak Fauj is in action against the terrorists, the rest of world is confused how it is that a seemingly professional first world army is getting it's lunch handed to it by a, at best, guerilla force. The rest of the world is confused that there is no political consensus to fight the war against Islamist terror, the rest of the world cannot understand how it can be that the media seem to be partisan on the side of the Islamist terrorists, the rest of the world cannot understand how it is that major organizations of clerics refuse to back the Pak Fauj.

In any case, the US have decided that India and Afghanistan can best support it in the war to eliminate Islamist terror - the merits of this decison can be discussed later, what we must now recognize is that we must "THINK" our way through this and not "FEEL" our way through this, because there is no "feeling" one's way through this. It's pretty clear cut.

On reading the above mentioned Pak-US relations working group's paper, you will find that the US has become the protector of Indian Interests, you will also find that a settlement of the Durand line is far down on the US priority list, you will find that the US is convinced that Pakistan has but nuissnace value but it is prepared to fund the Pakistani to "limp along", so long as the Pakistani shows inclination to confront Islamist terror.

You may be asking yourself, how is it that Pakistan are isolated in the world and China and Russian are not interested, readers would be decieving themselves with this question, readers know the answer to this question, islamist terror is an enemy of China and Russia.

Will the Indian really send 150, 000 troops to Afghanistan? Not likely, but numbers less than 150,000 are suficient or at least ought to be sufficient in induce some sobriety into Pakistani policy makers about the need to generate tangible results against islamist terror and to assert and maintain forcefully, it's exclusive soverign claim over Pakistani territory, should Pakistan imagine that it can tolerate Islamist terror's control over a portion of it's territory, it will embolden others to think that they too can control Pakistani territory.

Will the Us not forget about Islamist terror after the election and the staggering events of the global fiancial markets?? No, it CANNOT - it WILL NOT gamble with it's survival as a nation and a peoples, with a financial loss, it's only money (a huge, tremendous, mind boggling amount of money - in the end it's just paper that the rest of the world has to pay for), however; it will not stand idle when the lives of it's citizenry is threatened by islamist terror.

India ?? US? Yes, in the coming balance(s) the US for it's own compulsions sees India asa responsible power with the capablity to do what the global system needs to be done - for good or for bad, its immaterial to Pakistan in the sense that it's ability to positively influence events appears neglibile.

To understand what has happened one must imagine, for Pakistani policy makers, a world turned upside down, so incredible has been their failure, that territory which they once saw as a natural extension against an adversary, now appeals to that adversary against Pakistan -- How did this come about?? Yes, conspiracy, foreign hand, etc; happy?? Satisfied are you ? with this less than half truth?? You know all to well, the answer is the excesses of Islamist ideology and terror.

Don't get mad, get determined!! Determined to not lose, that would be a good start. Islamist extremism and terror must be eliminated as a idea that has any crediblity in society, because if it does have credibility, ask yourself what kind of a society that would be and would you want to be a part of that society??

Why are Pakistan a economic basket case ?? What needs to happen to change this to a economic powerhouse??

Neither PPP, nor MLN or MLQ nor JI or JUI or that ridiculous ANP are nay solution for what ails Pakistani politics. Pakistan need a new cosntitution to support a new Pakistani political system - but one thing at time, we have more immediate concerns, but a new Pakistani system is a priority whose time is fat approaching, if Pakistan are to survive.
'

 

[Kasrkin]

Pakistan,Iran, CARs, China and Russia have a stake in the security of afghanistan not India which dosnt even have a border linked to afghanistan. the US is clearly fishing for ideas.

YES !!! And our Foreign Office or Armed Forces or the President or the Prime Minister should make this much clear and draw a line in the sand.