Russia opposes a military action against Pakistan

[SSGPA1]

New Delhi, Dec 6 (PTI) Russia today disfavoured any military action by India against Pakistan in the wake of Mumbai attacks as both have nuclear weapons even as it suggested involvement of ISI in the terror strikes.
Russian Ambassador Vyacheslav Trubnikov said any action against Pakistan should be taken under the UN mandate and hoped that the international community's pressure would make Islamabad take action against terrorists, even if they are "non-state actors".

Asked about the possibility of military action by India against Pakistan, he told reporters that no state should take the "law into its own hands" as UN is the right forum to take a decision.

Pakistan and India have nuclear missiles and "any risky step might" lead to snowballing of the situation, he said, adding "We have to get our heads little bit cooler for restoration of peaceful process." On whether Russia will support India if the matter goes to the Security Council, he said Moscow will do so if India produces "hard proof" about involvement of Pakistan-based elements in the Mumbai attacks.

"I feel that investigation should produce serious proofs about perpetrators and financers," he said adding he would not like to jump into any conclusion now.

Referring to last week's terror strikes, the Ambassador said elements which do not want to see normalisation of relations between India and Pakistan could be behind the henious terror attacks in Mumbai.

Pointing fingers at the ISI, he said the spy agency could be involved in terror strikes so as to break the improving relations between the two countries. PTI

Russia disfavours military action by India against Pakistan

This is a positive change by Russia. The envoy expressed reservation about the ISI but at this point I think main objective is to avoid any war or battle between Pakistan and India.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

Some people even in Pakistan think it is high time for ISI to be rounded up and thrown into Indian jail cells (Kul Aoozobillah), so I must say this is a highly balanced response from Russia.

 

[roadrunner]

On whether Russia will support India if the matter goes to the Security Council, he said Moscow will do so if India produces "hard proof" about involvement of Pakistan-based elements in the Mumbai attacks.

"I feel that investigation should produce serious proofs about perpetrators and financers," he said adding he would not like to jump into any conclusion now.

"Hard proof" is not what India has shown - or the US.

This is a positive change by Russia. The envoy expressed reservation about the ISI but at this point I think main objective is to avoid any war or battle between Pakistan and India.

The Russians always were fairly friendly to Pakistan, but the military plunged for friendship with the Americans, which was a mistake. The Russians would have been more firm in their support.

 

[A.Rahman]

Some people even in Pakistan think it is high time for ISI to be rounded up and thrown into Indian jail cells (Kul Aoozobillah), so I must say this is a highly balanced response from Russia.

Those "some" people are bagharait and traitors. Should be shot on sight & buried at night

 

[TruthSeeker]

New Delhi, Dec 6 (PTI)

Russian Ambassador Vyacheslav Trubnikov said any action against Pakistan should be taken under the UN mandate and hoped that the international community's pressure would make Islamabad take action against terrorists, even if they are "non-state actors".

Asked about the possibility of military action by India against Pakistan, he told reporters that no state should take the "law into its own hands" as UN is the right forum to take a decision.

Gee, this is said by the people who rolled into Georgia with nary a howdy-doo to the UN?? I know the US does stuff all the time without UN sanction but the Russians do not have clean hands by a long shot (Georgia, Afghanistan, Poland, Czechoslovakia) to be pontificating to India about such things.

 

[roadrunner]

Gee, this is said by the people who rolled into Georgia with nary a howdy-doo to the UN?? I know the US does stuff all the time without UN sanction but the Russians do not have clean hands by a long shot (Georgia, Afghanistan, Poland, Czechoslovakia) to be pontificating to India about such things.

I don't know about the other three, but the Russians didn't invade Afghanistan. They were invited in by the ruling government at the time. I think it was Tureki that did the inviting.

Didn't Georgia declare independence or something, then start the fighting?

 

[Keysersoze]

I don't know about the other three, but the Russians didn't invade Afghanistan. They were invited in by the ruling government at the time. I think it was Tureki that did the inviting.

Didn't Georgia declare independence or something, then start the fighting?

They were Invited, but when they assassinated Amin and landed with more than advisor's then that is a invasion.

 

[S-2]

"I think it was Tureki that did the inviting."

You are correct and elements of the Soviet Army had been in-country since at least June, 1979 according to the Russian General Staff.

Taraki was murdered in early October, 1979 by supporters of Amin. The Soviet gov't made the final decision to invade on Dec. 10th. Planning by the Soviet General staff and nascent elements of the Soviet 40th Army were by then complete. Amin was overthrown and assassinated by SPETZNATZ elements with Karmal replacing him.

The U.S. had no explicit U.N. mandate to invade Afghanistan. OTOH, ISAF is specifically a U.N. sanctioned peacekeeping force and was from it's inception.

 

[roadrunner]

They were Invited, but when they assassinated Amin and landed with more than advisor's then that is a invasion.

The PDPA faction signed a treaty with the Soviets in 1978 permitting Soviet intervention should the Afghanistan government call on it (Soviet-Afghan treaty of friendliness and cooperation or something). When Amin had Tureki shot, that was when the Parchams invited in the Soviets. Were the Parcham in power when they called in the Soviets I'm not sure, but the treaty still stood at the time.

It's not a clear case of an invasion by the Soviets.

Edit: Amin invited the Soviets in, but then got killed by a Soviet General in his own Palace. Strangely enough the Soviet General also got shot by Soviet troops. The next puppet government carried on executing the treaty though. Presumably if the government had said leave, then it would have been an invasion.

 

[SSGPA1]

I am taking it as a new relationship between Pakistan and Russia. First the enigines for JF-17 and now a neutral response.

May be the Russians want to utlize Pakistan's influence in Afghanistan.

 

[A1Kaid]

GOOD NEWS!!!

Are you guys Seriously forgetting CHINA IS OUR FRIEND and GREAT ALLY!!!


THEY HAVE VETO POWER!!!

U.N "Ain't" Gonna do Shhhhhhhhhh.......

China will VETO any U.N Resolution condemning Pakistan...Do you really think China would go against or punish Pakistan on behalf of any country especially India.

This is coming from someone who has greatly study Sino-Pak Relations. Thank You Very Much.

We should not take orders from a "global institution" which is mostly controlled by a few countries in this world....

 

[S-2]

The Soviet General Staff was long in planning it's "invitation". The Soviet 40th Army crossed the Amur Darya River as a combat assault out of assembly areas. The landings at Kabul Airport were planned as combat assaults, the need pre-empted by Soviet seizure of key nodes within the city.

You're projecting desires in an hour of need, fellas. Transparently so. That was an invasion by any standard which, btw for those of you too tender of age to have lived it, a direct threat to your own nation.

Might want to temper that enthusiasm a tad.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

You're projecting desires in an hour of need, fellas. Transparently so. That was an invasion by any standard which, btw for those of you too tender of age to have lived it, a direct threat to your own nation.

Might want to temper that enthusiasm a tad.

Look how we gang raped the Soviet Union with your money.

Might want to give proper respect to Pakistan when due, something everyone forgets.

 

[roadrunner]

The Soviet General Staff was long in planning it's "invitation".

Possible. But it was legally invited in using the treaty powers between the two countries which in fact Amin used. That so far is an invite.

The Soviet 40th Army crossed the Amur Darya River as a combat assault out of assembly areas. The landings at Kabul Airport were planned as combat assaults, the need pre-empted by Soviet seizure of key nodes within the city.

And the Soviets did assasinate Amin. No doubts. This is the only point where you can argue that it was an invasion. But then the treaty still stood and the next puppet did not call for the withdrawal of the Soviet military.

You're projecting desires in an hour of need, fellas. Transparently so. That was an invasion by any standard which, btw for those of you too tender of age to have lived it, a direct threat to your own nation.

At the time it seemed like a good idea. But would Afghanistan have been better off under the Soviets? I think perhaps.

The Soviets may well have been a threat to Pakistan. But the only thing they would have wanted would have been Balochistan. And that could have been negotiated in such as way that they could access it while it still was a part of Pakistan. The whole thing was unnecessary.

 

[Vinod2070]

The Russians always were fairly friendly to Pakistan

Really? So all the theory of the warm port access was crap?

You guys unnecessarily destroyed your civil society for a non-existent threat!