The Road to Kabul Runs Through Kashmir

[Sinnerman108]

"Think hard and present 5 points."

1. Omar

2. Haqqani

3. Hekmatyar

4. Hafez Gul Bahadur

5. Maulvi Nazir

Afghans suffer daily by their hand.

Thanks.

As I requested , think HARD !
the above quoted are 5 individuals who are Afghan, or influenced by Afghanistan Pakhtuns.

All i am asking is 5 points, where the state of Pakistan has made Afghanistan to suffer.

 

[rastor]

Its the Kashmir issue. Pakistan gains no benefit from having supremacy over any other country including Afghanistan. If the Kashmir issue is resolved, Pakistan will not even have an issue with India becoming a member of UNSC (given some adjustments on Veto powers are made - which is a demand by the vast majority of UN members given the less than fair dealings at UNSC).

Come to think about it, even NSG supply to India becomes a non-issue for Pakistan if Kashmir is resolved.

What about LeT, Harkat-Muj etc? Will they be shut-down if Kashmir is resolved? Surely they will not extinguish themselves, they are not going to disappear because kashmir is settled. So pak.army or isi or police need to snuff them out. Will that be done when kashmir is settled? A lot of blind trust is needed.....

You got a radical terror problem with you that your leaders short-sightedly used. And nobody is going to share or even less gift kashmir when you got these vipers. The chances are very less that kashmir will be resolved even if Pakistan is a paragon of virtues .... but with this posture yeah right................

The title is wrong. The road to kabul runs through islamabad........the question is for how long will this be true.

 

[Hellfire]

As if Pakistan is the sole reason for your suffering. You are being used by all sides.

Yes that may very well be a fact. But "use" of Afghanistan may vary towards the goals achieved. While US-NATO-ISAF are 'using' Afghanistan to try and fight a war that they may end up fighting in own land on others territory and in the 'enemies' backyard, Iran-India-Russia are using Afganistan to ensure that the destabilisation does not spread beyond the present region and threaten the security of the said nations with Iran being the most threatened nation with immediate consequences on its security. Pakistan - it is using Afghanistan only to ensure that all other nations are kept at bay for its very well known that if Pakistan so desired, the insurgency in Afghanistan would be very short lived one as all PA has to do is to seal the border with massive troop deployment and employ pressure in its border regions with Afghanistan. By acting decisively against safe havens of groups operating in Afghanistan, it can go a long way in earning the goodwill of the people of Afghanistan (if not GoA, in short term) and 'use' its influence thus earned to limit the influence of other nations.

People picking up guns and fighting ISAF and the US forces are Afghans after all. They can chose to not tow the Pakistani line and not fight (if you are implying that Pakistan is responsible for all of the Taliban insurgency). But why do they?

Because:

1. Am sure you are aware the consequences of religious indoctrination and its potential impact in fueling an insurgency/guerilla movement. So the lack of any fomal education coupled with strict "Pakistanized" Islamic teachings have effectively brain washed the people who are taking up arms.

2. The only way a man can hope to eat and survive there. 40 years on and they have only seen war in that nation.

Secondly, under the garb of economic development (a short term benefit), what is the Indian purpose for investing in your country? Do you think anyone gives anyone anything for free? No.

Is economic development of any nation a short term benefit? Is that why we see GoP spend more on arming itself than investing for economic development of the nation? An interesting POV you have presented here.

The aim of Indian investment in Afghanistan is simple - ensure economic development (by road you are definitely developing/ improving the infrastructure which is an essential pre-requisite for economic development) while US-NATO-ISAF have ensured same along with adequate military pressure on Talibs to enable develpmental activities to continue and force a change in perception in the viewpoint of general masses about need for continuation a policy of killing each other.

No man wants to fight - give him a chance to settle in peace and live with dignity, he will never lift a weapon in his life.

Its their national interests that are driving their desire to fund Afghanistan. The Indian interest is to guide your foreign policy to not accommodate Pakistan. Your country will eventually do what it must, but if being landlocked with Pakistan, there is no accommodation of Pakistan's concerns due to consideration for the Indian interests, there will be a problem.

Indian national interest is definitely involved. We do not want further radicalisation of the region with consolidation of radical groups of Afghanistan whose effects will be felt in Pakistan and onto India .....

And yes Pakistan should not be accomodated till as such time it stops seeing the vast numbers of Talibs in Afghanistan as a useful tool to hit India with in Kashmir with minimum costs and retributions. Definitely Indian objective is at play here. There is no denying it.

As for being landlocked. Iran is a useful conduit in future ..... Pakistan may well loose its usefulness shortly.

If you really want to think it through, the only solution for Afghanistan is to tell both Pakistan and India to take their problems outside of your country. This would be a favour to both Pakistan and India in the long run.

Actually, it would be favor for Afghanistan, India and the rest of the world if Paksitan was to say - "hey we are with you guys" and wash its hands off. Let others deal with the problem there, you just seal your border and let no one in ..... nor out

As a Pakistani, I have no interest nor any desire to meddle in the Afghan affairs for as long as they do not impact Pakistan negatively. If Afghanistan takes the neutral approach vis-a-vis Pakistan and India, Pakistan's policy in Afghanistan will automatically become passive.

That may be your personal view point. GoP has full interest and intent to meddle and is doing so. INSPITE of Afghanistan being in no position to harm Pakistan, the only itch is, you are trying to force Afghanistan to accept you as a friend and only your friends as friends. Its an independent nation with its own friends and no one, not even US can tell it who can be its friends. Why dont you just clear out of Afghanistan and let it be?

Your last line clearly and emphatically smacks of this overbearing and bullying attitude vis-vis Afghanistan

 

[Hellfire]

Amazing how your thankless thinking come out again and again !

What should the people of Afghanistan thank you for? For ruining their nation? Or for not helping them overcome this scourge of Talibs which have ruined the nation after Soviet withdrawl? Or for not sealing the border and taking decisive steps against groups based on your western border working against the Afghan state? Please do elaborate.

what have the afghan's suffered because of Pakistan ?
Think hard and present 5 points.

Even if we were to recount the whole issue , you would cry "Indian cooked" "Western Propoganda Financed By Jews" etc etc .....

Our thinking hard may actually be too hard for you to accept.

 

[S-2]

"As I requested , think HARD !"

Don't engage in pedantry.

Two are your own citizens. All five reside on your lands and have done so since three of them were ousted from Afghanistan eight years ago. All make war on the afghan people and ISAF whom are there by a U.N. mandate and repeated requests of the Afghan government that's recognized by your own Pakistani government.

That's too hard for my tastes and it shouldn't be that way.

Thanks.

 

[Sinnerman108]

"As I requested , think HARD !"

Don't engage in pedantry.

Two are your own citizens. All five reside on your lands and have done so since three of them were ousted from Afghanistan eight years ago. All make war on the afghan people and ISAF whom are there by a U.N. mandate and repeated requests of the Afghan government that's recognized by your own Pakistani government.

That's too hard for my tastes and it shouldn't be that way.

Thanks.

This is not the first time you have replied without logic and if that is the way you want to carry on, feel free.

Hellfire
What should the people of Afghanistan thank you for? For ruining their nation? Or for not helping them overcome this scourge of Talibs which have ruined the nation after Soviet withdrawl? Or for not sealing the border and taking decisive steps against groups based on your western border working against the Afghan state? Please do elaborate.

Please be better informed before you start making comments.

What to thank for ?

1. Hosting millions of them for 30 + years

2. For helping them get rid of USSR's invasion

3. Providing with food , weapons, medicine for all these years albeit smuggled.

4. for sacrificing our own economy in the name of transit trade

5. Tolerating them, their ideology, drugs, street weapons, crime for all these years ( and in this point I specifically mean the Hazara, Tajiks, etc).

Can't you think of 5 ways the state of Pakistan has damaged State of Afghanistan ?

 

[Hellfire]

Please be better informed before you start making comments.

Really? Am thankful am not utopian in my study of Military History to be able to achieve the distinction of parrotting words without having developed an independent faculty to reach an analytical objective assessment.

What to thank for ?

1. Hosting millions of them for 30 + years

2. For helping them get rid of USSR's invasion

3. Providing with food , weapons, medicine for all these years albeit smuggled.

4. for sacrificing our own economy in the name of transit trade

5. Tolerating them, their ideology, drugs, street weapons, crime for all these years ( and in this point I specifically mean the Hazara, Tajiks, etc).

Can't you think of 5 ways the state of Pakistan has damaged State of Afghanistan ?

Rebuttal:

1. No one asked you to host them for 30 years. You allowed influx of refugees into your own territory as many had brethren this side of the border and you could not really do much without antagonising a poorly held part of your country. You had negligible assets to be able to quell any backlash/prevent influx of refugees. In addition, you learnt well from '71 war when India allowed a humanitarian crisis to develop in Bengal leading to justification of intervention in Bangladesh(then East Pakistan). So your own selfish political objectives were being met, not you being gracious here.

2.They didnt need help in getting rid of USSR invasion. There was a political unrest and they would have been better off under Soviet occupancy. Instead, to get in the good books of US to get shiney new weapons to beat India with, you decided to play ball with CIA which saw a potential trap for Soviets in Afghanistan to make them bleed and you willingly played along to serve YOUR OWN interests.

3.All paid for and provided by US in those years. And by drugs grown in rural afghan countryside and smuggled across and sold in markets .... contribution of Pakistani government was only in disbursement of funds granted by UN and token amount by its own self. Again, your own selfish interests by showing the Islamic nations of being benevolent.

4.Sacrificing your own economy? As if you had a booming economy at the time!!! And how did you 'sacrifice' your own economy apart from by spending billions in competing militarily with India?

5.Tolerating them? Were you even aware of those years? Prez Zia and ISI saw an opportunity in that large pool of trained and equipped (by US) battle hardened, radicalised, pot smoking pool of mujahids to be used as a tool to induct into Kashmir to fight as proxies and bleed India there with minimal to no retributions/political fall out and extensive resources to act as strategic reserve to tie down India with!!! Again a whole load of selfish ends here .........


so in short ... you definitely should follow your own advice and have some basic info BEFORE commenting lest you end up being only a

cheers


awaiting your next tirade

 

[Sinnerman108]

Rebuttal:

1. No one asked you to host them for 30 years. You allowed influx of refugees into your own territory as many had brethren this side of the border and you could not really do much without antagonising a poorly held part of your country. You had negligible assets to be able to quell any backlash/prevent influx of refugees. In addition, you learnt well from '71 war when India allowed a humanitarian crisis to develop in Bengal leading to justification of intervention in Bangladesh(then East Pakistan). So your own selfish political objectives were being met, not you being gracious here.

2.They didnt need help in getting rid of USSR invasion. There was a political unrest and they would have been better off under Soviet occupancy. Instead, to get in the good books of US to get shiney new weapons to beat India with, you decided to play ball with CIA which saw a potential trap for Soviets in Afghanistan to make them bleed and you willingly played along to serve YOUR OWN interests.

3.All paid for and provided by US in those years. And by drugs grown in rural afghan countryside and smuggled across and sold in markets .... contribution of Pakistani government was only in disbursement of funds granted by UN and token amount by its own self. Again, your own selfish interests by showing the Islamic nations of being benevolent.

4.Sacrificing your own economy? As if you had a booming economy at the time!!! And how did you 'sacrifice' your own economy apart from by spending billions in competing militarily with India?

5.Tolerating them? Were you even aware of those years? Prez Zia and ISI saw an opportunity in that large pool of trained and equipped (by US) battle hardened, radicalised, pot smoking pool of mujahids to be used as a tool to induct into Kashmir to fight as proxies and bleed India there with minimal to no retributions/political fall out and extensive resources to act as strategic reserve to tie down India with!!! Again a whole load of selfish ends here .........

1a. Poorly held part of my country ?
On the contrary it is the very same part of the country which is strongest in keeping the national fiber together.

1b. Refugees are never requested to be hosted, that is why they are called refugees. It's upto the host nation to accept them and host them.
There are no obligations, only courtesy.
In this particular case, yes some people may have come across because they had families in Pakistan, but that is very small %.

Whole of Europe could not host Jewish refugees so what to talk of history and lessons.


2a. On the contrary it was CIA who saw an opportunity to bleed USSR, Please look up history and find out when Pakistan started helping Afghanistan and when did CIA join in.
You will get your answer.

3. Please look up as to how many Stingers were actually supplied to the Mujahideen and what was their cost impact ?
More skirmishes were won with rifles than with any US weapons.

The Mujahideen improvised by trading Russian weapons for drugs as well.

Pakistan did not just go on distribute funds, but also organize, train and equip Mujahideen.

Again please look up the history books and find out who Gen Akhter Abdul Rehman, Gen Zia and Gen Hamid Gul are and what was their contribution to the Afghan war.

As for the drugs business, they were sold in Pakistan in huge numbers by "immigrants" and it was our generation which was destroyed.

4. Please look up the history books, Pakistan had the economic edge over India and for that matter most of south east Asia till the 70s.
It was the Afghan war which caused that immense bleeding of economy.

Every thing that was ordered from Afghanistan in the name of Transit trade went up there and then was smuggled back in, destroying the local economy. ( all this time, Indians were enjoying high tariff rates on import and allowing more time for local economy to build)

Most of development jobs were lost to Afghan labor which was being "hosted" free of tax.

Even today, sugar , wheat, and other commodities are smuggled into Afghanistan creating scarcity in local markets.

Hospitals in Quetta, Peshawar, are still flooded with sick from Afghanistan who come in, get treatment and go back.

5. you really should look up as to who kicked out the Indians in Kashmir in 1947-48. Not a single one was Afghan, All Pakistan.

You may be offended if I told you what motivated us at that time and today


You can try make all the smart remarks you want.
They are getting you no where.

so now, how about developing rational and sound logical argument based on empirical analysis ?

All I am requesting is 5 well thought of instances where the State of Pakistan has caused Afghanistan to suffer.

 

[Ahmad]

1. Hosting millions of them for 30 + years

Pakistan did allow refugees for their own reasons, not to have any love for Afghans. Although the case of great Pakistani public is totally different from GoP.

2. For helping them get rid of USSR's invasion

Again, Pakistan allowed them and trained them to get rid of the USSR because pakistan itself was afraid of the USSR. They had to make Afghanistan a defending zone to save its own skin from the might of the Soviets.

3. Providing with food , weapons, medicine for all these years albeit smuggled.

I am afraid Pakistan didnt provide any food, and even if they did it was the UN's donations to the refugees, but nowdays the refuges surving on NGO's helps and their relatives sending them money from other countries which is a plus point for paksitan - more money coming to the country. And the weapons/money was mostly provided by the west and arab contries, pakistan even had its own share of the benifit from the west.

4. for sacrificing our own economy in the name of transit trade

You are putting every ill of your country on the Afghans, yes Afghans are becoming a soft target and anybody can claim anyting on them. You better make FATA safe and get rid of the smuglers and drug traders. If you dont have full control of tribal areas how come you blame afghans for it? If FATA is not a lawlessness area nobody can do anything bad their.

5. Tolerating them, their ideology, drugs, street weapons, crime for all these years ( and in this point I specifically mean the Hazara, Tajiks, etc).

Tolerating what? the corrupt police which is ripping them off everyday? Yes, and AFghanistan didnt have this drug problem before, perhaps we took this habit from pakistan. And as if there was weapon on the streets of pakistna before. and how come suddengly you ethnicized this issue?

 

[Ahmad]

2a. On the contrary it was CIA who saw an opportunity to bleed USSR, Please look up history and find out when Pakistan started helping Afghanistan and when did CIA join in.
You will get your answer.

Pakistan helped itself.

3. Please look up as to how many Stingers were actually supplied to the Mujahideen and what was their cost impact ?

If i am not wrong these Stingers(spelling?) are american made it was given in limited numbers to the Mujahideen. It wasnt pakisan i am afraid.

Pakistan did not just go on distribute funds, but also organize, train and equip Mujahideen.

for your own sake and benefit.

4. Please look up the history books, Pakistan had the economic edge over India and for that matter most of south east Asia till the 70s.
It was the Afghan war which caused that immense bleeding of economy.

Perhaps the indian members would be able to argue over this.

Most of development jobs were lost to Afghan labor which was being "hosted" free of tax.

and the same labours sacrificed their lives to defend pakistan from the might of the USSR. by the way not most of these job went to the afghans.

Even today, sugar , wheat, and other commodities are smuggled into Afghanistan creating scarcity in local markets.

Food security is a problem in all asian and african countries, i doubt if this type of smuggling would have any decisive impact on this problem,although it is a problem.

Hospitals in Quetta, Peshawar, are still flooded with sick from Afghanistan who come in, get treatment and go back.

My friend, Paksitani hospitals cant provide a good service to its own citizens let alone providing it to the refugees. People nowdays go to india(those who have enough money) and the others come to paksian, but they only see private doctors not the hospitals which is a really hot business for the private doctors in peshawar specially.

 

[Hellfire]

1a. Poorly held part of my country ?
On the contrary it is the very same part of the country which is strongest in keeping the national fiber together.

Really? Not a poorly held part of Pakistan?

Here is an article which I recovered on a blog site .... original has to be found
Pakhtunkhwatimes: The Pashtun Question and Pakistan's Fears

few more

http://www.cfr.org/publication/1197...as.html?breadcrumb=%2Fregion/283/pakistan

http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/IS3204_pp041-077_Johnson_Mason.pdf

http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/xstandard/Student discussion paper 0901.pdf

1b. Refugees are never requested to be hosted, that is why they are called refugees. It's upto the host nation to accept them and host them.
There are no obligations, only courtesy.
In this particular case, yes some people may have come across because they had families in Pakistan, but that is very small %.

Whole of Europe could not host Jewish refugees so what to talk of history and lessons.

Pathans/Pakhtuns believe in Pakhtunistan an area encompassing parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan .... strangely they only have loyalty to their tribe and not a nation per se ..... their tribe comes first and foremost ...... if you have read the above articles am sure you shall be able to appreciate that fact

2a. On the contrary it was CIA who saw an opportunity to bleed USSR, Please look up history and find out when Pakistan started helping Afghanistan and when did CIA join in.
You will get your answer..

Did say - CIA found a chance and Pakistan gladly jumped in - counting on the possible fruitful relation ...... never denied it. I dont know whether you are contradicting just for the heck of it?

3. Please look up as to how many Stingers were actually supplied to the Mujahideen and what was their cost impact ?
More skirmishes were won with rifles than with any US weapons.

The Mujahideen improvised by trading Russian weapons for drugs as well.

Too good. Stingers? who the hell paid for the AK-47s used to equip the Mujahids who were till then fighting with at best a .303 Lee Enfield???? Surely you dont imply Pakistan ... and if you do ... you again land up shooting your own foot ..... it was again your own selfish desire ........

Pakistan did not just go on distribute funds, but also organize, train and equip Mujahideen.

I agree. Why?

Again please look up the history books and find out who Gen Akhter Abdul Rehman, Gen Zia and Gen Hamid Gul are and what was their contribution to the Afghan war.

I definitely know their roles. And I would love to have you read the good Gen Zia's address on Op. Topac

Operation Topac

As for the drugs business, they were sold in Pakistan in huge numbers by "immigrants" and it was our generation which was destroyed.

Pray why your police/internal security agencies didnt crack down on them?

4. Please look up the history books, Pakistan had the economic edge over India and for that matter most of south east Asia till the 70s.
It was the Afghan war which caused that immense bleeding of economy.

Please post links to support the same.

Every thing that was ordered from Afghanistan in the name of Transit trade went up there and then was smuggled back in, destroying the local economy. ( all this time, Indians were enjoying high tariff rates on import and allowing more time for local economy to build)
Most of development jobs were lost to Afghan labor which was being "hosted" free of tax.

whose fault is it? indian or worlds? Or is the fault purely Pakistani policy makers?

5. you really should look up as to who kicked out the Indians in Kashmir in 1947-48. Not a single one was Afghan, All Pakistan.

where did Kashmir conflict of 47 come in? no relevant arguments for you?

You may be offended if I told you what motivated us at that time and today
You can try make all the smart remarks you want.
They are getting you no where.
so now, how about developing rational and sound logical argument based on empirical analysis ?
All I am requesting is 5 well thought of instances where the State of Pakistan has caused Afghanistan to suffer.

I would suggest you just follow your own advice and read up your own history and facts. You are right. Trying to reason with you will not get me anywhere for you are definitely not in full picture of relevant facts.
In addition, instead of 5, I have given Pakistan the whole credit for Afghanistan Mess. Only you are not able to grasp it. That may be due to your utopian outlook.

thanks

 

[blain2]

"Secondly, under the garb of economic development (a short term benefit), what is the Indian purpose for investing in your country?"

Why do you presume that economic development constitutes a "short-term benefit" to India? It is long-term.

You are right. They can be long term. As long as its not used as a vehicle to undermine Pakistan.

"Do you think anyone gives anyone anything for free? No."

There are forty plus nations that are giving freely to Afghanistan for one common purpose-its stabilization. Achieving such benefits all, most notably Afghanistan's immediate neighbors in CAR, Iran, and Pakistan. Implicit to stabilization is economic progress.

Pakistan is not against helping Afghanistan. Our number one complaint has been the vacuum that was left after the Soviet departure. So Pakistan does not want a backward, economically deprived Afghanistan either and if these countries are helping, then its great because when Afghans prosper and so does Pakistan due to the trade routes and various other economic activity that is generated. However the forty plus nations are giving freely because they are drawn into an affair which they want to be done with and move on. India's interests are of a strategic nature and India's assistance is very much in line with what she perceives as the best way to replace Pakistan's influence with that of her own. I hope this is not the case, however you have to consider what has gone on in the region in the past 20 years with Pakistan and India jockeying for support in South Asia.

"Its their national interests that are driving their desire to fund Afghanistan."

National interests might encompass a variety of arenas and deserves inclusion of ALL those interests to fully appreciate the value. Those interests include economic development of Afghanistan. If a quid pro quo exists for India is that any worse than the PRC funding investment in, say, copper mines in Afghanistan? I don't think so.

Its no different for as long as it stays that way. However the message that has been delivered to Pakistan is that India will have a role to play in Afghanistan once the ISAF/US depart (of late there has been some backpedaling on this which is welcome for us Pakistanis at least). For as long as Pakistan and India have this long simmering conflict, any such moves to give India a role in Afghanistan - they are positioning themselves for it with the upfront economic assistance, eventually they want to have a security role - will have a dramatic impact on Pakistan's security calculations.

"The Indian interest is to guide your foreign policy to not accommodate Pakistan."

Perhaps. Perhaps not. That is a cynical proposition when considering what Pakistan's demonstrated interests have been in the same regard. You are, in effect, projecting yourself here. Just two weeks ago Lt. Gen. Talat Masood suggested Pakistan sees great value in retaining strategic assets WRT to Afghanistan.

Strategic assets are important to us just as Northern Alliance members are important to Iran and India. We are not the only ones trying to make sure that we are not left in the lurch once all is said and done. Pakistan has no reason to antagonize the US with supporting anti-US/AQ affiliated people. However Pakistan has to have a pragmatic stance towards those who will be in Afghanistan if and when a settlement is reached.

"Your country will eventually do what it must, but if being landlocked with Pakistan, there is no accommodation of Pakistan's concerns due to consideration for the Indian interests, there will be a problem."

I'd suggest that a trust deficit exists not just between Pakistan and India but between Pakistan and Afghanistan. That includes many of the Pashtun citizens of Afghanistan. I'd further suggest that it's in Pakistan's interests to geo-strategically compete with India for Afghanistan's favor in the manner commonly accepted by the rest of mankind-economic and diplomatic relations which benefit the Afghan people.

Pakistan would not mind competing economically with India for business with Afghanistan. However currently we have a sword hanging over our heads. Pakistan's defensive posture is eastward oriented. If Indian influence encompasses security relations with Afghanistan then this becomes a major problem for Pakistan. Nobody likes to be squeezed and Pakistan is also not an exception to this case.

If Afghanistan, in pursuit of an independant foreign policy finds that IT'S NATIONAL INTERESTS are served by formalized relations with both countries, it might be wise to accede to that and be the best neighbor possible. This isn't a zero-sum game as you seemingly posture and Pakistan has a few hatchets which must be buried between the prevailing Afghan government and itself.

Problems between two governments come and go. I do not see lingering Pakistan-Afghanistan issues if some understanding is reached by all sides which ensures that nobody's interests would be undermined. Our problem in Pakistan is that we are not getting this message (up until recently at least but in the last two weeks or so the messages have been slightly more upbeat from our standpoint).

Afghanistan is absolutely free to have their relations with India and whomsoever else they want to, however it becomes a zero-sum game when we feel that to an extent the Indians are involved in undermining us. I do not want to get into this topic because we have a lot of threads covering what we perceive the Indians to be doing in Afghanistan. You may or may not agree with it, however the reality is that just like Americans have concerns with us, we have concerns about the Indian activities in Afghanistan (those aside from the economic development).

Allow me to go one step further, please? Much of Pakistan's fears derive from the perception that the Afghan government is unbalanced in its favor because the GoA is unduly comprised of elements unfriendly to Pakistan. Maybe, maybe not but such ignore the dynamics of political intercourse and the electoral process just as it might ignore those same dynamics when viewing Pakistan's currently elected government.

I think that is a perception, but not one grounded in total reality. Pakistan's issue is that with a large scale insurgency going on, there is a considerable population which is disenfranchised and is not getting heard. The counter to that would be to get them to vote, however if they do not agree with foreign forces sitting in their country, this becomes a non-starter of an argument. What makes this more complicated for us in Pakistan is that the vast majority of this disenfranchised population is Pashtun, and due to affinity in Pakistan with this ethnic grouping, even perceptions of under-representation become an issue. Since Pashtuns comprise 16-20% of our population, any such sentiments have an implication on Pakistan's foreign policy towards Afghanistan.

Change inevitably occurs where an increasingly educated and sophisticated constituency can perceive options and possesses no fear that those choices might be aborted by powers beyond their control.

To that end, Pakistan should safeguard its own citizens and those of Afghanistan from "one man, one vote, one time". Doing so assures evolutionary change consistent with the desires of the people.

Thanks.

Valid point, however literacy is not the high point in South Asia (Sri Lanka being the only exception to this case). There is a lot of work to be done in this regard.

 

[Cheetah786]

LOL i love this The two allies of Ungrateful Afghan here are Indians (Russian allies) during the time Russian were slaughtering Afghanistan Second AMERICAN WHO LEFT THEM HIGH AND DRY AFTER THE WAR ENDED and is back they're now bombing them and arming them at the same time am i missing some thing here.

Joke comes to mind here

Two guys, Osama Bin Laden and Uncle Sam are out walking together one day. They come across a lantern and a Genie pops out of it. "I will give each of you one wish" says the Genie.
Osama Bin Laden said: "I want a wall around Afghanistan, so that no infidels, Jews or Americans can come into our precious state."
With a blink of the Genie's eye, 'POOF' - there was a huge wall around Afghanistan.
"Uncle Sam" , asks: "I'm very curious. Please tell me more about this wall."
The Genie explains: "Well, it's about 15,000 feet high, 500 feet thick and completely surrounds the country; nothing can get in or out."
Uncle Sam says: "Fill it with water."

 

[Hellfire]

Two guys, Osama Bin Laden and Uncle Sam are out walking together one day. They come across a lantern and a Genie pops out of it. "I will give each of you one wish" says the Genie.
Osama Bin Laden said: "I want a wall around Afghanistan, so that no infidels, Jews or Americans can come into our precious state."
With a blink of the Genie's eye, 'POOF' - there was a huge wall around Afghanistan.
"Uncle Sam" , asks: "I'm very curious. Please tell me more about this wall."
The Genie explains: "Well, it's about 15,000 feet high, 500 feet thick and completely surrounds the country; nothing can get in or out."
Uncle Sam says: "Fill it with water."

Ah! What a great solution, would end a lot of miseries !!!

 

[blain2]

Yes that may very well be a fact. But "use" of Afghanistan may vary towards the goals achieved. While US-NATO-ISAF are 'using' Afghanistan to try and fight a war that they may end up fighting in own land on others territory and in the 'enemies' backyard, Iran-India-Russia are using Afganistan to ensure that the destabilisation does not spread beyond the present region and threaten the security of the said nations with Iran being the most threatened nation with immediate consequences on its security. Pakistan - it is using Afghanistan only to ensure that all other nations are kept at bay for its very well known that if Pakistan so desired, the insurgency in Afghanistan would be very short lived one as all PA has to do is to seal the border with massive troop deployment and employ pressure in its border regions with Afghanistan. By acting decisively against safe havens of groups operating in Afghanistan, it can go a long way in earning the goodwill of the people of Afghanistan (if not GoA, in short term) and 'use' its influence thus earned to limit the influence of other nations.

And Pakistan wants to keep others at bay just for the hell of it? What is our problem with Russia or Iran? We have no problem. Our sole concern is that the Pak-Afghan border remains intact and if there is a vacuum in Afghanistan, it is not used to stir up Pashtun nationalism and undermine Pakistan's territorial integrity. This is the basic issue. Not something that you are conjuring up here with regards to Pakistan wanting to keep every one at bay and stick its thumb at them after doing so.

Because:

1. Am sure you are aware the consequences of religious indoctrination and its potential impact in fueling an insurgency/guerilla movement. So the lack of any fomal education coupled with strict "Pakistanized" Islamic teachings have effectively brain washed the people who are taking up arms.

2. The only way a man can hope to eat and survive there. 40 years on and they have only seen war in that nation.

Before "Pakistanizing" everything there is a need to understand the madrassa concept. Religious indoctrination happened in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Madrassa network exists in both countries and anyone attending it would learn that if your land is under occupation, then picking up arms is justified. This same indoctrination was a non-issue when the Soviets were in Afghanistan, but now its an issue for very many reasons.

Before you infer that this is some insidious Pakistani madrassa plot, let me just put this forth. If a Muslim country is invaded, the madrassa teachers would be duty bound to tell their students that its their right and duty to pick up arms and wage a fight against the occupier. They Afghans who are fighting on the part of Taliban get this same message in Madrassas in Afghanistan and in Pakistan if they come to attend it. They usually go to Pashtun-run madrassas, and this is what they are taught. Not because some ISI minder sits there and instigates them, but due to the Islamic obligation to fight against occupation.

Is economic development of any nation a short term benefit? Is that why we see GoP spend more on arming itself than investing for economic development of the nation? An interesting POV you have presented here.

Its all about interests. India's security interests are woven into the economic assistance to Afghanistan. You can deny it all you want, however if things go the way GoI wants them to, the security considerations will play a very large part in this assistance.

Economic assistance and trade with Afghanistan is nothing new for Pakistan. The cement used in building roads and buildings all over Afghanistan has been sold by cement factories in Pakistan. The Afghan markets are filled with smuggled and imported goods from Pakistan and now others including India. So lets not portray Pakistan as being against economic development in Afghanistan.

The aim of Indian investment in Afghanistan is simple - ensure economic development (by road you are definitely developing/ improving the infrastructure which is an essential pre-requisite for economic development) while US-NATO-ISAF have ensured same along with adequate military pressure on Talibs to enable develpmental activities to continue and force a change in perception in the viewpoint of general masses about need for continuation a policy of killing each other.

You cannot attain all of the above for as long as there are foreign forces in that country. Someone will have an issue with it at one point or another. The above aim is fine actually. Both Pakistan and India should be doing this, however there is mistrust between the two and for as long this remains, both sides will remain suspicious of each others motives and moves.

No man wants to fight - give him a chance to settle in peace and live with dignity, he will never lift a weapon in his life.

I agree. However if someone comes in and squats in his house, then he will have an issue.

Indian national interest is definitely involved. We do not want further radicalisation of the region with consolidation of radical groups of Afghanistan whose effects will be felt in Pakistan and onto India .....

Nobody wants further radicalization. However this trend cannot be stopped if the underlying causes of instability are left unresolved.

And yes Pakistan should not be accomodated till as such time it stops seeing the vast numbers of Talibs in Afghanistan as a useful tool to hit India with in Kashmir with minimum costs and retributions. Definitely Indian objective is at play here. There is no denying it.

Indians have never arrested a single Afghan or Pakistani Taliban in IoK. So talking about using Talibs as a tool against India is misguided but makes for good propaganda against Pakistan.

As for being landlocked. Iran is a useful conduit in future ..... Pakistan may well loose its usefulness shortly.

As much as you'd like to wish for this, the reality is different.

Actually, it would be favor for Afghanistan, India and the rest of the world if Paksitan was to say - "hey we are with you guys" and wash its hands off. Let others deal with the problem there, you just seal your border and let no one in ..... nor out

Let others deal, which I take it means you guys. Given your history of interference in Sri Lanka's civil war and meddling here and there, I think Pakistan should safeguard her interests. As far as sealing the border is concerned, first seal the LoC successfully instead of complaining about ingresses all the time. Once you have done this successfully, please impart this methodology to both Pakistan and the US/ISAF side so they too can do the same along the Pak-Afghan border.

Last I checked, when people from the Pakistan side cross over legally to Afghanistan with their bio-metric ID cards, the Afghan side disposes them off to make the point that they do not believe in the border delineation. Given this attitude, rest assured we will not be washing our hands off so easily.

That may be your personal view point. GoP has full interest and intent to meddle and is doing so. INSPITE of Afghanistan being in no position to harm Pakistan, the only itch is, you are trying to force Afghanistan to accept you as a friend and only your friends as friends. Its an independent nation with its own friends and no one, not even US can tell it who can be its friends. Why dont you just clear out of Afghanistan and let it be?

We will clear out just as soon as the Afghans agree to the border between us and them and they assure us that your side will not be causing trouble for us. Since they cannot guarantee either, the impasse exists.

Your last line clearly and emphatically smacks of this overbearing and bullying attitude vis-vis Afghanistan

There is nothing overbearing here. What Pakistan is asking is no different from what you ask the BD government for. Last I checked, you did not want BD to host and support anti-India elements. Pakistan is asking and expecting the same from Afghanistan. When we ask its overbearing, when you do it, its just safeguarding your interests. Nice logic!