Was the Afghan-Soviet war a neccessary evil for Pakistan, or were we stupidly dragged in?

[Erieye]

I've been thinking. Was our involvement in the Afghan-Soviet war and supporting the mujahideen infrastructure a neccessary evil for us and beneficial?

Some questions:

Were we inclined to support the war due to our immense reliance on American support and weaponry? Were we left otherwise open to Indian aggression?

Since the border was incredibly porous with no fencing, and both sides have the same ethnic group - Pashtuns - was it reletivaly impossible to stay out of it, especially with the border/tribal regions wanting to get involved to assist their co-ethnics?

Would the situation have been different if Soviets took over Afghanistan - would Soviet Afghanistan pose a risk to us considering Soviet allied India on the other side?

Opinions below please.

My personal opinion was that it was overall a neccessary evil due to all of the above pointing to us getting involved. Soviet Afghanistan still would be hellbent on retreiving their claimed Balochistan and KP territories, and they instantly began supporting militant activity inside Pakistan. A strong Afghanistan would have been a nightmare for us paired with India on the other side.

@Meengla @Bleek @PakFactor @Great Janjua @Maula Jatt @villageidiot @Mirzali Khan @Sayfullah @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Ali_14 @Olympus81 @chinasun

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

I've been thinking. Was our involvement in the Afghan-Soviet war and supporting the mujahideen infrastructure a neccessary evil for us and beneficial?

Some questions:

Were we inclined to support the war due to our immense reliance on American support and weaponry? Were we left otherwise open to Indian aggression?

Since the border was incredibly porous with no fencing, and both sides have the same ethnic group - Pashtuns - was it reletivaly impossible to stay out of it, especially with the border/tribal regions wanting to get involved to assist their co-ethnics?

Would the situation have been different if Soviets took over Afghanistan - would Soviet Afghanistan pose a risk to us considering Soviet allied India on the other side?

Opinions below please.

My personal opinion was that it was overall a neccessary evil due to all of the above pointing to us getting involved. Soviet Afghanistan still would be hellbent on retreiving their claimed Balochistan and KP territories, and they instantly began supporting militant activity inside Pakistan. A strong Afghanistan would have been a nightmare for us paired with India on the other side.

@Meengla @Bleek @PakFactor @Great Janjua @Maula Jatt @villageidiot @Mirzali Khan @Sayfullah @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Ali_14 @Olympus81 @chinasun

I am the one, always say that it was avoidable. People can understand that how USA never get directly involved in a morden day war.

They usually use the countries as satellite state to fight a war. They only throw the money and arms, and enjoy sitting outside of destruction of the both parties.

This is a classic example that USA abandon the Pakistan after 1992, once they achived the success. They left the Pakistan with the Taliban ( called mujahidin), the same people turned terrorist's after 9/11 and again Pakistan joined the war with USA.

 

[Erieye]

I am the one, always say that it was avoidable. People can understand that how USA never get directly involved in a morden day war.

They usually use the country as satellite state to fight a war. They only throw the money and arms, and enjoy sitting outside of destruction of the both parties.

US sits half way across the world with immense funding and technology to offer, we don't have that luxury, or anything to leverage. We are talking about a newly independent poor nation.

Pakistan is the only viable state to use as a launching pad for Afghanistan due to geography and the porous border.

 

[TheSolution]

No matter how inhumane or evil it sounds, I do think a destroyed and backwards Afghanistan is, and was, a benefit to us.

Not due to any inherent hate towards them but they constantly fund excessive terrorism and want to go to war with us in any possible capacity. We are dealing with truly backwards tribal people.

Let me show you this.

There are many pages of attacks like this, many militant groups.

Had the Soviets taken over, Afghanistan would have encouraged them to go to war with Pakistan and continue funding terrorism.

We did what they forced us to do. It cost us but it was the more desirable outcome. Playing the long-term game.

 

[Erieye]

No matter how inhumane or evil it sounds, I do think a destroyed and backwards Afghanistan is, and was, a benefit to us.

Not due to any inherent hate towards them but they constantly fund excessive terrorism and want to go to war with us in any possible capacity. We are dealing with truly backwards tribal people.

Let me show you this.

View attachment 915265

There are many pages of attacks like this, many militant groups.

Had the Soviets taken over, Afghanistan would have encouraged them to go to war with Pakistan and continue funding terrorism.

We did what they forced us to do. It cost us but it was the more desirable outcome. Playing the long-term game.

Agreed essentially.

But my biggest criticism is that we didn't utilise those years of wars Afghanistan was in properly. We should built have powerful insitutions of governance in every domain, a strong foundational and central identity to integrated all groups into Pakistan. Built a strong foundation as grounds for lasting success and growth.

We should have been very far ahead of Afghanistan by now, and have competent instituions. We wasted time even then, we have never utilised our opportunities well enough. Never.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

US sits half way across the world with immense funding and technology to offer, we don't have that luxury, or anything to leverage. We are talking about a newly independent poor nation.

Pakistan is the only viable state to use as a launching pad for Afghanistan due to geography and the porous border.

Sorry, I don't understand.

What technology did the United States offer? According to what I understood, by assisting USA, they usually give the normal military supplies and funding.

But if your economy is robust and you are willing to pay in cash, will/do/did they reject you? If they were refused, did you not have access to other resources?

Personally, I firmly believe that Pakistan's security position would have been considerably better throughout the 1980s and 1990s if it had adopted the Iranian model for dealing with refugees and refrained from joining the conflict. As a result, more international businesses might have invested in Pakistan.

No matter how inhumane or evil it sounds, I do think a destroyed and backwards Afghanistan is, and was, a benefit to us.

Not due to any inherent hate towards them but they constantly fund excessive terrorism and want to go to war with us in any possible capacity. We are dealing with truly backwards tribal people.

Let me show you this.

View attachment 915265

There are many pages of attacks like this, many militant groups.

Had the Soviets taken over, Afghanistan would have encouraged them to go to war with Pakistan and continue funding terrorism.

We did what they forced us to do. It cost us but it was the more desirable outcome. Playing the long-term game.

This occurred as a result of your involvement in the USA-Soviet War in afghanistan. Here, we're discussing the period prior to 1979 if you were not joined.

 

[TheSolution]

This occurred as a result of your involvement in the USA-Soviet War in afghanistan. Here, we're discussing the period prior to 1979 if you were not joined.

No it didn't.

You need to go read through history and see they have been funding militancy since 1947.

 

[Erieye]

Sorry, I don't understand.

What technology did the United States offer? According to what I understood, by assisting USA, they usually give the normal military supplies and funding.

But if your economy is robust and you are willing to pay in cash, will/do/did they reject you? If they were refused, did you not have access to other resources?

Tell me what does a newly independent poor nation have to offer compared to America?

America with its thriving economy, defence industry with weapons like the F-16, stringer missiles, and the ability to supply an abundance of weapons that we may not be able to afford.

And then a poor country like Pakistan still having a larger country to its East breathing down its neck, and requiring support from America to retain detterence and defence.

It was a neogitation with America, and made sense considering our tribal regions especially on the border have no border separating them from Afghanistan or fence, they have a history of being involved in wars of Afghanistan. They were probably going to get involved.

And the Soviet Afghanistan would still have plans to fund terrorism and militancy, being egged on by the Afghans themselves who had such desires too. They would have eventually posed a threat at the end anyway.

There was no other way out - we nipped the Soviets and the Afghans at the same time, and got much needed American support.

Personally, I firmly believe that Pakistan's security position would have been considerably better throughout the 1980s and 1990s if it had adopted the Iranian model for dealing with refugees and refrained from joining the conflict. As a result, more international businesses might have invested in Pakistan.

Look. Afghanistan was a security risk just like India, there's no sugar coating this.

The destruction of that war set them back and prevented them from waging any conventonial conflict against us, or have the funding or time to wage proxy wars.

Although I agree with your refugee sentiment, it should have been restricted to refugee camps close to the border and sent back. They have furhter ruined our society with drugs, militancy, guns, and by spreading hate between people.

 

[altafahmed]

I've been thinking. Was our involvement in the Afghan-Soviet war and supporting the mujahideen infrastructure a neccessary evil for us and beneficial?

Some questions:

Were we inclined to support the war due to our immense reliance on American support and weaponry? Were we left otherwise open to Indian aggression?

Since the border was incredibly porous with no fencing, and both sides have the same ethnic group - Pashtuns - was it reletivaly impossible to stay out of it, especially with the border/tribal regions wanting to get involved to assist their co-ethnics?

Would the situation have been different if Soviets took over Afghanistan - would Soviet Afghanistan pose a risk to us considering Soviet allied India on the other side?

Opinions below please.

My personal opinion was that it was overall a neccessary evil due to all of the above pointing to us getting involved. Soviet Afghanistan still would be hellbent on retreiving their claimed Balochistan and KP territories, and they instantly began supporting militant activity inside Pakistan. A strong Afghanistan would have been a nightmare for us paired with India on the other side.

@Meengla @Bleek @PakFactor @Great Janjua @Maula Jatt @villageidiot @Mirzali Khan @Sayfullah @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Ali_14 @Olympus81 @chinasun

At that time our establishment was saying that Russia has captured Afghanistan so that they can capture Pakistan (Karachi specifically), if this was true than yes this was was necessary for Pakistan's survival...
Secondly a strong Afghanistan will not be a nightmare for us if we had qualified diplomats instead of some FA pass babus and people with hatred against Pashtoon in their hearts controlling relations with Afghanistan.

 

[Sifar zero]

I've been thinking. Was our involvement in the Afghan-Soviet war and supporting the mujahideen infrastructure a neccessary evil for us and beneficial?

Some questions:

Were we inclined to support the war due to our immense reliance on American support and weaponry? Were we left otherwise open to Indian aggression?

Since the border was incredibly porous with no fencing, and both sides have the same ethnic group - Pashtuns - was it reletivaly impossible to stay out of it, especially with the border/tribal regions wanting to get involved to assist their co-ethnics?

Would the situation have been different if Soviets took over Afghanistan - would Soviet Afghanistan pose a risk to us considering Soviet allied India on the other side?

Opinions below please.

My personal opinion was that it was overall a neccessary evil due to all of the above pointing to us getting involved. Soviet Afghanistan still would be hellbent on retreiving their claimed Balochistan and KP territories, and they instantly began supporting militant activity inside Pakistan. A strong Afghanistan would have been a nightmare for us paired with India on the other side.

@Meengla @Bleek @PakFactor @Great Janjua @Maula Jatt @villageidiot @Mirzali Khan @Sayfullah @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Ali_14 @Olympus81 @chinasun

It was a necessary evil.
Unless we wanted to live as a Soviet client state.

 

[Erieye]

At that time our establishment was saying that Russia has captured Afghanistan so that they can capture Pakistan (Karachi specifically), if this was true than yes this was was necessary for Pakistan's survival...
Secondly a strong Afghanistan will not be a nightmare for us if we had qualified diplomats instead of some FA pass babus and people with hatred against Pashtoon in their hearts controlling relations with Afghanistan.

It was mainly about Balochistan and KP which they had always wanted to capture and encouraged the Soviets too as well, but yes I have heard about the Karachi rumour too although I don't know how much truth it holds.

And yes a strong Afghanistan is a nightmare for us, and no amount of diplomacy can change this, they backstabbed Ayub Khan who visited them in good faith and extended help, trade and aid, and then spat in his face by a formal invasion similar to Kargil in Bajaur district. And also funding terrorism which even Faqir of IPI and Bacha Khan had addmitted to and regretted.

You sympathisers of Afghans simply can't accept they are tribal people hellbent on their goal of 'Loy Afghanistan; - diplomacy has been tested and tried, it can only be paired with credible military deterrence to be successful.

What's funny is even at that time establishment was mostly Pushtoon themselves.

Hamid Gul... Assad Durrani, heck even General Naseerullah Babar Khan the father of the Taliban is Pushtoon. Even the Punjabi Islamist General Zia Ul Haq Shaheed spoke only good even about Afghans and let their regugees enter into the country. (Who later slaughtered muhajirs in Karachi)

So please stop this victim complex honestly.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Tell me what does a newly independent poor nation have to offer compared to America?

America with its thriving economy, defence industry with weapons like the F-16, stringer missiles, and the ability to supply an abundance of weapons that we may not be able to afford.

And then a poor country like Pakistan still having a larger country to its East breathing down its neck, and requiring support from America to retain detterence and defence.

It was a neogitation with America, and made sense considering our tribal regions especially on the border have no border separating them from Afghanistan or fence, they have a history of being involved in wars of Afghanistan. They were probably going to get involved.

And the Soviet Afghanistan would still have plans to fund terrorism and militancy, being egged on by the Afghans themselves who had such desires too. They would have eventually posed a threat at the end anyway.

There was no other way out - we nipped the Soviets and the Afghans at the same time, and got much needed American support.

Look. Afghanistan was a security risk just like India, there's no sugar coating this.

The destruction of that war set them back and prevented them from waging any conventonial conflict against us, or have the funding or time to wage proxy wars.

Although I agree with your refugee sentiment, it should have been restricted to refugee camps close to the border and sent back. They have furhter ruined our society with drugs, militancy, guns, and by spreading hate between people.

You're heading in a different path...buddy.

Take a look at China, please. and similarly, other countries that once struggled to live without such assistance are today faring much better on practically all fronts.

This mentality caused you still be unable to stand on your legs independently. Still, you need someone to support you.

defence industry with weapons like the F-16, stringer missiles,

Is that your excuses? Ohh GOD.

And the Soviet Afghanistan would still have plans to fund terrorism and militancy

Do you really believe that the Soviet Union could have attack Pakistan because of the warning water, etc.? The Black Sea's warm waters were already accessible to the USSR. Why did it have to travel so far down to the Arabian Sea?

Look. Afghanistan was a security risk just like India, there's no sugar coating this.

Isn't Pakistan a security risk to India? but, when India first attacked Pakistan after independence?

 

[Erieye]

You're heading in a different path...buddy.

Take a look at China, please. and similarly, other countries that once struggled to live without such assistance are today faring much better on practically all fronts.

This mentality caused you still be unable to stand on your legs independently. Still, you need someone to support you.

This is not possible with an enemy several times larger than yourself breathing down your neck.

Do you really believe that the Soviet Union could have attack Pakistan because of the warning water, etc.? The Black Sea's warm waters were already accessible to the USSR. Why did it have to travel so far down to the Arabian Sea?

Afghan leaders were encouraging them, that was part of the main driving factor, that you help us in taking Balochistan and KP.

There is documented evidence of the above. Afghanistan had been trying for a long while but failing until it turned to the Soviets.

Look. Afghanistan was a security risk just like India, there's no sugar coating this.

Isn't Pakistan a security risk to India? but, when India attacked Pakistan after independence?

It is precisely due to the military detterence (again supported by American weaponry) that prevented such a thing. So you're proving my point.

You think a militarily weak Pakistan without any credible defence would not have been attacked by India?

Secondly don't compare India to Afghanistan, you are fundamentally different societies and people. You clearly have no idea about their tribal lifestyle or code of honour. They don't care about things like economy, or international relations, or geopolitics, when it comes to something they view as their property. These are hotheaded tribal folks that would rather die in the thousands then give up their goal.

 

[Meengla]

This occurred as a result of your involvement in the USA-Soviet War in afghanistan. Here, we're discussing the period prior to 1979 if you were not joined.

Yes.
Also, prior to 1979 when Afghanistan was relatively peaceful (except for the Parcham-Khalaq infightings), there was not much of a threat from them. King Zahir Shah and Sardar Daud made some noises here and there about 'Pashtunistan' but Pakistan was NOT signficantly threatened by or from Afghanistan. There is historic data to prove that! My father even took us kids into Afghanistan from Torkham (?) border crossing without visa or any papers in the 1970s and we had tea there! A few Afghan soldiers smiled and greeted us. It was that relaxed and peaceful then!!!

Stability, education, and peace tend to prevent nations from launching wars. The issue of Pashtunistan was/is basically a non-issue; if anything, Pashtuns would rather be part of Pakistan than Afghanistan! There are countries peacefully co-existing for decades or even centuries despite claims on neighbor countries' land.

To repeat what I have been saying in this forum: A total subjugation and uplift of Afghanistan by the Soviets would have eventually lead to better situation for Pakistan than what followed--and what followed is nightmare which is never ending!

But then---we have the benefit of hindsight...

 

[TheSolution]

Look. Afghanistan was a security risk just like India, there's no sugar coating this.

Isn't Pakistan a security risk to India? but, when India first attacked Pakistan after independence?

Seriously you have to be retarded to make this comparison.

Afghanistan and India are like night and day differences. Their tribal code of honour would rather them all be killed than give up what they see as their property.

You would have crumbled within a week in Afghanistan's position when facing the NATO coalition, it is because of their societal differences they waged a war for 20 straight years.