What's behind attack on Afghan Parliament?

[SrNair]

@SrNair When one is out of logics and any morals to defend himself he can only blabber like you are doing .

Out of logic ??Really??

You started this thread without a single piece of info or evidence and you are asking about logic

I dont have to defend .
Why should I defend a hollow topic created by you without any evidence?

Serious debates wont happen in here.

 

[Nicky G]

... and that Afghanistan and Pakistan should make peace and get over their respective differences, the latter part provides further context.

No leader is going to ask for a war to continue, especially one being waged against his country. That does not negate the clear charge he made against Pak.

Accusing a country of waging an undeclared war when your security agencies are supposedly to work closely is very significant. You guys might wish to dismiss that, no one else will.

That makes no sense, since such attacks would only strengthen opposition to the MoU within the Afghan Parliament, and in fact it is the continuing Taliban violence in Afghanistan that is the biggest justification given by those who oppose Ghani's outreach to Pakistan so for the ISI to support such an attack at a time when some Afghans oppose Pakistan-Afghan collaboration precisely because of continuing Taliban attacks, makes absolutely no sense.

It makes perfect sense when you consider the belligerent attitude of one of the parties involved. "If you oppose us, we will hit you and you will not be safe anywhere." kind of mentality.

Structures can be rebuilt relatively quickly - damaged relationships between States (as would be the case in this hypothetical argument of India gaining the most out of continued high profile Taliban attacks in Afghanistan) are much, much harder to rebuild.

India has a limited budget, we don't have spare cash like the Chinese. It would be silly to throw money away in such a manner with such a degree of risk involved in a mission that can go wrong at any stage. Imagine if one of these attackers were to be captured and paraded in public like we were able to do with that Mumbai attacker.

The risks for India would clearly outweigh any potential benefits.

As I argued above, if the Taliban acted at the behest of someone, then that someone has to be India, since they have the most to gain (and Pakistan the most to lose) from such attacks and the responsibility for such attacks being pinned on Pakistan.

I have to keep repeating myself, since you want to ignore this but there is nothing to link India with Taliban, plenty to link Pak with them.

Sorry, until I see any evidence linking India with this Pak asset, your proposition is very flimsy.

To add a new dimension, this event creates a security vacuum in Afghanistan, someone else just might need to step in. We'll see who steps in, that could give an idea.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

https://twitter.com/x/status/612949438651305984

https://twitter.com/x/status/612893147278897152

https://twitter.com/x/status/612949438651305984

https://twitter.com/x/status/612893147278897152

That's not what the Afghan Tolo news network is reporting based on their interview with the soldier:

Afghan Hero Says He Will Defend His Country To The End

No leader is going to ask for a war to continue, especially one being waged against his country. That does not negate the clear charge he made against Pak.

The 'charge' is not the issue as much as Afghan government support for terrorists (as established by leaked US diplomatic cables detailing Karzai's support for BLA/BLF/BRA terrorists) is. Ghani is perceived to be rolling back Afghan support for terrorism in Pakistan, and so long as he sticks to that policy Pakistan will reciprocate and support him, which is why Pakistan is trying to increase Afghan-Pakistan military and intelligence cooperation.

Accusing a country of waging an undeclared war when your security agencies are supposedly to work closely is very significant. You guys might wish to dismiss that, no one else will.

The war is being waged by Afghanistan against Pakistan, as Musharraf and various other Pakistani civilian and military leaders have argued over the years. An end to support for terrorism in Pakistan by Afghanistan (as Ghani is trying to do) will be welcomed by Pakistan with increased military and intelligence cooperation to combat the Afghan Taliban and associated groups.

Pakistan has demonstrated her commitment to supporting Afghanistan through the military ops in North Waziristan, which have severely restricted the space and resources that were available to the Afghan Taliban and Haqqanis. The Afghan government and NDS have themselves recognized this fact by stating that the Pakistani offensive has pushed thousands of Afghan Taliban and Haqqani fighters into Afghanistan. Such a large scale displacement of Taliban fighters would not be possible were the Pakistani military offensives not targeting them.

It makes perfect sense when you consider the belligerent attitude of one of the parties involved. "If you oppose us, we will hit you and you will not be safe anywhere." kind of mentality.

I agree, this attitude makes perfect sense when attributed to the current Indian government - they have the most to gain from such high profile Taliban assaults, Pakistan does not.

India has a limited budget, we don't have spare cash like the Chinese. It would be silly to throw money away in such a manner with such a degree of risk involved in a mission that can go wrong at any stage. Imagine if one of these attackers were to be captured and paraded in public like we were able to do with that Mumbai attacker.

The kind of Indian support for the Taliban we are talking about would not require Indian agents to directly interface with the attackers. Support would be in the form of intelligence and cash, with an assortment of criminal and tribal elements available to act as mediators. Heck, by using Indians who speak Urdu/Pushto this kind of support could be carried out by Indians pretending to be ISI/PA representatives.

The risks for India would clearly outweigh any potential benefits.

I have yet to see any significant risk here that India would have to take into account - the party with the most to lose here is Pakistan, and the party with the most to gain, by sabotaging Afghan-Pakistan rapprochement, is India.

Sorry, until I see any evidence linking India with this Pak asset, your proposition is very flimsy.

There is no evidence linking Pakistan to the recent spate of terrorist attacks in Afghanistan either, but the fact remains that the party with the biggest motive here is India.

 

[Nicky G]

The 'charge' is not the issue as much as Afghan government support for terrorists (as established by leaked US diplomatic cables detailing Karzai's support for BLA/BLF/BRA terrorists) is. Ghani is perceived to be rolling back Afghan support for terrorism in Pakistan, and so long as he sticks to that policy Pakistan will reciprocate and support him, which is why Pakistan is trying to increase Afghan-Pakistan military and intelligence cooperation.

Actually, Ghani is under pressure from his opposition for being soft with a country whose ex-President actively admits to trying to destabilize Afghanistan.

Afghan backlash over security deal with Pakistan | World news | The Guardian

The statement of 'undeclared war' was a reaction to that pressure and those concerns as we can see are very real.

The war is being waged by Afghanistan against Pakistan, as Musharraf and various other Pakistani civilian and military leaders have argued over the years. An end to support for terrorism in Pakistan by Afghanistan (as Ghani is trying to do) will be welcomed by Pakistan with increased military and intelligence cooperation to combat the Afghan Taliban and associated groups.

Pakistan has demonstrated her commitment to supporting Afghanistan through the military ops in North Waziristan, which have severely restricted the space and resources that were available to the Afghan Taliban and Haqqanis. The Afghan government and NDS have themselves recognized this fact by stating that the Pakistani offensive has pushed thousands of Afghan Taliban and Haqqani fighters into Afghanistan. Such a large scale displacement of Taliban fighters would not be possible were the Pakistani military offensives not targeting them.

Your ex-President admitted to trying to destabilize another country, there is no way around that no matter how many little gestures you try to claim now.

The reservation against Pak very much resides in Afghanistan, and its very real. People don't trust Pak and they very right not to considering the belligerent past behavior.

I agree, this attitude makes perfect sense when attributed to the current Indian government - they have the most to gain from such high profile Taliban assaults, Pakistan does not.

Ghani was under pressure from his opposition to not rush into a silly deal with a country that was actively working against Afghanistan.

This is to try to silence that opposition.

The kind of Indian support for the Taliban we are talking about would not require Indian agents to directly interface with the attackers. Support would be in the form of intelligence and cash, with an assortment of criminal and tribal elements available to act as mediators. Heck, by using Indians who speak Urdu/Pushto this kind of support could be carried out by Indians pretending to be ISI/PA representatives.

Its not about agents, its about money and RoI. We are spending about $125M on that new parliament of theirs. India has some ground level info gathering sources, not resources that can carry this out.

Makes no sense to attack our infrastructure and endanger our investments.

I have yet to see any significant risk here that India would have to take into account - the party with the most to lose here is Pakistan, and the party with the most to gain, by sabotaging Afghan-Pakistan rapprochement, is India.

I have outlined them repeatedly. Destroying infrastructure, endangering investments, risk of capture etc.

There is no evidence linking Pakistan to the recent spate of terrorist attacks in Afghanistan either, but the fact remains that the party with the biggest motive here is India.

Taliban has claimed responsibility. Your ex-President bragged about cultivating them. It does not get better than that, unless one of those attackers had been caught and put through the mill to make them confess.

Now, Ghani and Afghani establishment needs to revisit the wisdom in a pact with a nation that was/is a 'mortal enemy' as some have put in - reference the article I linked.

Anyway, the points are getting repeated here. Thus far, its Taliban. At best for Pak, they are out of your control, else all fingers point to you.

Lets wait and see how this develops. I am sure we will have an opportunity to revisit this.

These articles become very relevant now, in light of what has transpired:

‘On intelligence deal with ISI, Ghani has lost to Pak’

Afghan Senate chairman attacks intelligence sharing MoU with Pakistan (Secong lead) | Business Standard News

Afghan President Under Pressure to Scrap Intel-Sharing Deal With Pakistan

Now, this emoroyonic deal needs to be scrutinized and options weighed:

Amid criticism: Afghan spy agency says MoU with ISI embryonic - The Express Tribune