With thumbs-up from Afghans, India explores more areas of aid

[EjazR]

With thumbs-up from Afghans, India explores more areas of aid

Buoyed by results of two independent surveys in Afghanistan voting India as the preferred country, ahead of even multilateral agencies like UN and NATO, to carry out reconstruction in the country, India is exploring ways to increase its assistance in various areas to that country.

India, which has a $ 1.3 billion development assistance programme for Afghanistan in place already, may venture into areas of cooperation like agriculture and irrigation apart from existing areas like power, IT, medicine, infrastructure and human resource development.

In a recent Gallup poll, when asked about the roles the Afghans thought that various groups or countries were playing in resolving the situation in Afghanistan, 59 per cent favoured India's role. UN and NATO were mentioned by 57 per cent and 51 per cent Afghans respectively.

In another public opinion survey conducted by the International Republican Institute (IRI), India topped the list of the countries seen as having "good relations with Afghanistan" -- with 24 per cent of respondents naming India, followed by the US (19 per cent), Iran (17 per cent) and Tajikistan (12 per cent). Pakistan, interestingly, was mentioned by only 5 per cent Afghans covered in the IRI survey. In the Gallup poll, about 33 per cent of Afghans surveyed saw Pakistan as supporting the Taliban leadership.

South Block is treating these polls and surveys as a "ready reckoner of Afghan goodwill" towards India, while also maintaining that this was "no reflection" on the quantum of funding committed to that country. While India may be the largest regional donor to Afghanistan, it is the sixth largest donor in the world.

These polls, sources said, are validation of India's approach to Afghanistan and puts India's role in consonance with that country's developmental needs. India's assistance is always finalised only after Kabul spells out its priorities.

When the Gallup poll had sought to know the role that India should play in the country, 59 per cent Afghans mentioned reconstruction and 16 per cent suggested economic development.

New Delhi has already commissioned around 100 small development projects and is engaged in constructing Salma Dam on Hari Rud River in Herat and the Afghan Parliament building.

 

[Ingis]

India's growing relationship with Afghanistan is simply a win-win situation for India.

Now, India needs to stand up to US pressure and further enhance relations with its other "brother" - Iran.

 

[Ingis]

Let India help Afghanistan

Let India help Afghanistan | Shashank Joshi | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

In the 19th century, Indian armies twice crossed the Hindu Kush, hoping to stitch together the patchwork political authority of the territory in the service of their British masters. Over a century later, the sovereign republic of India once more has a renewed presence in what was once its mountainous buffer from the Tsarist, and then Soviet, giant to the north.

A year ago, Indians completed the construction of Afghanistan's new parliament building and, to compound the symbolism, provided training to the legislators who would make the country's laws. Over a billion dollars in aid and investment, multiple consulates, and a little-reported thousand-strong troop presence all testify to the flourishing ties between the two democracies.

India is Afghanistan's fifth-largest donor, pledging $1.2bn since 2001 and providing aid that spans education, health and infrastructure. The most eye-catching project, a 215km road connecting the Iranian border to Afghanistan's arterial highway, will eventually allow India to transport goods by sea to an Iranian port it is developing, and thence to Afghanistan and beyond. This circumvents the overland route, blocked by Pakistan, but also gives a fillip to Indo-Afghan trade ($538m during 2007-8). Hamid Karzai, himself educated in India and the beneficiary of Indian military support during the 1990s, visited India four times in the first five years of his tenure. The Afghan national army, the linchpin of the new American strategy to pacify the country, receives training across India.

Not everyone is happy with the widening Indian footprint. Pakistan, long reliant on Afghanistan as a source of "strategic depth" has invoked fears of encirclement and Indian-sponsored separatism. This is in addition to the panoply of wild "conspiracy theorists who insist that every one of Pakistan's ills are there because of interference by the US, India, Israel and Afghanistan", says Ahmed Rashid, a noted Pakistani journalist.

Among other attacks, a car bomb at the Indian embassy in Kabul killed 41 in July 2008. According to the New York Times, American officials quickly presented "intercepted communications between Pakistani intelligence officers and militants who carried out the attack" to demonstrate Pakistani culpability and "the ISI officers had not been renegades".

Then in September 2009, General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of the International Security Assistance Force, suggested in a leaked assessment of the war that "while Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India". The scarcely veiled threat of further bloodbaths such as Mumbai prompted renewed anger in the Indian media.

India has responded cautiously. Indian defence minister AK Antony insisted "categorically … there is no question of Indian military involvement in Afghanistan … not now, not in the future". A former head of India's foreign intelligence service has said that "sending troops … is not an option".

There are sound and perhaps compelling reasons for this reticence. There remain bitter memories of the 1,200 deaths suffered by an Indian peacekeeping force in Sri Lanka, and although Indian security forces have six decades of counterinsurgency experience, they face multiple intensifying guerilla wars at home from Maoists and separatists. Moreover, India's coalition politics, featuring local parties with parochial interests, is hardly suited to sustaining ambitious foreign policies.

Yet more than 1,000 members of the paramilitary Indo-Tibetan Border Police are deployed in Afghanistan. President Obama's affirmation to withdraw US forces by 2011 has generated a prospective vacuum, inducing Pakistan to renew its support for the Taliban. This has produced loudening, though still marginal, Indian voices in favour of more boots on the ground.

Amir Taheri, writing in The Times, suggests that a military commitment is "surprisingly popular in India". One former diplomat argues that "influential sections of Indian opinion are stridently calling for an outright Indian intervention in Afghanistan without awaiting the niceties of an American invitation letter".

The editor of the "realist" journal Pragati writes that "military involvement … will shift the battleground away from Kashmir and the Indian mainland". An affiliated blog draws on the idea of "force fungibility" to argue that "since it is not feasible for Indian troops to directly attack Pakistan's military-jihadi complex, India should ensure that US troops do so" by "reliev[ing them] of duties in areas where they are not actually fighting the Taliban – especially in western and northern Afghanistan".

Others have suggested that "the best contribution … might be in the areas of combat training and creating capacities in logistics and communications", still sorely lacking in the embryonic Afghan national army.

Support for the war is faltering in western capitals, partly because citizens cannot see how it furthers homeland security. The frequency and scale of attacks on India mean that Indians have no such trouble. National caveats on force employment – particularly from France, Italy, and Germany – hinder the efficacy of Nato troops, but Indian casualty sensitivity is almost certainly less than that in, say, Britain.

India's longstanding cultural ties to Afghanistan – Bollywood movies are wildly popular there, for instance – mean that Indian soldiers would be less likely to be stigmatised as occupiers, with 73% of Afghans professing a favourable view of India (and 91% holding the opposite view of Pakistan).

India is also experienced at counterinsurgency, enjoys good relations with regional powers such as Iran and Russia (including bases in Tajikistan), and the large reserves of available forces. India has nearly 9,000 troops with the UN, and just withdrew 30,000 from Jammu and Kashmir.

The obstacle to India's involvement is Pakistan. Yet few stop to evaluate the absurdity of having "today's most active sponsor of terrorism" as a frontline ally against terrorists. In December 2009, the New York Times reported Pakistan's refusal to crack down on Siraj Haqqani, the strongest Taliban commander in Afghanistan, on the basis that he was a "longtime asset of Pakistan's spy agency".

The truth downplayed in western capitals is that India is one of the only interested parties, the US included, that has an interest in both state-building and counterterrorism on the Afghan side of the Durand line. Creating incentives for it to expand its provision of security could lay the groundwork for a commitment that will last long after the last western soldier is flown – or desperately airlifted – out of Kabul.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Let India help Afghanistan

Among other attacks, a car bomb at the Indian embassy in Kabul killed 41 in July 2008. According to the New York Times, American officials quickly presented "intercepted communications between Pakistani intelligence officers and militants who carried out the attack" to demonstrate Pakistani culpability and "the ISI officers had not been renegades".

I wonder why didnt they tell indian embassy to evacuate if they knew we were blowing them to hell.

Then in September 2009, General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of the International Security Assistance Force, suggested in a leaked assessment of the war that "while Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India".

He meant india is involved in ...........

A former head of India's foreign intelligence service has said that "sending troops … is not an option".

I wish yousend em.

Yet more than 1,000 members of the paramilitary Indo-Tibetan Border Police are deployed in Afghanistan.

Thats why we killed those mongoloid terrorists.

President Obama's affirmation to withdraw US forces by 2011 has generated a prospective vacuum, inducing Pakistan to renew its support for the Taliban. This has produced loudening, though still marginal, Indian voices in favour of more boots on the ground.

Amir Taheri, writing in The Times, suggests that a military commitment is "surprisingly popular in India". One former diplomat argues that "influential sections of Indian opinion are stridently calling for an outright Indian intervention in Afghanistan without awaiting the niceties of an American invitation letter".

More BOOTS didnt USA try it well sure i wish indi sends some LOL.
[

U]The editor of the "realist" journal Pragati writes that "military involvement … will shift the battleground away from Kashmir and the Indian mainland". [/U]An affiliated blog draws on the idea of "force fungibility" to argue that "since it is not feasible for Indian troops to directly attack Pakistan's military-jihadi complex, India should ensure that US troops do so" by "reliev[ing them] of duties in areas where they are not actually fighting the Taliban – especially in western and northern Afghanistan".

UTTER BULLSHYT by a idiotic fool.

Others have suggested that "the best contribution … might be in the areas of combat training and creating capacities in logistics and communications", still sorely lacking in the embryonic Afghan national army.

India for training LOL they themselves ned it to counter 24 INSURGENCIES IN INDIAN OCCUPIED LANDS............

India's longstanding cultural ties to Afghanistan – Bollywood movies are wildly popular there, for instance – mean that Indian soldiers would be less likely to be stigmatised as occupiers, with 73% of Afghans professing a favourable view of India (and 91% holding the opposite view of Pakistan).

BOLLYWOOD MOVIES = CULTURAL TIES HAHAHA 91% AFGHANS HATE PAKISTAN WHILE 85 MILLION AFGHANS PUSHTOONS LIVE IN PAKISTAN...........REPORTER MUST BE TALKING ABOUT TAJIKS,HAZARAS WHO SUPPORT SHUMALI ITEHAD OR NORTHERN ALLAINCE

India is also experienced at counterinsurgency, enjoys good relations with regional powers such as Iran and Russia (including bases in Tajikistan), and the large reserves of available forces. India has nearly 9,000 troops with the UN, and just withdrew 30,000 from Jammu and Kashmir.

COIN experience with 2 DOZEN SEPERATIST INSURGENCIES JOKE OF THE MILENIUM.IRAN the country which gave free OIL to PAKISTAN in INDI-PAK wars??The PIPELINE DEAL WORTH MORE THEN 5.6 BILLION $$$ that india left due to US PRESSURE and PAKISTAN AND IRAN are going through?Not to forget PAK-IRAN-TURK RAILWAY LINE which will connect PAKISTAN with not just middleeast but europe???????? Tajikistan a landlocked country enjoying excellent ties with PAKISTAN tht was one of the first countries to accept its INDEPENDENCE???and not to forget ongoing deal with PAKISTAN? Pakistan is second largest contributer to UN MISSIONS?
JAMMU KASHMIR AN OCCUPIED TERRITORY WHICH WANTS TO JOIN PAKISTAN AND UN GIVES IT RIGHTS THAT INDIA VIOLATES NOT TO FORGET HUMAN RIGHT?

The obstacle to India's involvement is Pakistan. Yet few stop to evaluate the absurdity of having "today's most active sponsor of terrorism" as a frontline ally against terrorists.

ABSURDITY WTF are you high on some c. WE HAVE LOST 2000 SOLDIERS and world appreciate that WHO THE F.. K CARE ABOUT INDI???

In December 2009, the New York Times reported Pakistan's refusal to crack down on Siraj Haqqani, the strongest Taliban commander in Afghanistan, on the basis that he was a "longtime asset of Pakistan's spy agency

"
Really then why did usa not take him out with a DRONE STRIKE?BULL SHYT

The truth downplayed in western capitals is that India is one of the only interested parties, the US included, that has an interest in both state-building and counterterrorism on the Afghan side of the Durand line. Creating incentives for it to expand its provision of security could lay the groundwork for a commitment that will last long after the last western soldier is flown – or desperately airlifted – out of Kabul.

What interest??? TERRORISM THAT IND SPREADS IN OTHER COUNTRIES ??? as it has no ethnic or cultural ties or even no border??
This article is written by who???
This is utter non sense with self praise and BULL SHYT.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Let India help Afghanistan

Among other attacks, a car bomb at the Indian embassy in Kabul killed 41 in July 2008. According to the New York Times, American officials quickly presented "intercepted communications between Pakistani intelligence officers and militants who carried out the attack" to demonstrate Pakistani culpability and "the ISI officers had not been renegades".

I wonder why didnt they tell indian embassy to evacuate if they knew we were blowing them to hell.

Then in September 2009, General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of the International Security Assistance Force, suggested in a leaked assessment of the war that "while Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India".

He meant india is involved in ...........

A former head of India's foreign intelligence service has said that "sending troops … is not an option".

I wish yousend em.

Yet more than 1,000 members of the paramilitary Indo-Tibetan Border Police are deployed in Afghanistan.

Thats why we killed those mongoloid terrorists.

President Obama's affirmation to withdraw US forces by 2011 has generated a prospective vacuum, inducing Pakistan to renew its support for the Taliban. This has produced loudening, though still marginal, Indian voices in favour of more boots on the ground.

Amir Taheri, writing in The Times, suggests that a military commitment is "surprisingly popular in India". One former diplomat argues that "influential sections of Indian opinion are stridently calling for an outright Indian intervention in Afghanistan without awaiting the niceties of an American invitation letter".

More BOOTS didnt USA try it well sure i wish indi sends some LOL.
[

U]The editor of the "realist" journal Pragati writes that "military involvement … will shift the battleground away from Kashmir and the Indian mainland". [/U]An affiliated blog draws on the idea of "force fungibility" to argue that "since it is not feasible for Indian troops to directly attack Pakistan's military-jihadi complex, India should ensure that US troops do so" by "reliev[ing them] of duties in areas where they are not actually fighting the Taliban – especially in western and northern Afghanistan".

UTTER BULLSHYT by a idiotic fool.

Others have suggested that "the best contribution … might be in the areas of combat training and creating capacities in logistics and communications", still sorely lacking in the embryonic Afghan national army.

India for training LOL they themselves ned it to counter 24 INSURGENCIES IN INDIAN OCCUPIED LANDS............

India's longstanding cultural ties to Afghanistan – Bollywood movies are wildly popular there, for instance – mean that Indian soldiers would be less likely to be stigmatised as occupiers, with 73% of Afghans professing a favourable view of India (and 91% holding the opposite view of Pakistan).

BOLLYWOOD MOVIES = CULTURAL TIES HAHAHA 91% AFGHANS HATE PAKISTAN WHILE 85 MILLION AFGHANS PUSHTOONS LIVE IN PAKISTAN...........REPORTER MUST BE TALKING ABOUT TAJIKS,HAZARAS WHO SUPPORT SHUMALI ITEHAD OR NORTHERN ALLAINCE

India is also experienced at counterinsurgency, enjoys good relations with regional powers such as Iran and Russia (including bases in Tajikistan), and the large reserves of available forces. India has nearly 9,000 troops with the UN, and just withdrew 30,000 from Jammu and Kashmir.

COIN experience with 2 DOZEN SEPERATIST INSURGENCIES JOKE OF THE MILENIUM.IRAN the country which gave free OIL to PAKISTAN in INDI-PAK wars??The PIPELINE DEAL WORTH MORE THEN 5.6 BILLION $$$ that india left due to US PRESSURE and PAKISTAN AND IRAN are going through?Not to forget PAK-IRAN-TURK RAILWAY LINE which will connect PAKISTAN with not just middleeast but europe???????? Tajikistan a landlocked country enjoying excellent ties with PAKISTAN tht was one of the first countries to accept its INDEPENDENCE???and not to forget ongoing deal with PAKISTAN? Pakistan is second largest contributer to UN MISSIONS?
JAMMU KASHMIR AN OCCUPIED TERRITORY WHICH WANTS TO JOIN PAKISTAN AND UN GIVES IT RIGHTS THAT INDIA VIOLATES NOT TO FORGET HUMAN RIGHT?

The obstacle to India's involvement is Pakistan. Yet few stop to evaluate the absurdity of having "today's most active sponsor of terrorism" as a frontline ally against terrorists.

ABSURDITY WTF are you high on some c. WE HAVE LOST 2000 SOLDIERS and world appreciate that WHO THE F.. K CARE ABOUT INDI???

In December 2009, the New York Times reported Pakistan's refusal to crack down on Siraj Haqqani, the strongest Taliban commander in Afghanistan, on the basis that he was a "longtime asset of Pakistan's spy agency

"
Really then why did usa not take him out with a DRONE STRIKE?BULL SHYT

The truth downplayed in western capitals is that India is one of the only interested parties, the US included, that has an interest in both state-building and counterterrorism on the Afghan side of the Durand line. Creating incentives for it to expand its provision of security could lay the groundwork for a commitment that will last long after the last western soldier is flown – or desperately airlifted – out of Kabul.

What interest??? TERRORISM THAT IND SPREADS IN OTHER COUNTRIES ??? as it has no ethnic or cultural ties or even no border??
This article is written by who???
This is utter non sense with self praise and BULL SHYT.

 

[EjazR]

IRIN Asia | AFGHANISTAN: Patients turn to India for treatment | Asia | Afghanistan | Health & Nutrition | Feature

KABUL, 29 June 2009 (IRIN) - The lack of quality health services at home is prompting thousands of Afghan patients to travel to India for medical treatment despite the high costs.

The Indian embassy in Kabul said it had issued 5,224 medical visas in 2008 - up from 4,658 in 2007 and 3,844 in 2006.

The real number of Afghans going to India for treatment is higher than these figures suggest, as visas are also issued by four Indian consulates dotted around the country, and some who travel to India as tourists seek medical treatment on arrival.

In total 21,420 visas (tourist, business and diplomatic) were issued to Afghan citizens by the embassy in 2008.

“In respect of individuals going for medical treatment on a private, self-financed basis, the embassy has no specific role. All arrangements are made directly by them,” Akhilesh Mishra, deputy chief of the Indian mission in Kabul, told IRIN.

Medical tourism is one of India’s most successful industries, attracts tens of thousands of people annually from around the world and generates revenues of up to US$2 billion.

Unlike the stringent visa procedures for many other countries, applications for Indian visas are relatively straightforward for Afghans (no requirement for financial statements or medical insurance), and in most cases the whole process takes 5-8 working days.

However, some travellers complain about the strict security procedures for Afghan citizens in India: “We spent one full day in long queues to register our entry and another day for our departure,” said a man who travelled

Travel to and treatment in India requires at least several hundred dollars and it is therefore believed that only well-off Afghans can afford such trips.

However, some are forced to borrow from relatives or muddle through as best they can.

“I took my mother to India for heart surgery and it cost me over US$4,000, including the airfare, accommodation and medical fee,” said Hasmatullah, a private guard who earns $150 a month.

Another man said he borrowed money to pay for his son’s treatment at a hospital in New Delhi.

Health care in Afghanistan remains poor: “The diagnosis and treatment of some diseases require advanced medical technology and professional medical staff which are currently not available here,” Saeed Kabir Amiri from the Ministry of Public Health, told IRIN in Kabul.

“For instance we don’t do CT scans [using computerised tomography scanners], MRI [Magnetic Resonance Imaging] scans and there are no dialysis facilities at hospitals in the country,” said Amiri, adding that there was little capacity to treat things like heart disease, cancer or impotence.

Whilst for many Westerners Indian hospitals might offer a cheaper alternative, for many Afghans India is their only option for reliable medical treatment.

“I have seen numerous doctors here and taken all kinds of medicines but have not felt any improvement. Now I am going to India and I am sure I’ll be healed there,” Najiba, who has an orthopaedic disorder, told IRIN outside the Indian embassy in Kabul.