India / Afghanistan - A New Strategic Relationship

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 05 Oct 2011 21:55

^^^
G.Parthasarathy did a good job.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 05 Oct 2011 22:42

Haresh wrote:one of pakistans and fanatical islams best friends in the UK has an opinion.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oc ... fghanistan

"vainglorious generosity?" I detect failed-imperialist heartburn.

Maybe OT but are there parallels to Ranjit Singh's conquest of the Northwest, shunting aside a decrepit mughal imperium in Punjab?

Would be lovely poetic justice if it is a reprise and it is happening under a sardar.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 05 Oct 2011 22:50

the last paragraph is revealing. it shows the objective of the US/UK alliance. if India becomes too powerful in Af-Pak, then US/UK will try to do what they did to Russia. so, it is essential that India develop its own assets and have the capability to take out, in the medium term, any Jihadi forces that are Western plants in collusion with Pak.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 05 Oct 2011 22:52

ramana wrote:Haresh post excerpts where he wrans what TSP can do. Then it can be counter argued.

"Insurgent wrath" my foot. More like TSP pique. If they are pi**ed they know where the toilet is. Wait they are already there.

With experts like this no wonder the US got lost in Af-pak.

The Tisdall article only states rudely and starkly what hordes of other western writers insinuate more politely, and what many Indians buy--that India has no right to anything commensurate with its heft.

But Tisdall's article is helpful to show that it is all based on emotion (color him green) and hot air and so there is nothing objective to prevent India from succeeding.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Oct 2011 22:53

NVS writes Work in Progress

Work in progress
The Indo-Afghan pact builds on the goodwill India has gained in Afghanistan, says N.V.Subramanian.

5 October 2011: The Indo-Afghan strategic pact may not be as big as the media is making it out to be but neither is it insignificant. It does represent some new thinking and fair risk-taking in terms of power projection as India solidifies its status as an emerging great state.

Afghanistan is a graveyard of great powers and empires and this is only too well-understood by Indian policy-makers. Soviet Russia and the US rashly intervened in Afghanistan. One paid with the loss of the Soviet Union. America, on the other hand, faced the 9/11 attacks from which it has irrecoverably declined.

Pakistan has also been fatally wounded by meddling in Afghanistan. Its existential threat from terrorism can be rooted to its making common cause first with the mujahideen and then with the Taliban.

A dangerous quest for strategic depth against India drew Pakistan deeper and deeper into the Afghan morass. But its principal threat today comes not from India but the terrorists and chiefly and ironically from something called the Pakistani Taliban.

This history is well-known which is why India restricted its earlier counter-Taliban strategy to providing logistic support to the non-Taliban Northern Alliance in league with Russia, the Central Asian republics and Iran. In a post-US phase, a second Northern Alliance appeared inevitable to this writer backed by the same parties.

But the latest strategic pact suggests that India has gone a step further. It has brought Hamid Karzai and therefore a goodly section of Pashtuns into its perceived construct of a post-US Afghan power structure.

Karzai has his enemies, some of them oddly Western governments including the US who expect him to be a perfect democrat. India has lesser expectations from him but greater hopes.

Karzai is the foremost democratic leader amongst Afghans and particularly Pashtuns and therefore has to be cultivated. To consign Pashtuns to the Taliban is to consign them to hell and to crush their democratic aspirations. So Karzai becomes important.

But while India is willing to take risks by dealing with a section of Pashtuns, it will baulk from militarily intervening in Afghanistan. Dealing with Pashtuns means engaging Karzai and the others he considers moderate who may be reconciled to a democratic Afghanistan, including the lower rungs of the Taliban.

So long India does not militarily intervene in Afghanistan its credentials will remain clean. Afghans won't look on Indians as occupiers and that creates an atmosphere of trust and understanding.

But this represents an advance from dealing largely and perhaps exclusively with non-Pashtun Afghans of the Northern Alliance which permitted Pakistan to play havoc with the other side. To expect today's pact to dramatically alter the situation in Afghanistan is unrealistic. But India certainly will be counted as a player without the concomitant military commitment, and that is noteworthy.

But the way ahead is hard for India in Afghanistan. The US exit will surge Taliban power. Quite aside from its support to the anti-Karzai, anti-democratic forces, Pakistan's own ruptured ties with the US is forcing greater dependence on the Saudis, who could be willing to pay for Pakistani nukes to deter Iran. This intelligence was available with this writer no sooner than US military aid to Pakistan was suspended post the Abbottabad raid that killed Osama Bin Laden.

{It begs the question that KSA is seeking better ties with India to hedge for TSP collapse. Witness the KSA as chief guest at India's last Republic Day parade.}

The Iranians are key to any Indian plans to stabilize Afghanistan while keeping the Pakistanis neutralized. An Iran-Pakistan face-off over Pak nuclear proliferation to Saudi Arabia may produce smirks in India but will unsettle the region.

{KSA has the Arab Spring to worry about let alone confront Iran for supremacy in ME. Turkey is another fish and has the Kurds to worry about.}

Pakistan may not after all sell the nukes to the Saudis in return for Iranian non-cooperation with India on Afghanistan. Or, in the worst case, Pakistani nukes may be sold to both parties, the Saudis and the Iranians, clandestinely.

The logic is that if the Saudis get the nukes from Pakistan, what prevents the Iranians? Pakistan and Iran are not diehard Shia-Sunni rivals as Iran and Saudi Arabia are.

{Saudis wont get Paki ukes. They will get PRC nukes passed off as TSP's. Any acqusiiton in ME will have PRC hand. And that is against US interests.}

The point is there is no simple reading of the Afghan situation and today's pact represents a small progress on the Indian side. Considering that India is risk-averse to power projection after the disastrous IPKF intervention in Sri Lanka, it represents a step forward. The other recent examples are the Indian Navy's anti-piracy operations in the Indian Ocean and India's forays in the South China Sea.

Ultimately, however, it is not about Afghanistan but Pakistan. Pakistan prevents a resolution of the Afghan crisis although it is paying a very high price for its involvement in Afghanistan.

The Pakistan, US and Soviet examples tell not to intervene in Afghanistan and to manage the situation as best as possible from the outside. Which is what the Indo-Afghan pact represents. The Pashtuns have turned against the Pakistanis. The Taliban leaders loathe ISI control but can do little about it. The Afghans know that the Pakistanis are out to destroy Afghanistan.

If India can manage these forces to bring plural democracy to Afghanistan without intervention and with the exclusion of Pakistan, that would be real victory. Perhaps the pact sets the foundation for this.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Oct 2011 01:16

Deccan Chronicle Op-Ed:

Indo-Afghan treaty move forward

...
The agreement acknowledges, for the first time, the need for security cooperation. Afghanistan and India will engage in a regular “strategic dialogue” led by their national security advisers. Although such exchanges have been taking place, this will provide a systematic framework for consultation and coordination of policies. More importantly, India has agreed “to assist, as mutually determined, in the training, equipping and capacity building programmes for Afghan National Security Forces”.

This is a welcome and overdue move. To begin with India might assist in the training of the Afghan National Police. Going forward, it could play a significant role in the training of the Afghan National Army (ANA) as well. India already trains Afghan officers in its military academies. New Delhi should be prepared to do more. Over the last two years, the ANA has expanded rapidly — from around 90,000 in late 2008 to nearly 1,71,000 in this month. Quantitative expansion has not, however, been accompanied by qualitative improvement. The ANA continues to be plagued by illiteracy, drug abuse and desertion. Its operational mettle is yet to be seriously tested. A large part of the problem is the lack of foreign trainers. Recent assessments show that only 58 per cent of the trainers pledged by the international coalition have actually been made available. Further, a significant proportion of those assigned have no experience of training foreign forces. Unless this situation is rectified, the ANA will find it difficult to tackle the insurgency after 2014. India could potentially play an important role here.
.....

The US and Afghanistan have also been sensitive to Pakistani concerns, not least because of the need for Pakistan’s cooperation in dealing with the Taliban. Recent events appear to have led to a shift in this position. This does not mean that Kabul is willing entirely to disregard Pakistan’s apprehensions. India, too, recognises that Pakistan’s ability to influence developments in Afghanistan is considerable. In fact, the agreement explicitly states that it is not directed against third countries. This may not be enough to allay the Pakistan Army’s concerns. But total security for Pakistan can only mean total insecurity for Afghanistan. And as long as Rawalpindi continues to threaten the security of its neighbours, it can scarcely expect them to be solicitous of its maximalist demands.

The writer is a senior fellow at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 06 Oct 2011 03:05

Pakistan Appears More Isolated After India-Afghan Pact
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2011/10/ ... .html?_r=1
Pakistan wants a major say in shaping any peace settlement in Afghanistan, where India is taking an active but low-profile approach to building influence through aid and investment. But Islamabad has alienated both the Washington and Kabul governments -- who will play a central role in any reconciliation -- because of its suspected links with militant groups fighting Western and Afghan forces in Afghanistan. On a two-day visit to New Delhi, Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh sealed a strategic partnership on Tuesday that covered closer political ties and fighting terrorism. It signals a formal tightening of links which may spark Pakistani concerns that India is increasingly competing for leverage in Afghanistan. Poor Pakistan, heavily dependent on foreign aid, does not have the resources to compete economically with India in Afghanistan. That means it will likely keep relying on militant groups to do its bidding, said security analyst Ayesha Siddiqa. "If poor Pakistan continues to play this proxy game, ultimately it's going to be extremely dangerous for Pakistan," she said. "It's extremely damaging, and an extremely risky game which has greater blowback for poor Pakistan."

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 06 Oct 2011 03:10

In the end, I hope India is not training a bunch who will take that expertise back and enrich the Taleban. When claims of blood-ties and religious tickling comes - the fish will go back to its school.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Oct 2011 03:11

Wow NYT is already in rhona/dhona mode with out the ink getting dry? And see how many times bahichara in one para!

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Oct 2011 03:22

Well, well, well. The dust has barely settled on Adm Mullen's outburst, and now India-Afg formalize an ongoing reality into a strategic partnership. The point is not that USA is allowing India into Afg or pleading to it... the choreography speaks to Part A/Part B of the break down of the devil's pact made post 9/11 - the pact being that Pak will bring the Talebaan under control and cede direct control over Afg, in return of which USA will use its presense and clout in Afg to curb Indian influence over there.

Adm Mullen was used to tell everyone publicly that Pak had reneged on Part A. Part B is Unkil reneging on his side of the deal. Again, this is not to make the point that US is "allowing" India or playing favorites; merely that it feels no longer obligated to keep up its part of the bargain.

So not a wholly positive reading, but certainly a happy milestone. More than anything else, it is as if the weight of history is forcing the door open for India's entry into its traditional front yard.

But.. hinoz Kabul door ast! I feel the slant in US reporting of India-Afg partnership overly emphasized the "has the potential to antagonize Pak" aspect. Seems like Unkil looks at this as his apre moi le deluge card... India cannot be stopped from indulging in a proxy war, and any resulting bad things that happen are no longer to be laid at Unkil's door. India should not forget that however important Afghanistan is, Pakistan matters even more to India, and for the same reasons.

India has to defeat Pakistan, but not by destroying it. Pakistan, on the other hand, has no such overriding concerns as it hurtles towards failure. And this will make things really ugly and bloody for India and Afg, especially since US looks like it has no more stomach to stay in Afg a day longer than the 2014 deadline. Maybe Ombaba will be defeated and the current defeatist strategy overturned, but I do not see how any successor would want to own a defeat like this one. So India will have to be softer than ever to Pak. For India's diplomats who made this possible, a diplomat equivalent of AVSM is in order. For them to win the equivalent of PVSM, they have to make Pakistanis feel included in this India-Afg partnership. Note - Pakistanis, not Pakistani Establishment. That will be the challenge of the days to come.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Oct 2011 05:41

Aam Pakistanis feel included. However the TSPA military and its families relying on US and UK support dont feel included. They have the sarkari mullas on payroll. So its 5% gang holding up the inclusion process. Once Afghan stabilizes the rest of the Pak will convince the 5% to get out to US and or Gulf.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 06 Oct 2011 05:51

Oh yeah, defeat Pakistan, but please, oh please, don't destroy it! We do need them to survive as a Paki state. Who needs Mullen? We can do a much better job on his behalf!

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 06 Oct 2011 06:31

India should provide nuclear weapons and short range missiles to the Northern alliance. Make it a nuclear power the way China made Porkistan one. They need to do the same to Vietnam and any other country that is pissed at the Chins.

India should do this overtly not covertly. If China can openly build nucklear facility in Pakistan, India should do the same openly. India needs to buy some courage.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Oct 2011 06:36

Manny, This is not humor thread.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Oct 2011 07:59

brihaspati wrote:Oh yeah, defeat Pakistan, but please, oh please, don't destroy it! We do need them to survive as a Paki state. Who needs Mullen? We can do a much better job on his behalf!

What about the survivors from a destroyed Pakistan?

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 06 Oct 2011 09:06

If India can provide the necessary help to build a renewed and stable Afghanistan it will go a long way in building goodwill which will enhance our security in the region. These are not the kind of people who will forget their friends or forgive their enemies that easily.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 06 Oct 2011 09:33

There is unnecessary self-congratulations on the A'stan-India deal.

Western nations, OK mainly Khan, need funds to keep A'stan in control. You give some phook to India and it caughs up a billion or billion and a half. This just makes the job of the Amirkhanis easier. These generous funding from India eases funding pressure for Amikhanis and their buddies.

But when the time comes for some hard decision making, India does not get even seat at the table. Turkey did not even invite India on the A'stan meeting a year or two back. India cannot even access A'stan, except through the pariah state of Iran.

Has anybody compared the amount donated to A'stan to the money India spends on its ICBM program? Or N. weapons program?

A fool and its money are soon separated.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 06 Oct 2011 10:31

In order to "train and arm the Afghan security forces" there will have to be many Indian boots on the ground in Afghanistan, including fully operational air bases, well before the US-NATO exit so this is going to move very fast. If it has been in the works for a couple of years as the reports say, the C-17s suddenly make a lot of sense.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 06 Oct 2011 11:10

a real first gingoistic move by India.

Pak lurkers - watch this space.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 06 Oct 2011 11:26

surinder wrote:
Western nations, OK mainly Khan, need funds to keep A'stan in control. You give some phook to India and it caughs up a billion or billion and a half. This just makes the job of the Amirkhanis easier. These generous funding from India eases funding pressure for Amikhanis and their buddies.

Amirkhans and their buddies have been spending money for a long time. If we want to eat with them we have to pay our share of the bill. Otherwise we don't eat. Simple.

To say that we have been cheated on the bill when the meal has not been eaten, the order has not been placed, only the menu card has arrived... is hardly rational.

But when the time comes for some hard decision making, India does not get even seat at the table. Turkey did not even invite India on the A'stan meeting a year or two back.

Praji, thoda perspective. Yes, Turkey did not invite us... they invited Pakistan and Afghanistan, plus some NATO and Islamic countries.

At that time it was Pakistan, not India, which attended a conference to make hot-air plans for Afghanistan's future.

Today it is India, not Pakistan, which has a signed agreement to train and equip the Afghan National Army.

So how "hard" were the decisions made at Turkey's table exactly?

India cannot even access A'stan, except through the pariah state of Iran.

So what is the solution? Wait till we recapture POK/NA, get access to Wakhan corridor, and only THEN think about pursuing our interests in A'stan?

Has anybody compared the amount donated to A'stan to the money India spends on its ICBM program? Or N. weapons program?
.

Do you know the figures spent on N-weapons and/or ICBMs? If so, please post a comparison. AFAIK those are not public domain information. For that matter, not all the "aid" to Afghanistan is public domain information either; only a certain part of it is.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 06 Oct 2011 11:50

Muppalla wrote:a real first gingoistic move by India.

Pak lurkers - watch this space.

It appears that Pakistan actually walked into a well laid trap set by Americans in Afghanistan. Consider all the pieces here.
1. Mullen gives a statement knowing fully well how Pakistan would react and vehemently deny everything.
2. The escalation ladder is climbed by Pakistan very quickly (The psycho-behavioral analysts can easily predict such primal responses)
3. India-Afghanistan ink a deal well prepared in advance.(How many really think that there was less than 6 months preparation for this deal?)
4. Anwar-al-Awlaki, Dilawar(principal subordinate to Haji Mali Khan) killed this week alone signalling things to come.

Pakis lurks: Jab geedar ki maut aati hai to woh shahar ki taraf bhaagta hai

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Oct 2011 12:47

Pakistan will most certainly do everything to make the India-Afghanistan agreement fail. It will include intimidation through terrorism, the SOP of TSP. It will also try to reverse or at least delay the decision on trade with India and then try to sabotage the Afghan-India one-way transit etc. The two-way transit trade is now ruled out. It will be interesting to see if Pakistan would continue to engage India in bilateral talks after vociferously demanding 'uninterrupted and uninterruptible process' for a long time now.

We have not yet seen any comments officially from GoP. Pakistan thought that it could arbitrarily define its own redlines in Afghanistan and everyone else would simply fall in line because of its geostrategic importance. It simply got carried away by its own megalomania. The Indian and the US interests converge in the training of the ANA. There is simply no other regional power that could do the training. The Pakistani offer to train the ANA is still standing. It has neither been withdrawn nor rejected. It would help the Pakistani H&D if it hurriedly withdraws that offer citing some trivial reason before it becomes an embarrassment.

It is up to India (mostly) to convert this momentum into something quite tangible to retrieve the ground lost in the period between 1996-2002.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 06 Oct 2011 15:54

400,000 Consulates and now 586,000 Military Bases as well.

Paki ka kacchha gila ho gaya ré!

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 06 Oct 2011 16:36

surinder wrote:
But when the time comes for some hard decision making, India does not get even seat at the table. Turkey did not even invite India on the A'stan meeting a year or two back. India cannot even access A'stan, except through the pariah state of Iran.

You took the words straight out of my mouth

. This is the real test of where India fits in the grand scheme of things. Right now, the way I see it, its all hype. I read a news report somewhere that US state dept did repeat that India has no role in the Afghan peace negotiations that involves evernone including the TSP abomination. So, what US wants is to have an illicit affair with India. To get satisfied in private, but no public role for fear of hurting its TSP prostitute.

Like the late Apple icon Steve Jobs concluded after his romance with India ended and his unrealistic quest for enligtnmenet was shattered, US too IMO for all the phony bonhmie is not willing to court India in a true strategic sense.

kasthuri · Post by **kasthuri** » 06 Oct 2011 17:13

Pakistan warns Afghanistan to behave responsibly in the wake of new pact with India

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 06 Oct 2011 17:14

But why should we wait till someone courts us to assume our legitimate role in Afghanistan? Once we gain entry then India should be capable of seizing the opportunity to create a space for itself in Afghanistan's future. With or without support from US. Becoming another regional MUNNA for unkil will not help our cause at all.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 06 Oct 2011 18:02

Karzai wrote:“Pakistan is a twin brother. India is a great friend,The agreement that we signed yesterday with our friend will not affect our brother.”

I just watched Ravana burn and it just struck me, does Karzai have knowledge about Vali-Sugriva fight and the role of Shri Rama? Is he sending a message we are not recieving?

shankara · Post by **shankara** » 06 Oct 2011 18:14

^^
"Pakistan is our conjoined parasitic twin sucking life out of us and it must be destroyed for Afghanistan to stay alive. Khybersurgeon

please help. SOS."

EOM

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 06 Oct 2011 18:24

shankara wrote:^^
"Pakistan is our conjoined parasitic twin sucking life out of us and it must be destroyed for Afghanistan to stay alive. Khybersurgeon please help. SOS."

EOM

Message understood and acknowledged. Over and out!

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 06 Oct 2011 18:25

Altair wrote: I just watched Ravana burn and it just struck me, does Karzai have knowledge about Vali-Sugriva fight and the role of Shri Rama? Is he sending a message we are not recieving?

Tara would be Pakthunistan.

Vali is said to steal 50% strength of his opponent. It is so true w.r.t unkil and the porky-flend.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 06 Oct 2011 18:37

What India now needs to do is to make more parties around Afghanistan stakeholders in the current India-friendly setup. Iran, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, the Afghan Pushtun Warlords, some independent minded Taliban warlords and most importantly the Tajik-led Northern Alliance.

India needs to encourage Afghanistan to sign transit agreements with Iran. In exchange for free transit and shipping from Chahbahar, Afghanistan would provide inter-connectivity between Iran and Tajikistan, perhaps through a route the Indians can construct. This would allow India to export and import to Afghanistan from Iran with enhanced trust, because it would not just be India that Iran would stop but also Afghanistan from trading with the outside world.

Secondly India should try to build a big oil refinery somewhere around Herat with Oil brought in from Turkmenistan. The products can be used for India and Afghanistan's operations in Afghanistan. India and Afghanistan should not be dependent on anything coming from Pakistan. Also USA plans to stay longer in Afghanistan. US forces too could buy gas from the refinery.

When India goes in we have to invest in Afghanistan mineral wealth extraction on a large scale and make Iran a partner. Also the money needs to be spread around, including to Pushtun warlords who could pull away Taliban to their side. India should pay maximum attention on getting Taliban out of the clutches of ISI and indirectly working for India. These should go back to Pakistan and hunt some Paki faujis.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 06 Oct 2011 18:55

The agreement is indeed a good turning point . To view it narrowly as only militaristic would be a mistake. In the fine print there are many aspects which would help India in cementing the ties.However , all aspects would take at least two years to take root.

Economic relations would be hostage to transit routes provided by Pakistan ( cost would be cheaper) or India has to find alternative ways while showing Pakistan as main bottleneck in development of Afg.

Following would be taken up almost immediately after formation of a Partnership Council /Joint Working Groups

1. cooperation between the Chambers of Commerce and Industries
2.facilitate annual student exchange programmes
3. setting up a permanent, career-based civil service suitable for Afghan realities.
4. establish India-Afghanistan Round Table consisting of eminent persons representing different fields.
5.promote cooperation and exchanges in the field of sports.

Military /security related cooperation will be going onj in the background without giving focus to it.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 06 Oct 2011 19:00

^RajeshA +1

India should identify specific industries that can provide employment and economic growth to Afghanistan and establish those industries in Afghanistan borders with those countries.

Another business opportunity is to BOT few Gas-based power generation companies (BHEL can do that) in Afghanistan using a pipeline network from Iran.

India already established the mechanism to transfer oil/gas at Iran borders. That way India can do business with Tajikistan, Ujbekistan, and Turmenistan while avoiding western sanction regime (in the short term)

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 06 Oct 2011 19:18

First comments from Official Estb from Pak
http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/06/pakistan ... india.html

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan is warning Afghanistan to behave responsibly in the wake of Kabul’s new strategic pact with India, Islamabad’s archenemy.

Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tehmina Janjua said on Thursday that Pakistan expects Afghanistan to demonstrate maturity.

Janjua says Pakistan seeks friendly ties with Afghanistan, rooted in common history, culture and tradition. She says this is no time for ”point-scoring, playing politics or grandstanding.”

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Oct 2011 19:41

Nightwatch comments

5 OCt 2011

Afghanistan-India: On 5 October, Afghan President Karzai told the press that the new agreement with India will not harm Pakistan. Speaking on a two-day visit to New Delhi, Karzai said the new Afghan-Indian strategic partnership is not directed against any country but meant to support Afghanistan. Karzai said Pakistan is Afghanistan's twin brother and India is a great friend.

Comment: The openly proclaimed Afghanistan-Indian strategic partnership arguably is the most significant strategic development in Afghanistan since 2006. Despite Karzai's public blandishments, India and Afghanistan have agreed that Pakistan must be contained. Expect steadily increased tension in South Asia, starting with increased activism by proxies and clandestine services.

I think people are misreading India. India goes along with others when its interests are served and this gives the impression of kow-towing meek SDRE. India also does whats needed in its interests and this breaks the image that others have. Any proxy or clandestine service activity will get the attention it deserves.

Indo-Af pact is a national interest and its signing reveals the importance India places. It serves the following interests:

- Assures Afghan unity - No division of Afghanistan into Northern Alliance and South Pashtun areas. IOW its counter to Blackwill partition idea
- Assures that part of the Pashtuns are now India friendly. To date its was only the non Pashtuns that were India friendly
- Assures Taliban is confined to TSP. TSP can digest them or become one of them
- The gloves can come off when there is adverse activity.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 06 Oct 2011 19:57

A couple of years down the road, it (P)Orc hunting time!

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 06 Oct 2011 20:13

RajeshA ji

If this grows into critical mass, direct land route through POK would have to be found. That involves taking up of part of POK and your idea in another thread about Chitral route might be of interest to explore further.

sum · Post by **sum** » 06 Oct 2011 20:56

The agreement is indeed a good turning point . To view it narrowly as only militaristic would be a mistake. In the fine print there are many aspects which would help India in cementing the ties.However , all aspects would take at least two years to take root.

Have all parts of the treaty been made public or some juicy bits kept out of media ( like erstwhile Russki deals where Nerpa lease etc was hidden away in fineprint)?

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 06 Oct 2011 21:06

Is the infrastructure fully in place to support the logistics of Indian presence in Afghanistan, beyond a token presence. I know that the Delaram-Zaranj road is now complete. But are there other infrastructural needs that need to be urgently worked on?

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 06 Oct 2011 21:31

The way for this to fail is for Taliban to come to power in Afghanistan. India being kept out by khan from the power-transfer negotiations is significant in that regard. Khan could do a U-turn and do a Gen. Diem on Karzai and cause the Taliban to come to power. (actually they don't have to even come fully to power, it is enough if they have partial control and cause chaos in the remaining part.) That will be TSP's play.

So the agreement is meaningless unless India is serious about backing Karzai and exterminating the Taliban. I have my doubts about the latter part.