Afghanistan News & Discussion
Posted: 21 Feb 2007 02:08
Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
I would have added: And HiroHito would be declared the Greatest Frontline Ally in the US War Against Aerial Bombings
Pakistan and Saudi Arabia... our friends...
Doesn't it just make you feel warm and fuzzy?
If Bush had been president when Pearl Harbor happened, we would have declared "war on aerial bombing," and invaded Korea based on intelligence from Germany.
Who/what is ARC??shyamd wrote:I heard we are stationing around 2000 special forces personel? Also, ARC apparently uses the base.
Need to add info on the Paki Army officers and soldiers that were airlifted.Kunduz was the last major city held by the Taliban before its fall to US-backed Afghan Northern Alliance forces on November 26, 2001. Before its fall, witnesses reported seeing Pakistani aircrafts airlifted up to five thousand Taliban and Al-Qaeda troops from the city.[1][2][3]
Jimmy wrote:
Anybody know what type of aircraft is the IAF fielding at Ayni?
A suicide bomber killed as many as 18 people outside the main US base in Afghanistan on Tuesday.
The attack came during a visit to Afghanistan by US Vice President Dick Cheney, who stayed at the base on Monday night. He was not hurt, according to his spokeswoman.
"The suicide bombing took place at gate two where Afghan labourers were waiting," the Afghan Islamic Press quoted a provincial police officer as saying.
The Afghan interior ministry later said 15 Afghans and three foreign soldiers were killed in the suicide attack.
"Initial reports are stating that 18 people were killed and three of them are foreign soldiers," interior ministry spokesman Zemarai Bashary told AFP.
"The 15 others are civilian Afghan workers who wanted to enter Bagram air base for their work. On injuries we do not have exact reports."
However Afghan Islamic Press, a Pakistan-based news agency, quoted provincial governor Abdul Jabbar Taqwa as saying 20 people had been killed in the blast outside the Bagram air base, 60 kilometres north of Kabul.
Bagram district governor Kabir Ahmad said all the dead and injured where Afghans.
As the U.S.-Taliban clash intensifies in the spring, expect Musharraf to be called to make dramatic decisions. The Pakistani president will probably be forced to accept many of Washington's strategic requests, but his political strength domestically may be dealt a serious blow.
well ofcourse as the local security partners, the ISI would have known about the visit...Philip wrote: Today's attack was not the first apparently aimed at a top US official in the country. In January last year, a militant blew himself up in Uruzgan province, killing 10 Afghans, during a supposedly secret visit by the US ambassador.
this is controversial...but I think it was in direct retaliation for bombing of Samjhauta-> which was supposed to be a message for Musharraf to be more co-operative on Iran else relations to east would be disturbed.Rye wrote:The Boom for Cheney's benefit could be just to improve on the fiction that Musharraf is under siege from "rogue ISI elements".."look, Dick, they blowed us up good too.
ha...his escape route must have included the keywords...C-130, ISI, AirliftDostum lured thousands of Taliban to northern Afghanistan, near Kunduz, and massacred them. Legend has it that Dadullah escaped on horseback.
By Sudha Ramachandran
BANGALORE - With its first base in Central Asia at Ayni, Tajikistan, ready to begin operations soon, India's power projection into the region is poised for a leap forward.
Refurbishment of the Ayni base, which is about 10 kilometers northeast of the Tajik capital Dushanbe, has reportedly been completed, and India's Chiefs of Staff Committee has given its go-ahead. The Defense Ministry is now awaiting the green signal from the Cabinet Committee on Security to begin operations. India has become the fourth country - after Russia, the United States and Germany - to have a base in Central Asia.
Ayni was used by the Soviets in the 1980s to support their military operations in Afghanistan. After the Soviet pullout, the base fell into disuse and was in a dilapidated condition right through the 1990s.
Then in 2002, India undertook to refurbish the base at a cost of about US$10 million. But reports indicated that India's role will not be confined just to renovating it. India had reached an agreement with the Tajiks to set up a base there. Officially, however, India and Tajikistan have maintained that India's role was limited to renovating it.
The Ayni base will apparently be under the command and control of India, Tajikistan and Russia by rotation. The base will be jointly maintained by the Indians and the Russians. It is believed that New Delhi agreed to India-Russia joint maintenance under pressure from Moscow.
The economic factor too would have weighed in favor of the decision on joint maintenance. Besides, there were logistical considerations as well. With India's access by land or air to Tajikistan depending on the whims of Pakistan, India would have realized that it would have to look to the Russians for logistical support anyway.
A base will take India's close ties with Tajikistan to a new level. The two countries were on the same side in the Afghan civil war in the 1990s; both opposed the Pakistan-backed Taliban regime in Afghanistan.
Tajikistan has been India's entry point for influence in Afghanistan and Central Asia. It was at Farkhor near Tajikistan's border with Afghanistan that India set up a hospital in the late 1990s to treat injured Northern Alliance fighters. India supplied the Northern Alliance with high-altitude military equipment and helped repair its attack helicopters.
Indian military advisers provided input on strategy. All this support for the Northern Alliance was quietly channeled through Tajikistan. It was on Tajik soil that India's relationship with the anti-Taliban alliance blossomed.
With the fall of the Taliban at the end of 2001, India moved swiftly not only to consolidate its influence in Kabul but also to ensure that its long-standing relationship with the Tajiks was taken to a higher level. Besides defense cooperation, the two countries are working closely to tackle terrorism, build infrastructure and so on.
Tajikistan is Central Asia's poorest country. Unlike the other former Soviet republics in the region, it does not have oil or natural gas. But it does have another asset that makes it attractive to such countries as India - its geographic location. Noted Indian strategic analyst Raja Mohan has observed that Tajikistan's location makes it "the fulcrum of regional geopolitics".
Tajikistan shares borders with China, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. Pakistan is only about 30km away. A narrow strip of Afghan territory separates Tajikistan from Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Northern Areas.
A base at Ayni allows India rapid response to any emerging threat from the volatile Afghanistan-Pakistan arc, including a terrorist hijacking such as that of Indian Airlines Flight IC814 in December 1999. It also gives New Delhi a limited but significant capability to inject special forces into a hostile theater as and when the situation demands.
And should the base at Ayni grow in the coming years, it would enhance India's options in the event of military confrontation with Pakistan. India would be able to strike Pakistan's rear from Tajik soil.
The base goes beyond India's concerns vis-a-vis Pakistan and Pakistan-backed religious extremism in the region. Ayni has to do with India's growing interests in Central Asia as well. India is eyeing Central Asia's vast oil and gas reserves as well as its hydropower to boost its energy security. Its growing interest in Central Asian energy is accompanied by increasing involvement in the region's security. Ayni also has to do with India's big-power ambitions.
While India is keen to back its ambitions with muscle, it appears to be opting for a low profile for its air base in the region. It was initially planning to deploy MiG-29 fighters there. It is now going to deploy only a squadron of Mi-17 V1 helicopters. While the reason for the downsizing is not clear, it is possible that the lowering of India's profile has to do with Chinese objections. China's ties with the Tajiks have been growing, and it is possible that Beijing would have leaned on Dushanbe to keep Indian presence at the base low-key.
Unlike China, India does not share borders with the Central Asian countries. That is a disadvantage. But it has a long-standing ally in Russia, and its relations with Central Asian countries have been warm.
However, the foreign policies of the Central Asian countries have been far from stable. "India, therefore, cannot count on Central Asia totally on key political and security issues," writes P Stobdan in an article "Central Asia and India's security" in Strategic Analyses:
Even in the case of Afghanistan, the positions of Central Asian states vacillated several times in the past. Even Uzbekistan, at one point, took a U-turn in support of dealing with the Taliban. Similarly, on several occasions, Kazakhstan too favored engaging the Taliban in a dialogue and even established a modus vivendi with the Afghan militia.
Turkmenistan's position always remained favorable to the Taliban. In the future too, though India's security interests may converge with those of the Central Asian states, the methods and nature of approaching those problems may differ.
In 2005, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which includes Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, China and Russia, issued a statement calling on the US-led coalition to agree to a deadline for ending the temporary use of bases and air space in member countries, saying the active military phase of the Afghan operation was coming to an end.
The demand for a US exit had its roots in Washington's alleged involvement in the wave of regime changes that swept through the former Soviet republics of Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan, and the mass uprising in Uzbekistan.
Uzbekistan, which was Washington's closest ally in the initial stages of "war on terrorism" - it was the top recipient of US security assistance in Central Asia - was the most vociferous in its demand for a US exit from the bases in the region.
While India's presence in Central Asia cannot be compared to that of the US - not only is it small in comparison but Delhi does not meddle in the domestic politics in the countries there - it is clear that India is adopting a cautious approach. It does not want to ruffle feathers in the region. Hence the low-profile presence at Ayni.
Sudha Ramachandran is an independent journalist/researcher based in Bangalore.
Pakistani, Afghan troops in fierce clash
MOHMAND AGENCY - A Pakistani checkpost stationed at Kodakhel, 30 km west of Mohmand Agency Headquarter Ghulnai, close to Afghan border, was hit by rockets fired by Afghan National Army on Friday morning. Pakistan forces also retaliated.
The firing continued for about two and a half hours. A political official at Ghulnai informed that the Afghan forces started firing at Kodakhel at 8.30 Friday morning. Pakistani forces in reply targeted Afghan Army posts and the firing went on till 11.00 am. The reasons behind this firing incidents are still unknown, the official said.
Pakistan had posted its army in Mohmand Agency in June 2003 and there have been reports of cross firing off and on. The last of the firing incidents took place on June 29.
In the meanwhile, NATO planes bombarded the suspected Taliban shelters in Asmar district and Dangam Pass in Kunar province of Afghanistan adjacent to the Pakistani border on the night between Thursday and Friday. NATO planes also kept flying over the area between Bajaur Agency and Kunar on Thursday. Residents of Mamond and Charmang in the Bajaur Agency however said that no bomb was dropped on the area despite Pakistan airspace violations by NATO planes.
Kabul, Feb 23: Questioning Pakistan's objections to India having consulates in Afghanistan's Jalalabad and Kandahar, President Hamid Karzai has wondered why Islamabad allowed Indian diplomatic mission on its soil if it was a security threat for them.
"Isn't there an Indian embassy in Islamabad?" he asked during an interview with an Afghan news agency.
"Why has Pakistan allowed that on its soil if the Indian diplomatic missions are such a threat?" the President asked.
Pakistan has objected to India having consulates in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad and Kandahar in the south, alleging that they were a security threat to it.
Informed sources here say that the Pakistani leadership takes up the issue in nearly every meeting with the Afghan leader.
India has traditionally maintained diplomatic sub-offices in both the cities which lie near the Afghan-Pak frontier. When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan (1996-2001), New Delhi was forced to close even its embassy in Kabul.
Speaking of the widely speculated "spring offensive" of the Taliban, which has been a subject of discussion and disquiet in NATO circles, Karzai said that the extremists "cannot launch an offensive, whether in spring or any other season, without assistance from outside".
He said almost all attacks launched by the Taliban were taking place in provinces that border Pakistan.
"When I visited Faryab province in northern Afghanistan some time back, my security guards left me unguarded, and their stance was that the province was not near the Pakistan border," Karzai said.
Interesting report from Stratfor on SSS's report from Asia Times:Rony wrote:http://atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IC01Df03.html
Pakistan makes a deal with the Taliban
Pakistan: Using the Media to Lay the Path Toward Negotiations
March 08, 2007 23 56 GMT
Summary
Since March 1, Asia Times Online (ATO) has published a number of peculiar reports about an alleged realignment of relations involving al Qaeda, the Taliban, Pakistani Islamists and the Pakistani government. The reports' details indicate that Islamabad is deliberately attempting to tell the West that the Taliban need to be treated differently from al Qaeda. ATO is a medium through which Pakistan is trying to set up the parameters for a potential negotiated settlement involving the Taliban.
Analysis
Former Afghan Prime Minister and Pashtun Islamist rebel leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar said March 8 that his group's alliance with the Taliban has ended and that he is open to the idea of negotiating with Afghan President Hamid Karzai's government. Hekmatyar, a one-time CIA asset, said certain elements among the Taliban decided to part ways with his Hizb-i-Islami, which he said was a mistake. He also said his group is prepared to talk but that Kabul -- and particularly its Western backers -- might not accept his conditions of a cease-fire followed by negotiations.
Hekmatyar's statement comes within days of some eccentric news reports exclusively from Web-based news publication Asia Times Online (ATO). ATO reported March 1 that Pakistan and the Taliban have worked out a deal and that Mullah Dadullah is Islamabad's point man among the Pashtun jihadists. The report also says al Qaeda and the Taliban have split from each other over ideological differences and the Taliban's relationship with Pakistan, but that links between the two groups remain.
Two days later, ATO reported differences between al Qaeda and Pakistani jihadist and Islamist forces. It named two people in particular for whom al Qaeda had reportedly developed a strong dislike. One is Fazlur Rehman, leader of his own faction of the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (the largest group within the six-party Islamist coalition Muttahida Majilis-e-Amal, which rules Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province). According to the report, al Qaeda is angry with Rehman, who also leads the opposition in the Pakistani parliament, for aiding Islamabad's efforts to capture al Qaeda operatives.
The other is Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, leader of Jamaat-ud-Dawah, the largest radical Wahhabi group in Pakistan and a successor to the defunct Kashmiri militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). Al Qaeda accuses Saeed of embezzling $3 million that the jihadist network gave him to relocate Arab jihadists' families following the U.S. move to effect regime change in Kabul. The report goes on to state that captured senior al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah was the one who gave Saeed the money and who demanded it be returned when Saeed failed to deliver on his part of the bargain. Shortly thereafter, Zubaydah was captured from an LeT safe-house in the Pakistani city of Faisalabad. Al Qaeda is convinced that Saeed betrayed the global jihadist movement. The report quotes an al Qaeda source as saying that the network will kill men like Rehman and Saeed and all other such "hypocrites."
Details notwithstanding, these unusual reports raise a number of questions. Why is ATO the only outlet reporting such information? Who is releasing this information to ATO and why?
These reports are coming from ATO's Pakistan bureau office. Given ATO's track record of quoting jihadist, Islamist and government sources and of issuing reports found nowhere else, it seems that jihadists, Islamists, and certain elements connected to the Pakistani state have used the outlet as a convenient way to relay information. Considering that Islamabad is facing increasing pressure to crack down on jihadists operating on Pakistani soil and has spoken of the need to negotiate with the Taliban, it seems the ATO reports constitute an effort to reposition the fault lines among various Islamist nonstate actors and the Pakistani government.
Several inferences can be drawn from these reports: Islamabad has forged close ties with the Taliban; a significant rift has emerged between al Qaeda and the Taliban; and al Qaeda is also at loggerheads with Pakistani Islamists and jihadists.
Other things being equal, it would not make sense for the Pakistani government to allow a media organization to issue reports about sensitive matters that have a direct and adverse effect on the country's national security -- particularly from that organization's office based inside the country. But other things are not equal, especially when it comes to the murky nexus of jihadists in southwest Asia and the current political climate. In fact, it is in Islamabad's interests to allow such reports to flow or even to feed the system with such reports.
Pakistan has gradually floated the idea of negotiating with the Taliban. However, Islamabad knows that the Pashtun jihadists have ties to al Qaeda. Moreover, Pakistan is seen as the hub of transnational jihadist forces with which the West is not willing to negotiate. The way around these problems is to shape the global perception of the situation by saying that al Qaeda and the Afghan and Pakistani jihadists are actually at odds with each other. The mentioning of Rehman and Saeed is especially telling, because Pakistan would want to underscore that there is a world of difference between Pakistani/Kashmiri Islamists and al Qaeda.
In this context, even Hekmatyar's March 8 statement is not surprising. In December 2006, Pakistani Sen. Mushahid Hussain Sayed, chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, described to visiting Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store a proposed four-point formula to resolve the crisis in Afghanistan. One of the points was to begin talks with Hekmatyar.
It is therefore quite likely that ATO's anomalous reports regarding shifting alliances within the southwest Asian jihadist universe are an attempt to lay the foundation for eventual negotiations with the Taliban.