Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby brihaspati » 10 Jan 2013 10:29

RamaY ji, slightly dated and there has been a virtual clampdown since then on news or studies that reveal the extent of Islamization drive that actually led to the formation of independent Kosovo [under the KLA which was overnight changed from terrorists to freedom-fighters by the Clinton admin - with a remarkably coincident funding drive sourced through offshore Islamist banking via Somalia by the Saudis] :

http://www.international.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=3955
The Islamist Challenge in Kosova

Will Kosova's rural Muslim population become Europe's own Taliban? The danger is real, according to Isa Blumi, doctoral candidate in history and Middle Eastern Studies at New York University. He offered a first-hand view of the current situation in post-conflict Kosova and the politics of international intervention.

By Carla Thorson

Published: Thursday, May 15, 2003
Western shortsightedness could once again result in decades of conflict and instability.

"Even as Western societies worry about the 'rise of Islamic fundamentalism,' the international community's ill-conceived policies for Kosova's rural Muslim population may prove to be directly responsible for the production of Europe's own Taliban," according to Isa Blumi, New York University. Blumi painted a bleak picture of the prospects for Kosovar Albanians after the United States-initiated military action to force the withdrawal of Serbian military forces from Kosova in 1999. He offered a first-hand view of the current situation in post-conflict Kosova and the politics of international intervention at a workshop on Islamic Communities in Eastern Europe and the Balkans on May 15 sponsored by the European & Eurasian Studies and Near Eastern Studies Centers.

While the international intervention in Kosova in 1999 may have been justified on humanitarian grounds, it has since introduced destabilizing forces that may prove counterproductive, Blumi argued. Tension between the local population and international administration has been rising. As many as 50% of all Kosovars continue to live in poverty, and UNMIK (The United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo), and secular nongovernmental organizations have failed to address local needs. As a result, evangelical faith-based charities have stepped in to fill the vacuum, and neglect by the international community is being used by many of these organizations to fuel anti-western sympathies. The most visible of these organizations is the Saudi Joint Committee for the Relief of Kosova and Chechnya (SJCRKC). It has been very successful, not only by providing food, clothing and shelter, but also funding schools and mosques. Education in particular was one of the tools used in Afghanistan and Pakistan to develop the Taliban phenomenon, and rural Kosova currently is a parallel situation.

The international community's own emphasis on multiculturalism has created an environment easily corrupted by faith-based organizations with political agendas, according to Blumi. Because Albanians are widely considered Muslims, many assume that Muslim organizations are best able to look after Albanian Kosovars' needs. This is a misconception, Blumi argued. The Albanians are a diverse population, many of whom are hostile to Islamic institutions, and engage in "unorthodox" Muslim practices. It is not uncommon for Albanians to view their 500-year relationship with Islam as a by-product of foreign invasion that should be shunned, and some political groups today are eager to stress Albania's non-Islamic identity. These groups tend to find large audiences in urban Kosova, while the rural populations are being indoctrinated in schools funded by these Muslim charities that have invaded post-conflict Kosova.

"While many in Kosova continue to resist the sectarian implications of the religious activities of various 'charities,' others concede that the arrival of these proselytizing organizations are creating internal conflicts as people are drawn to them by promises of money, jobs, education, and a new identity." Blumi concluded that, "unless alternative development programs are provided immediately for rural communities in Kosova, outside powers may once again find themselves manipulating internal sectarian differences, as they did in Lebanon in the 1970s and 1980s and among Afghan refugees in Pakistan in the 1980s."


So do not be too quick in ruling out the Talebs in EU. In fact at that time, Afghan and Taleb fighters are alleged to have been active within Kosovo - "prior" to the Serbian onslaught. The allegations were and continue to be dismissed. In fact even international courts of justice consistently find accusations of genocide, or crimes against humanity - allegations - "unfounded" for most of the cases where the accused also happen to be Albanian Muslims. They have found almost all Serbs accused - who happen to be also almost all Orthodox - to be guilty.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby brihaspati » 10 Jan 2013 10:35

posting another piece based on 2012 in the Islamism thread.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23756
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 12 Jan 2013 15:12

Pak safe havens require more than military solution: Obama

So, Obama is going to stop drones, perhaps. The sudden increase since Jan 1, 2013 has been the flames of the dying embers, perhaps. Now, Obama recognizes the futility of military action and is seeking peace. The joint press conference with Karzai was chosen to sing the praise of Pakistan.
"With respect to Pakistan and safe havens there, Afghanistan and the United States and Pakistan all have an interest in reducing the threat of extremism in some of these border regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan, and that's going to require more than simply military actions," Obama told reporters

This is a signal to TSPA to stop whatever even the minimal military actions they were taking in FATA & KP and work out a 'peace deal'. So, the TTP-TSPA deal is being orchestrated by the US.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6822
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby shyamd » 12 Jan 2013 15:20

^^ Very much so, the proposal is for CIA to reduce bases from 15 to 5, so drone attacks are increasing now to tackle as many threats as possible.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23756
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 12 Jan 2013 16:36

shyamd wrote:. . . the proposal is for CIA to reduce bases from 15 to 5, so drone attacks are increasing now to tackle as many threats as possible.

before they cease.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby rajanb » 12 Jan 2013 22:04

Was watching CNN interview of Gen. McChrystal earlier this evening. He very diplomatically pointed out that the US tactics in Iraq and nw in Afghanistan were a failure, suggesting that what he wanted to do was stymied by people in Washington who knew nothing about the psychology of fighting insurgencey where he and to quote him " We could have been actually creating more insurgents than we were killing!".
"We got involved in nation building after WWII to leave behind a stable place."

To me it is a another Vietnam for the USians as it was for the USSR. History repeating itself.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 13 Jan 2013 00:06

rajanb, Also watch his interview on Charlie Rose show on PBS. Should be on archives.

SS, Looks like Blackwell's Plan B in motion.

While at it high pitch from Tellis et al to make India jump the broomstick on to US side.
Same old story of the old man, young bride and thief.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby rajanb » 13 Jan 2013 21:21

Now a interesting question pops to mind.

If the USians do a "Saigon Departure" from Afghanistan, what will the future scenarion of US and Pak relations.

Will not Pak, the wh0re, lose its strategic positioning vis-a vis the USians?

Will they turn to becoming wh0res for the Chinese?

And is the current situation on the LoC, the efforts to internationalise it, the so called "green book" stating that terrorists are the primary enemy and then escalations against us contrary to their recent green book, an alternative to maintain their wh0re status in the international arena?

In case their chinese angle fails?

Interesting times. Worrying times, not because of dhoti shivering, but because our polity has no clue.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Singha » 13 Jan 2013 21:35

er, TSP has already sold off POK to the PLA, 10,000 PLA troopers are stationed there under the guise of road and civil engineering work.
this I feel bolsters TSP confidence about POK security from indian attacks, since POK is the buffer to protect the Pindi-sargodha-attock area

member_20385
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 29
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby member_20385 » 13 Jan 2013 21:54

I am just wondering if the recent events on LOC and increased bid to infiltrate jihadis across has uncle’s t tacit approval . More jihadis in Kashmir == less jihadis to handle on pak afghan border. It was expected after uncle’s withdrawal but for early start this is the only possible explanation that comes to my mind.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6822
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby shyamd » 16 Jan 2013 16:49

India, Chinese and US are competing against each other for listening posts in Maldives, Oman and Madagascar to monitor Arabian sea, Afpak and Yemen.

We already have posts in at least 2 of the 3 and an agreement with the 3rd (which involves surveillance flights).

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4432
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby putnanja » 17 Jan 2013 10:14

US pullout from Afghanistan worries India

Concerns over heightened terrorism from Pakistan, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir, post 2014 US pullout, have brought Washington and New Delhi closer. India and US last week decided to set-up a bilateral dialogue on Afghanistan to keep terrorism emanating from Af-Pak area under control and ensure stability of the Kabul government. The first meeting of the official level bilateral dialogue is scheduled next month.
..
...
This comes after the US agreed to share details with New Delhi on the reconciliation process in Afghanistan. It is understood that PM Manmohan Singh is concerned over the regional impact of US pullout from Afghanistan.

Washington intends to dilute its equity in Pakistan and may need Islamabad only for the reconciliation process as the logistics line will die down after the pullout.

...
..
Senior MEA officials have made it clear to their counterparts in the US that India is opposed to Washington cutting any private deals with Islamabad which may destabilize the region.

...

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21089
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Prem » 17 Jan 2013 10:23

US cannot manage CAR or tackle Persian Khans unless it stay in Afghanistan. Obama can do drama with Afghana to pull out all the troop but its in US interest to keep the reasonable force in Kabul and Kandhar. Its not over till its over.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23756
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 17 Jan 2013 16:24

putnanja wrote:US pullout from Afghanistan worries India
Concerns over heightened terrorism from Pakistan, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir, post 2014 US pullout, have brought Washington and New Delhi closer. India and US last week decided to set-up a bilateral dialogue on Afghanistan to keep terrorism emanating from Af-Pak area under control and ensure stability of the Kabul government. The first meeting of the official level bilateral dialogue is scheduled next month.

This is a drama by the US to control Indian reaction and feed it with misinformation. The US is completely at the mercy of Pakistan until it leaves in c. 2014 and it will do pretty little against its interests until such time. The US-TSP matrimony might end in a divorce after that, that is a different matter.
However, there are clear indications that US intends to keep around 7,000 troops in support of the Afghan army and continue with aerial strikes on terrorist hideouts on the Durand Line.

Most likely, there will be no American soldier left in Afghanistan after 2014.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6822
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby shyamd » 17 Jan 2013 17:37

^^ Afghan official said Karzai asking Obama for ~20-30,000 troops. They think <6k presence would just be protocol and is Obama upper end! US ambassador says they are in ongoing discussions to supply drones only in surveillance mode.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby abhishek_sharma » 18 Jan 2013 15:50


Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21089
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Prem » 19 Jan 2013 00:07

Intention to release all Afghan Taliban
Hare We Go Again

ABU DHABI: Pakistan intends to release all Afghan Taliban prisoners still in its detention, , Foreign Secretary Jahil Abba Jailani said on Friday,"The remaining detainees, we are coordinating, and they will be released subsequently," Jilani said at a news conference in Abu Dhabi.Asked if the former Taliban number 2 Mullah Baradar would be among those to be released, he said: "The aim is to release all," without elaborating further.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 19 Jan 2013 00:10

These must be the good Taliban who were in preventive custody lest they negotiate with Karzai.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6822
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby shyamd » 20 Jan 2013 15:05

@AbasDaiyar: Al Jazeera documentary on the NDS-supported local uprising against Taliban in Andar, Ghazni - via @bashirgwakh
http://t.co/Tg10Stmk

------------
Told to expect Obama to talk about final numbers post 2014 or numbers to be deployed at the end of 2013 in the state of the union speech

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23756
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 20 Jan 2013 17:08

shyamd wrote:Told to expect Obama to talk about final numbers post 2014 or numbers to be deployed at the end of 2013 in the state of the union speech

I hope he does. But, he may propose but it will be the Taliban and the Pakistanis who will dispose.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23756
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 24 Jan 2013 17:39

US-Pakistan Moving Out of Tense Phase: US Official

That means danger for India.
At a Pentagon briefing, Lt Gen. James Terry, Deputy Commander of the US Forces in Afghanistan, also said on Wednesday that after 2014, the United States would focus on providing `right resources’ to the Afghans so that they could hold territory from insurgents.

The United States plans to withdraw most of its troops from Afghanistan by December 2014 but plans to maintain a small but effective force there if Kabul grants legal immunity to those deployed in the country. {Even if Karzai & Co grant that, the first thing the Taliban would do would be to revoke it. They will never brook the presence of US troops on Afghan soil even if they would only share power with others in the intial stages after c. 2014}

“From a military perspective, we are moving away from the tense phase with Pakistan,” said Gen Terry when asked about relations with Islamabad which nose-dived after a series of incidents last year put the two allies on a collision course.

The general, however, conceded that a trilateral mechanism, which aims to improve cooperation among the Pakistani, Afghan and US militaries will `take time to get in shape’.

But the US commander also noted that Pakistan and Afghanistan were now talking directly to each other on border issues, which was a good sign.

He said the cooperation centres the United States helped establish at Pak-Afghan border were also a mechanism to address these issues.

The process of flag meeting of Nato, Afghan and Pakistani military officials had also started.

The US general noted that Afghanistan and Pakistan were also talking to each other on political levels, which had a `potential’ to improving their ties.

Responding to a question, Gen Terry said it was difficult to say how many insurgents were still operating along the Pak-Afghan border, although some estimated them to be around 20,000.

Asked to comment on media reports that the insurgents may resurface after the US withdrawal, he said it’s difficult to predict future scenarios at this stage.
{Of course, the US does not want to concede defeat at this stage. Hence this fudging}
Gen Terry rejected a suggestion that the US withdrawal would make Afghanistan more vulnerable.

“We want Afghans to stand up, not stand alone,” he said, noting that the international community had made commitments to support Afghans during the transition period.

He pointed out that Afghan security forces had already started shouldering security responsibilities, terrorist safe heavens in the country had been greatly reduced and insider attacks were also being checked.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RoyG » 24 Jan 2013 22:54

Yeah...funny how some on BRF quickly changed their views on the situation. Of course, there are still a few who cling onto dreams of the Americans working out a deal from a position of strength with the Taliban which will somehow limit their influence. It's all nonsense. Our only option now is to develop some testicularity and have a clear well defined strategy on butchering these jihadis and their allies within the country when they reach our doorstep.

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby member_22872 » 24 Jan 2013 23:59

No testicles, Since TSP is a major player in Afg, with the present gov, GoI won't be able to show it can grow ball$, right now it is castrated, will be so for at least 2 more years. Good time for US to withdraw and for TSP, Allah is listening, after all there is no God but Allah.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6822
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby shyamd » 29 Jan 2013 19:49

@accurateJourn: Afghan Defence And Army staff General Pervaiz Kiyan showed approval to accept Pakistan’s long-standing offer to train Afghan troops

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6822
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby shyamd » 31 Jan 2013 20:27

Cries for help feed Delhi’s Afghan worries

SANKARSHAN THAKUR

Afghan Uniform Police personnel react after an IED attack in Kandadhar. (Reuters)
New Delhi, Jan. 30: Restive over Pakistan’s centrality to their reconciliation roadmap, influential Afghan sections are lobbying New Delhi to play pro-active counterpoint. The irony is the Afghan High Peace Council itself has handed Pakistan pre-eminence in its peace scheme and left little room for an Indian role.

Leaked sometime ago, the “Afghan Peace Process Roadmap to 2015” immediately spurred concern in South Block on two key counts: Pakistan’s primacy in navigating the process and the prospect of a post-US withdrawal deal with the Taliban whose contours and implications would not only be opaque but also adverse to India.

It is of little comfort to New Delhi that the new plan has been backed by both the US and the UK, which probably even played a role in its authorship. Initially reluctant to foreground Pakistan in the Afghan peace process, the US appears to have come round to the view that no lasting solution to the protracted Afghan strife is possible without Islamabad.

As Afghanistan’s immediate neighbour and bearer of the destructive exhaust of decades of Afghan turmoil, Pakistan is for nobody to square off the Afghan equation. At the same time, the deep involvement of Pakistani armed forces and intelligence in sustaining and spurring the Taliban has raised worrying questions about how well-intentioned its role may be.

Consistent urging from significant Afghan sections —politicians, businesspeople, civil society and media — over past weeks has only fed New Delhi’s concerns over the build-up of portentous prospects in the neighbourhood. A prominent media figure, sources said, had mildly suggested to officials during an interaction that New Delhi should “even be prepared to intervene militarily in the interest of the Afghan people” in the aftermath of the US withdrawal.

“Things are bad,” he was quoted as saying. “And Pakistan will try its best to get a grip over us by hook or by crook, even if it has to wage proxy war through the Taliban aided by its intelligence and armed forces.”

Based on background conversations with visiting members of the Afghan Jirga, or parliament, and senior media and civil society activists, The Telegraph has gathered that a few urgent anxieties have been pointedly conveyed to policy makers:

That the Hamid Karzai government is insecure and shaky;

That it could cut deals that will hurt fledgling democracy and genuine reconciliation and peace;

That Pakistan isn’t an honest or well-meaning peace-broker and will move to establish a loyal, or puppet, regime;

That all of this could plunge Afghanistan once again in a bloody civil war reminiscent of the 1996 takeover by Mullah Omar’s forces, still powerful in the region, and Pakistan-fed.


Our worries are deep and staring us in the face,” an Afghan MP told The Telegraph last week.“Who knows who is brokering what settlement with the Taliban? We face the possibility very soon of losing all the gains we may have made in the last few years and as an old and trusted friend and neighbour that should worry India too, we are here to articulate the wish that India should use its international leverage and good offices to assert a greater role, it will be for the good of all of us.”

India’s strategic interests in Afghanistan and beyond, cannot be overstated; it also lies hugely invested there in men, material and money.

“Aside from the Afghans themselves, we cannot emphasise enough how important the democratic stability of Afghanistan is to us,” a foreign ministry official said.

“Based on what we have been hearing from our own sources, from international inputs and from the Afghans themselves, that is under serious threat of being compromised after the US withdrawal (planned for 2014).”

It is with this specific objective that national security adviser Shiv Shankar Menon is travelling to Turkey in February for meetings with his counterpart Muammer Turker, and the Turkish foreign secretary, Feridun Sinirlioglu. Turkey has sprung as a player in the Afghan peace process having recently offered to host mid-rung Taliban leaders released by Pakistan and set up table for direct talks between them and the Karzai government.

Menon may go beyond merely stating Indian apprehensions with the emerging architecture of the peace process — specifically Pakistan’s central role in it and the shadowy nature of talks with the Taliban — and make a case for a more transparent process that would accommodate and address a wider range of inputs and concerns.

India is not merely unhappy a Pak-brokered deal with the Taliban may already be in the works, it is deeply vexed.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RajeshA » 31 Jan 2013 20:38

India should wake up to the fact, that GoI's timid ways has basically sunk all our investments in Afghanistan and Iran. India is not in any position to help the Afghan people.

If the Afghan people do not destroy Pakistan, Pakistan will destroy them. Afghanistan's biggest need is that of a reliable land corridor to the Indian Ocean, which is not manned by Ummah leadership aspirants like Pakistan and Iran. As long as Baluchistan is not free, Afghanistan will also not be free.

What these Afghans should be doing is to put pressure on the West, on Gulf countries, on Turkey, on India, etc. to liberate Baluchistan.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RamaY » 31 Jan 2013 21:03

Consistent urging from significant Afghan sections —politicians, businesspeople, civil society and media — over past weeks has only fed New Delhi’s concerns over the build-up of portentous prospects in the neighbourhood. A prominent media figure, sources said, had mildly suggested to officials during an interaction that New Delhi should “even be prepared to intervene militarily in the interest of the Afghan people” in the aftermath of the US withdrawal.


Why should India intervene militarily in the interest of Afghan people? What did Afghan people do for Indian interests all these years?

India should act only in Indian interests. The only way Afghan interests become Indian interests when sections of Afghans convert to Hinduism and seek clear and overt help from India and declare war with Pakistan.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RajeshA » 31 Jan 2013 21:14

RamaY ji,

they may declare war on Pakistan even without converting!
Last edited by RajeshA on 31 Jan 2013 23:57, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 31 Jan 2013 22:58

RajeshA, Please don't use Islamist terrorist metaphors.

Thanks,
ramana

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RajeshA » 01 Feb 2013 00:12

ramana wrote:RajeshA, Please don't use Islamist terrorist metaphors.

Thanks,
ramana

sorry!

jerry
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 22 Jul 2007 20:40
Location: DXB

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby jerry » 01 Feb 2013 17:28

http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2013/01/william-dalrymple-afghanistans-trafalgar?bclid=0&bctid=2127443413001

Great Interview! 10mts of listnening = reading realms of pages and books.
Alas now pakis will become the rent boys of another country.
I think its imperative for india to have good relations with iran and access to afghanistan from there,
a great mistake that uncle made instead putting all their afghan eggs (read uncle's gonads) in the pakis basket.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RajeshA » 01 Feb 2013 19:05

jerry wrote:http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2013/01/william-dalrymple-afghanistans-trafalgar?bclid=0&bctid=2127443413001

Great Interview! 10mts of listnening = reading realms of pages and books.
Alas now pakis will become the rent boys of another country.
I think its imperative for india to have good relations with iran and access to afghanistan from there,
a great mistake that uncle made instead putting all their afghan eggs (read uncle's gonads) in the pakis basket.


Uh-hunh! :roll:

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3510
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Rudradev » 02 Feb 2013 10:10

RamaY wrote:
Consistent urging from significant Afghan sections —politicians, businesspeople, civil society and media — over past weeks has only fed New Delhi’s concerns over the build-up of portentous prospects in the neighbourhood. A prominent media figure, sources said, had mildly suggested to officials during an interaction that New Delhi should “even be prepared to intervene militarily in the interest of the Afghan people” in the aftermath of the US withdrawal.


Why should India intervene militarily in the interest of Afghan people? What did Afghan people do for Indian interests all these years?

India should act only in Indian interests. The only way Afghan interests become Indian interests when sections of Afghans convert to Hinduism and seek clear and overt help from India and declare war with Pakistan.


RamaY ji, I have great respect for you my friend... so please forgive me for what I say here, and don't take it personally.

But what you've written above is, very sadly, too characteristic of the traditional right wing in India, and also the reason why the traditional right wing is forever limited to a marginal role in India's electoral politics.

In effect: let us not intervene because the current situation is less than 100% ideal... even though the cost of not intervening could turn the current bad situation into a future worse one.

In effect: while the reasoning and justification may be totally different from that of MMS/UPA, the end result becomes the same-- inaction and silent acquiescence to Paki designs. No?

Bal Thackeray had a lot of ideological flaws, but one thing that no one can fault him for is inaction. He did what he believed needed to be done, every single time, immediately and no questions asked. And even though he was such a regionally focused figure, he made one of the most profound marks on the early '90s Hindutva movement. Certainly more than the paralytic BhaJiPaos who sit in Delhi, refuse to consolidate behind Modi, and are offering Rust Purush's wrinkled rump for another hard kick (from Rahul baba, of all people!) in 2014.

Anyway, sorry for the OT. But somehow I think, like a person who spent decades of his life being tortured out of his mind by the police... the RSS (even though it is legal today) never intellectually survived the trauma of the post-Godse period. And it shows in the way they think (or don't think) today.

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby devesh » 02 Feb 2013 10:28

What should the RSS do?

whoever in that organization starts taking proactive measures, will be neutralized and eliminated by "security forces".
we've already once experienced it under the Brits. we'll simply see the same thing all over again.

unless and until the regime looses control to the extent that its writ is no longer "enforceable" in continuous areas in some part of the country, the "Hindus" cannot really fight back.

let's not forget that even women sadhvis have been mercilessly tortured and put through terrible mental agony by this regime.

the "anti-terror squad" of a certain state, and similarly named organizations will pounce and eviscerate anybody who dares to do more than just talk a few words. any concrete action by the "Hindus" will be targeted with laser-sharp focus.


all this is OT for this thread, anyway.

sorry for the digression.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3510
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Rudradev » 02 Feb 2013 10:35

If it can do nothing, then it is by definition irrelevant. Q.E.D.

Anyway let's take it to the GDF.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RamaY » 02 Feb 2013 10:49

Rudradevji,

If you go to the early pages of this thread I proposed India gets involved in Afghanistan militarily and take control from NATO groups and start focussing on nation building. But that was many years ago.

Those were the days when USA was going full fledged against Taliban and Taliban was on retreat. India had better chances of succeeding in Af-Pak in those circumstances.

It is a different ball game now. US withdrawal and their love with Pakis makes India's job that difficult. On top of it India's relationship with Iran is not as good as it was 5-6 years back.

In hindsight Indian military involvement in Afghanistan, while ensuring a positive energy-strategic relationship with Iran is a better approach and price for the nuke deal than India vote against Iran in IAEA and non-military aid to Afghanistan. The economomic boom days of 2001-2007 was a much better time to be involved in Afghanistan than current economic downturn.

Now it is near impossible for India to get some strategic space in Iran and military involvement in Afghanistan given current Indian economic downturn (this years budget will have cuts in military, infra etc fields) where the geopolitical involvement is mined with Iran/Syria issue, empowered Pakistan+Taliban and a tired US.

There is nothing wrong in changing our strategy along with changes in time and environment.

JMHT


The key to any leader and government is PREPAREDNESS. Indian leadership, governance structures and armed forces lack this basic thing completely.

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1202
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Virendra » 02 Feb 2013 14:02

I don't think Afghans have liked any foreign power on their soil ever. 'Friendly' may be but India is still a foreign power if it enters Afghanistan. That 'friendly' changes to 'enemy' in no time. (One of the reasons Maneck Shaw had our boots extracted out of Bangladesh quickly while they were still throwing flowers at us and not stones.)
Military involvement would not have been a good idea. Specially with this kind of governance and preparedness.
Where even the likes of US and NATO have grown tired, we're not a superpower yet.
We have a soft power equation with the afghans. We can have military involvement but only very limited.
Military training, equipment, protection of our assets and infrastructure etc should be good. Anything more than that would invite trouble and a repetition of history.
British, Russians, Americans .. lets not be the fourth in this line. I still haven't forgotten our experiences in Sri Lanka.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby svinayak » 02 Feb 2013 20:53

Virendra wrote:I don't think Afghans have liked any foreign power on their soil ever. 'Friendly' may be but India is still a foreign power if it enters Afghanistan. That 'friendly' changes to 'enemy' in no time. (One of the reasons Maneck Shaw had our boots extracted out of Bangladesh quickly while they were still throwing flowers at us and not stones.)
Military involvement would not have been a good idea. Specially with this kind of governance and preparedness.
Where even the likes of US and NATO have grown tired, we're not a superpower yet.
We have a soft power equation with the afghans. We can have military involvement but only very limited.
Military training, equipment, protection of our assets and infrastructure etc should be good. Anything more than that would invite trouble and a repetition of history.
British, Russians, Americans .. lets not be the fourth in this line. I still haven't forgotten our experiences in Sri Lanka.

For another 50 years India should only use military to defend her country and not deploy for any other purpose.
Other country mission is not the interest of India.
India needs to build a case gainst the foreign jihad fighters and create a military and non military reponse to it for next few decades

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RamaY » 02 Feb 2013 21:07

Virendraji/Acharyaji,

Both your points are valid.

Afghanistan was occupied, subdued and ruled by non-locals for centuries. It is the careful creation of secular international system that is not allowing non-Abrahamic societies to dominate and decimate Abrahamic societies while the otherway round I'd quietly allowed.

Post world wars there is only one country that is able to push forward occupation in the historical sense, that is China. And indis's non military strategy can learn from those examples.

At the same time, if you both were correct then India wasted $B in Afghanistan with its unnecessary non-military involvement.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby svinayak » 02 Feb 2013 21:24

RamaY wrote: At the same time, if you both were correct then India wasted $B in Afghanistan with its unnecessary non-military involvement.

This is non military and India should increase this. I also proposesed earlier that India should have its region inside AfPak and have 1 million Indian ( males) stationed inside Afgh and have few mil Indian travel to Afgh every year for the next 30 years. They should be only involed in trade, business, commerce, develpment etc


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: kvraghav, Majestic-12 [Bot], prasannasimha and 64 guests