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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 22 Jul 2013 20:16

I think there is some urge to have a fait accompli prior to Indian elections.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5470
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby vishvak » 22 Jul 2013 23:08

Afghans are much more clear in diplomatic talks then Indians.Indian diplomacy is not averse to statements and then doing equal equal to badmash pakis.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 22 Jul 2013 23:22

I ment the US and Pakis want to settle the issue* and present a fait accompli before Indian elections throws up any surprises.


* Put Taliban in driver seat in Afghanistan.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 23 Jul 2013 01:40

A book review:
http://www.dailypioneer.com/book-review ... -kush.html


The Scalphunters of Hindukhush:

Mark Mazzetti’s book not only talks about Afghanistan, Somalia and Yemen, but also deals with the rapid transformation of the Central Intelligence Agency from being a mere spy agency into a brutally efficient killing machine, writes MK Bhadrakumar


The Way of the Knife: The Untold Story of USA’s Secret War

Author: Mark Mazzetti

Publisher: Penguin, Rs 499

Wars are known to be vengeful in the ways they change men, especially unjust wars. The story of the United States’ war on terrorism is all the more gripping when it is read in these troubled times when the Obama Administration is desperately hoping to kickstart talks with the Taliban in Doha — with an enemy who according to British Prime Minister David Cameron’s wry admission recently should never have been an enemy in the first instance. But the fascinating story in Mark Mazzetti’s The Way of the Knife is not all about Afghanistan, not even half of it. It is also about Somalia and Yemen; but, principally, it is about the rapid transformation of the Central Intelligence Agency from being a mere spy agency into the brutally efficient killing machine during the period since the 9/11 attacks.

The CIA had humble origins in World War II, but as the Pulitzer-Prize winning New York Times reporter Mazzetti recounts, it had acquired a dark history by the 1960s thanks to the Cold War and became synonymous with notorious black-bag jobs so much so that President Gerard Ford signed an executive order barring it expressly from assassinations of foreign leaders such as Fidel Castro who stood in the way of the US’s regional policies. To cut a long riveting story short, a culture of reluctance to use the knife since persisted in the agency all the way down to the Bill Clinton Administration when the President actually had to settle for taking out Osama bin Laden with a Tomahawk missile rather than a bullet because the CIA insisted, “We’re not Mossad.” :lol:

Then came 9/11 and George W Bush signed the executive order restoring to the CIA the powers needed to hunt down Al Qaeda fugitives. But within the CIA’s bowels acute churnings erupted between the Old Guard and the Young Turks as to whether the agency should delve into the dark alleys of the past to move on to the future war on terrorism. Then, there is the subplot of Pentagon’s resentment over the CIA’s rise as a rival. Ironically, it has been under Barak Obama that the CIA’s unassailable ascendancy got established, finally. The zest with which Obama embraced black operations once he arrived at the Oval Office comes as a stunning revelation in Mazzetti’s book. Obama, who during his election campaign lambasted the drone attacks and so on, came to rely on the CIA and the Special Operations Command “in ways that not even George W Bush and Dick Cheney had, as America’s primary tool to conduct lethal operations”.

Not only that, Obama “calibrated and refined” the tools of secret war to create the window of opportunity “to wage war without the staggering costs of the big military campaigns that topple governments, require years of occupation, and catalyse radicalisation throughout the Muslim world”. Thus, what happened in Libya became possible — and Syria too may be happening.

Mazzetti quotes Obama as saying in a close-door meeting, “The CIA gets what it wants.” He approved every targeted drone strike that former CIA director Leon Panetta proposed. Under Obama, the CIA morphed into a military organisation so much so that in a smooth reshuffle, he simply shifted Panetta to the Pentagon and brought in Gen David Petraeus at the CIA — the jobs became interchangeable. But in the process, the US war machine acquired newer dark arts — hiring contractors such as the Blackwater to do the killing and so on — and “the patient ‘gentle’ work of intelligence gathering and espionage” at the agency became the stuff of folklore. True, it now spares the CIA of scandalous reputation such as its failure to anticipate the fall of the Berlin Wall or Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait.

However, for the Indian reader, the most absorbing chapters of Mazzetti’s book concern the CIA’s deeply flawed relations with Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence, which becomes a keyhole to peer into the despairing panorama of the Afghan war and comprehend the brilliant outmanoeuvring of the US by Pakistani military leaderships under Pervez Musharraf and Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. Mazzetti’s insightful account confirms the worst Indian fears regarding post-2014 Afghanistan. As a story-teller, Mazzetti is at his best in piecing together the CIA’s hunt for bin Laden and its cat-and-mouse games with the ISI played out in Pakistan’s inhospitable tribal areas, which finally climaxed in the showdown over Raymond Davis in February last year and the Abbottabad operation to kill bin Laden.

Thumbing the way through Mazzetti’s expose of the “crooked and deadly game” played by the generals in Rawalpindi, it is apparent that even with all the King’s men and all the King’s horses, restoring trust and mutual confidence between the respective security and military establishments of the US and Pakistan is a long haul. The deeply perplexing question, therefore, is just what is it that the US and Pakistan could hope to work out via the Doha talks. Pakistan never really believed that the US military was going to be around for long in Afghanistan and as early as 2003 when the invasion of Iraq began, it turned to reviving its “strategic assets” to fill a power vacuum that was going to arise in Kabul as surely as night follows sunset. Interestingly, the full-throttled revival of the Taliban insurgency began when Kayani was heading the ISI. Mazzetti painstakingly digs into a 98-page thesis that Kayani, a Major in the army at that time, wrote while at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas in 1988 on the Afghan jihad by the mujahideen, which ultimately turned out to be “the playbook for how Pakistan could hold the strings in Afghanistan during the occupation of a foreign army”. Curiously, American spy agencies even intercepted one telephone call in 2008 — the year of the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai, incidentally — during which Gen Kayani referred to the Haqqani Network as “strategic asset”. (By the way, New York Times bureau chief in Islamabad Declan Walsh at whose house Mazzetti stayed while working on the book was expelled from Pakistan in May soon after the book was published.)

{They threw out the two Indian reporters also for gratis!}


The wealth of information that Mazzetti reveals underscores the remarkable consistency of the Pakistani policies and makes one wonder what is the basis of the current euphoria by senior US officials that there has been a “genuine shift” in the thinking in Rawalpindi. The Doha talks are ultimately about exploring the viable frontiers of the divergent American and Pakistani agenda. The result could well turn out to be the deal that Afghan President Hamid Karzai warned against recently after the talks with Cameron in Kabul — namely, that Pakistan and some foreign countries are working toward carving Afghanistan into “fiefdoms”.

The reviewer, former Ambassador to Uzbekistan and Turkey, writes extensively on Afghanistan and Pakistan



Need peregrine's sign-off icon!

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 24 Jul 2013 11:41

'Zero Option' not in US-Afghan interest - DT
KABUL: The US ambassador in Kabul said Tuesday that withdrawing from Afghanistan after 2014 and leaving behind no American troops was not in the interests of either country.
“The zero choice would not be a choice that we would want,” {But, you will be forced to} a statement released by the embassy late Tuesday quoted ambassador James Cunningham as saying during a meeting with a number of Afghan leaders and officials.

The idea of a “zero option” — of leaving no troops behind — was mooted earlier this year by US deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes.

The New York Times reported this month that tense relations with President Hamid Karzai might see Washington quicken its troop withdrawal and possibly remove its entire military presence from the country.
“We don’t think it’s in the interests of the Afghan people or of the United States,” the ambassador was quoted as saying. afp

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

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby abhishek_sharma » 27 Jul 2013 06:13

Boys and Girls

Inside a Kandahar detention center for child jihadis.

Samudragupta
BRFite
Posts: 625
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 23:49
Location: Some place in the sphere

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Samudragupta » 30 Jul 2013 11:08

http://www.fairobserver.com/article/cur ... fghanistan

India has historically enjoyed amicable relations with every government in Kabul with the exception of the Taliban regime. After the ouster of the Taliban regime in 2001, India was one of the first countries to re-open its embassy in Kabul. With its pledge of more than $2 billion since 2002, India is, by a considerable margin, the largest regional donor and the sixth largest bilateral donor to Afghanistan’s reconstruction. In 2011, India was the first country to sign a strategic agreement with Afghanistan, outlining an institutional framework for cooperation on economic development and security.

Facing Exclusion

No country enjoys greater soft power in Afghanistan than India. Opinion polls consistently indicate that Afghans perceive India more favorably than any other country. Indian influence permeates various aspects of the daily lives of Afghans. Bollywood movies, Hindi songs, and Indian soap operas are broadcast frequently on Afghan television channels. Tens of thousands of Afghans visit India every year for education, medical care, and tourism.

President Karzai repeatedly hails India as a “great friend.” Afghanistan’s strategic importance to India’s geopolitical aspirations is well pronounced in New Delhi. It is thus no surprise that, through its engagement, New Delhi envisions certain strategic outcomes in Afghanistan. Some of these are: democratic pluralism, political stability, rule of law, economic integration with the rest of the world, and a foreign policy that is relatively independent of the interests of its immediate neighbors.

Despite the favorable historical context, an inauspicious augury of events has taken over India’s aspirations in Afghanistan. Since the Istanbul conference in 2009, India’s concerns about the premature political accommodation of the Taliban before neutralizing them militarily have been categorically dismissed by the West. Over the last 18 months in particular, India has been systematically excluded from participating in major international forums that seek to chart a roadmap for Afghanistan’s political transition and talks with the Taliban.

The various Afghan peace processes today threaten to undermine India’s interests in Afghanistan. There is no country in the region other than India that would lose more from a return of the Taliban to Kabul. The hard lessons from the Indian Airlines Flight IC 814’s hijacking in 1999, and the haven provided in Afghanistan to anti-Indian terrorist groups during the Taliban regime are not lost on New Delhi. During the last 11 years, India has relied overwhelmingly on the US presence in Afghanistan for its regional security interests. India is therefore most vulnerable to the drawdown of US military forces from Afghanistan.

The Challenges

Given Afghanistan’s strategic importance for India, New Delhi’s response to every major challenge outlined above reeks of cluelessness.

First, as the US orchestrates a face-saving drawdown of its military presence from Afghanistan, New Delhi dithers over the responsibility to recognize its interests, articulate them and pursue them aggressively. It fails to convey its interests and concerns both to its allies and to its adversaries.

Second, New Delhi remains reluctant to openly voice its opposition to the peace processes despite their negative implications for India’s security interests. In May 2011, on his visit to Kabul, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh “wished Afghanistan well” in the process of national reconciliation, adding that India would “respect your choices.”

Since then, despite no material change in the Taliban’s ideology, policies, and their practice of obstructing Afghanistan’s political evolution, India has not reconsidered its official endorsement of the Afghan government’s reconciliation with the Taliban. The Taliban have relentlessly continued to impede Afghanistan’s institutional building, burn schools, maim school teachers and students, harass Afghan women, intimidate children across all ethnic groups, and mock the Afghan government and its international partners. If that were not enough to shake New Delhi out of its complacency about the peace processes, consider this: since May 2011, the Taliban have assassinated several prominent leaders who fought against them ideologically and on the battlefront — a few of whom were close friends of India. Some of these were: General Daud Daud, Burhanuddin Rabbani, Mutalaib Baig, Ghulam Haider Hamidi, Ahmed Wali Karzai, Jan Mohammed Khan, and Arsala Rahmani.

In spite of these major setbacks, New Delhi refuses to openly confront the dangerous idealism about reconciliation and challenge its merits. In expressing its continued support for reconciliation, New Delhi mistakenly assumes that reconciliation, in its current form, is a “collective Afghan wish.” It also falsely hopes that the peace processes are “Afghan-led.”

As things stand, the peace processes neither include participation nor agreement from all the ethnic groups within Afghanistan. Ultimately, it does not take much imagination to realize that if the security vacuum left behind by the US military in Afghanistan is filled by the Taliban, it would have serious implications for India, not just inside Afghanistan but also in India.

And third, in spite of Afghanistan’s strategic importance, India’s domestic media is passive on Afghanistan. Reporting on Afghanistan within Indian media remains minimal and the analysis on Afghanistan’s political evolution is mostly cursory. India’s commentary on Afghanistan thus fails to become a reference point for the western analysts and media who seek to understand regional narratives on Afghanistan. Instead, the regional narratives about Afghanistan are dominated by the commentary in Pakistan that remains superior both in quantity and in the sophistication of its analysis. Despite this, there is little in the way of incentives or initiative from New Delhi to change this situation.

Undermining India’s Credibility

Several notable contradictions merit further attention. After every major attack launched by the Taliban against Indians and Indian assets in Afghanistan, New Delhi “hails” the solidarity and the strength of its relationship with Kabul and rewards it additional hundreds of millions of dollars. New Delhi seeks to play a greater role in the development of the Afghan National Security Forces, but chooses instead to genuflect to regional sensitivities. It signs a strategic agreement with Afghanistan, but subsequently decides to scale down its economic footprint in Afghanistan. It wins the bid to invest in the lucrative mining sector in Afghanistan, but refrains from operationalizing the mining activities in the short term. It remains legitimately paranoid about the completion of US military withdrawal in 2014, but fails to calibrate its independent response to the security vacuum that would result from the drawdown.

Such contradictions undermine India’s credibility as a serious partner, and also raise fundamental questions about its ability to realize strategic outcomes in its own backyard.

And here’s the irony: New Delhi enjoys enough leverage both within Afghanistan and globally to realize the outcomes that it seeks. It maintains longstanding friendships with elites from every major ethnic group in Afghanistan. Its cultural-economic profile and regional standing can win over most naysayers within Afghanistan, albeit temporarily. Geopolitically and economically, India's importance to the United States has never been greater. Its global reputation has not scaled such heights before. And, within pockets of the Indian government and in certain non-government organizations, significant expertise exists on Afghanistan.

If lack of expertise, resources, networks, or influence do not explain India’s reluctance in Afghanistan, what does? According to a retired government official, two issues plague foreign policy formulation in India. First, the strengthening of regional parties and weakening of the center hinders the conceptualization and articulation of national interests in India. At present, the foreign policy formation has become federalized, catering mostly to the concerns of regional parties. For instance, Sri Lanka is mostly a concern of the political parties in Tamil Nadu; Afghanistan is of concern only to the policymakers in New Delhi. The second problem is that foreign policy formulation requires a strong domestic context, which is missing in India. The current economic model in India has created strains within the society. Large segments of the population feel increasingly disenfranchised, and thus fail to take ownership of the system. The current model, as a consequence, is unable to mobilize the talents and the expertise of the Indian population into strengthening the domestic polity, and thereby enhancing India’s role in the international sphere.

While these problems are fundamental to the working of the Indian polity and would require long-term solutions, a few areas where India could immediately take action in Afghanistan are fairly obvious. For a start, New Delhi needs to define its interests and articulate them. It should, with its Afghan partners, develop a coherent vision about the kind of Afghanistan that would enable Afghans realize their potential and identify with India’s geopolitical aspirations.

A Litmus Test of its Power

There are four areas where New Delhi could take concrete action.

First, it must create an alternative forum for deliberating Afghanistan's future, involving Russia, Iran, China, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan, in addition to Afghanistan. While the US is vital to India’s interests in Afghanistan, India would be wise to not hinge its strategic outcomes to the changing priorities of the US in South Asia. Russia, Iran, China, and the Central Asian republics are a natural constituency for India’s outreach. These countries seek to lose from the return of the Taliban and share vital economic and geopolitical interests in the region.

Second, India must make its concerns known to Washington through more persuasive efforts. The narratives that punctuate the US withdrawal in 2014 inaccurately paint Afghanistan primarily as a “responsibility” or an “obligation” that is to be honored or dispensed with. India should frame Afghanistan as a country of strategic importance where India and the US share vital security interests – terrorism, narcotics trade, and arms smuggling. India should also develop a narrative that instability in Afghanistan has the potential to destabilize Pakistan. Open-source data would attest to this fact.

Third, it should make a concerted effort to expand its discussion of Afghanistan. India should aim to improve both the frequency and quality of its reporting on Afghanistan so that the media in the West refer to Indian commentary to understand the regional narratives on Afghanistan. New Delhi should endeavor to accomplish this by providing access and information on key developments in Afghanistan to domestic media outlets. It should also incentivize reporting and analysis on Afghanistan for well-established Indian journalists and analysts.

Fourth, and most importantly, New Delhi must investigate the reasons why President Karzai actually requested for military assistance from India. If the reasons are legitimate and are compatible with India's interests, New Delhi should consider providing the direct military assistance that Karzai recently requested. Doing so will signal the right intent: India is willing to defend and enhance its security interests in Afghanistan even when the West turns away. Skeptics may caution that doing so would risk provoking Pakistan, but look how well a strategy that has so far kowtowed to regional sensitivities has delivered for India.

In not urgently developing a strategy to respond to the changing dynamics in Afghanistan, New Delhi risks betraying not just the Afghans who are yearning to move past their darkest days, but also the democratic values that India stands for. That Afghanistan is at risk of further disorder after 2014 places a greater, rather than a lesser, responsibility on India to use its power assertively to halt and slow down the regressive trends. This should be a matter of top priority for India. If India desires to be respected as a great power, it must act like one. Afghanistan is a litmus test of its power. Realizing this may be a good starting point.

Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4069
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Lilo » 31 Jul 2013 04:21

Afghanistan begins to export products directly to India for the first time in its history

Afghanistan’s export activities through the ChabaharPort in southeastern Iran officially began on Saturday.

The port serves as the best alternative to the Pakistan’s Karachi Port where export activities were constantly interrupted by political restrictions and high storage cost.

But it doesn’t mean an end to exports via the Wagah border between Pakistan and India. However, the Chabahar option is more economical and profitable for Afghanistan,” Pajhwok Afghan News quotes Abdul Qadeer Mustafa, spokesman to the Export Promotion Agency of Afghanistan (EPAA).

The Port of Chabahar is a seaport in Chahbahar in southeastern Iran. Its location lies on the border of Indian Ocean and Oman Sea. It is the only Iranian port with direct access to ocean.

Afghanistan will be able to export its products directly to India, Kazakhstan, Gulf and European states in an efficient manner.

According to Mr. Mustafa, this would be Afghanistan’s first time in its history to directly dispatch products to India.

Located 72km west of Pakistan’s Gwardar port, Chabahar port holds immense strategic and economic significance for India.

India’s interest in Chabahar came after China had expressed interest in taking the Gwadar port in Pakistan.

In a trilateral meeting last year, India, Afghanistan and Iran discussed ways to expand trade and economic ties among the three countries starting, with Chabahar being the main focus.


SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 31 Jul 2013 15:07

Lilo wrote:
Afghanistan begins to export products directly to India for the first time in its history

India’s interest in Chabahar came after China had expressed interest in taking the Gwadar port in Pakistan.


Absolutely wrong.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 31 Jul 2013 21:40

A lot of lies and propoganda is passed of in media.

For instance the Chahbahar port route was first explored during PVNR's regime as part of his opening to Iran.
It is another thing that Iran dragged her feet in implementing it.
There is a rail link to Mahshad the status of which I dont know.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 01 Aug 2013 16:22

ramana, yes. The post-Cold War period altered relationship between India and Iran. Since 1992, there has been a flurry of visits of senior ministers and bureaucrats between the two countries. It was PVNR who made the first move by visiting Tehran in 1993 followed by Rafsanjani's return visit in 1995. PVNR's visit was indeed a turning point for it laid the foundation for everything that followed. Rafsanjani openly admitted to that. Vice President KR Narayanan went to Teheran in 1996. In 2001, PM Atal Behari Vajpayee visited Tehran and there was a 'Tehran Declaration'. This was followed by Khatami's visit to new Delhi in 2003 when the 'New Delhi Declaration' was signed.

India's Chahbahar involvement much predate the Chinese involvement in Gwadar. For India, at the end of the Afghan Jihad and with the economic liberalization and the consequent energy requirements and energy security, there were two primary concerns: one was the constriction of the Strait of Hormuz and security there and the other was India's decision to develop Iran as a counter-weight to Pakistan especially because of the convergence of interests between India & Iran on Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The North-South corridor was mentioned in the Tehran Declaration in 2001 but the groundwork for that had been laid much earlier. The corridor was to help movement of Indian goods through sea and road & rail network to Afghanistan and CAR. The Pakistanis awarded Gwadar contract to China in 2002.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 01 Aug 2013 20:19

There was an agreement to allow India to station combat planes in Iran in case of an all out war with TSP.

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Atri » 01 Aug 2013 20:36

ramana wrote:There was an agreement to allow India to station combat planes in Iran in case of an all out war with TSP.


wow.. UPA gave up all this leverage. There was this news about Indian proposal to build and maintain Delhi-Hanoi Railway line. It was by PVNR or ABV (can't remember). If pursued, would have completed by now.

member_26255
BRFite
Posts: 151
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby member_26255 » 01 Aug 2013 23:32

US decreasing not withdrawing forces from Afghanistan: Kerry



http://www.thenews.com.pk/article-11196 ... an:-Kerry-



ISLAMABAD: In an exclusive interview with Geo News senior anchor, Hamid Mir, US Secretary of State John Kerry said terrorist groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)(really?), Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) and Al-Qaeda were violating the sovereignty of Pakistan.



“Pakistan faces a very serious threat. LeT, TTP, Al-Qaeda and Haqqani network attack and kill people in mosques. They blow people up in market places.”



When asked about US drone attacks, the US Secretary of State replied that drone strikes are conducted in the defence of the United States :twisted: . “We are engaged in counter-terrorism for self defence. We are very appreciative of Pakistan and understand the powerful feelings about any of these efforts. “



Kerry added that terrorist activity in Pakistan was taking place in before drones and in areas where there we no drone attacks. “Blowing up women and children can never be excused.”



Kerry said the release of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui was not raised during his meeting with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. “People in Pakistan would feel very good about it (Dr. Aafia’s release) but we have a legal situation which we have to analyse.”



He also told Hamid Mir that the US was decreasing and not completely withdrawing its forces from Afghanistan. “Not every single soldier will leave in 2014. We have been very clear about that. We are not withdrawing we are drawing down.”......


vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5470
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby vishvak » 03 Aug 2013 11:15

There is no cost to ISIs misadventures in Afghanistan apparently. Even after knowing fully well that ISI attacked Indians last time there were hardly any diplomatic reactions in Afghanistan or even in India.

jagga
BRFite
Posts: 649
Joined: 22 Mar 2010 02:07
Location: Himalaya Ki God Mein

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby jagga » 03 Aug 2013 13:48

Rediff: Blast near Indian mission in Jalalabad, innocent kids got killed.

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

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby shyamd » 03 Aug 2013 14:08

ITBP jawans and ANSF thwarted the attempt. 3 soosai bombers attempted.

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

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby RoyG » 03 Aug 2013 18:46

A little taste of what is in store for us once the Americans make a full withdrawal. We are a soft target.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6479
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby CRamS » 03 Aug 2013 19:59

vishvak wrote:There is no cost to ISIs misadventures in Afghanistan apparently. Even after knowing fully well that ISI attacked Indians last time there were hardly any diplomatic reactions in Afghanistan or even in India.


Cost? Only massive gains for TSP. Even this morning NYT narrative, "rivalrly between India and TSP" to report this terrorist attack is a shot in the arm. And fo course the dominant discourse in India is about "Hindu terrorism", "evil Modi", and sickularism. ISI is not only having a field day, they must also be contemptuous as to what more can they do to elicit a more forceful reaction from India.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21084
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Prem » 04 Aug 2013 03:00

http://www.thefridaytimes.com/beta3/tft ... 02&page=21
AZL symptoms
By Saeed Naqvi
In fact Gen. Stanley McChrystal had expressed exasperation at the success of India's socio-economic development work because it distracted Pakistan from its war-on-terror focus. So what should India do? Go out of its way to become unpopular in Afghanistan so that Pakistan can single-mindedly dedicate itself to the task of facilitating US withdrawal? This, believe it or not, was the implication of Gen. McChrystal's lament.Even after McChrystal was removed and parked in the groves of academe at Yale for his deep thoughts, his successor Gen. Petraus, found it useful to take a swipe at India's "cold start" strategy which has been in cold storage for years. This, he thought, would win him friends in Islamabad.Building roads, hospitals, schools, providing training to Afghan civil servants, accepting students in Indian institutions, providing hospital facilities in New Delhi - all this had added to India's image in Afghanistan. This, in addition to Bollywood, which has kept Afghans riveted for decades. All of this was of interest to US ambassadors in the region who are answerable to the State Department. But the heavy military presence in Afghanistan continues to have the power to trump normal diplomatic ideas and initiatives in the region. In 2011 the Pentagon's priority was to enlist Pakistani support for US withdrawal. This, exactly, is the priority now, even as the clamour grows in Washington - withdraw by 2014 end, withdraw by 2014 end!
The interesting detail that should not be overlooked is this: even as Messrs McChrystal and Petraus were talking "withdrawal" in 2011, Karzai had already contrived an extension of his reign until 2014. Karzai established his indispensability at a time when the Western media had written him off as "not even the mayor of Kabul", one "whose writ does not run beyond the Presidential palace".If there was no consistent American stand on withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2010, why should we be convinced that the 2014 deadline is cast in stone?
Supposing the Qatar initiative was not botched up and Karzai did set into motion a dialogue with the Taliban, what outcome were the Americans expecting?
Karzai and the Taliban are both Pashtoons, concentrated in the South and South-East with durable links across the border with Pakistan. This would leave Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras out of the power structure which would then be overwhelmingly Pashtoon. Pashtoonistan would not necessarily be an automatic outcome but a Pashtoon entity, equidistant from Kabul and Islamabad, would begin to loom.
This would result in the consolidation of the Northern Alliance sentiment in the rest of the country.'Pashtoon' in Pashto means Afghan. It follows that anyone living within the geographical limits of Afghanistan is an Afghan.
Emir Amanullah, greatly influenced by Turkey's Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, knitted up the Afghan state by transferring Pashtoon populations to Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara-dominated areas. Likewise, other ethnicities were transplanted in Pashtoon areas. This patchwork of nationalities, even on a limited scale, has been something of a deterrent against the state's breakup. Islands of minorities would become targets in the event of ethnic nationalism coming on top.
However, much of this discussion could well be purely theoretical because there is an almighty standoff among the Pashtoons themselves.Pashtoons are divided into two principal clans - Durranis and Ghilzais. When the Saur revolution of 1978 brought the Afghan Communist parties, Khalq and Parcham, to power, Afghan history took a turn and not only because President Mohammad Daud was killed. His death made way for Noor Mohammad Taraki as Prime Minister. This meant that for the first time in 200 years, a Durrani yielded power to a Ghilzai. Afghanistan's communists and Taliban both derive from the Ghilzai stream. Having wielded power more or less for the past 36 years, Ghilzais will fight tooth and nail to block the return of a Durrani.Yes, Karzai happens to be a Populzai which is a Durrani sub clan. But he was imposed as a "provisional" ruler in 2001. He has lasted this long only because of US support, which helped him rig the 2009 elections so badly that Peter Galbraith resigned his job in Kabul in a huff.

Recently Americans have talked of a "zero option". This means that come what may, they will vacate Afghanistan by 2014's end even if Karzai does not sign a Status of Forces Agreement for US noncombatants beyond that date. Can the US really pick up the chips and leave the game? Of course not. Why then are the Americans allowing him to hold up their departure arrangements by pretending to be angry? I am using the term "pretending" advisedly because Karzai is too much of a creature of the US to be able to luxuriate in long sulks without a tacit understanding with them.Maj. Gen. Kurt J Stein, Commander of First Theater Sustainment command has in a recent interview to the New York Times cited a major hurdle in Afghan withdrawal: "Getting the Gear Out."After 11 years of war, the US has accumulated 600,000 pieces of equipment valued at $28 billion. In the 18 months that remain until December 2014, can the Americans obtain from Pakistan a promise that they will be helped to glide out, across Balochistan, without a glitch? Or are we looking at another deadline well beyond 2014? And, remember, getting men and material out is not the only mission unaccomplished...

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 06 Aug 2013 19:59

India Announces Package for Jalalabad Attack Victims - The Hindu
In the midst of tragedy following the foiled attack on the Indian Consulate in Jalalabad, India warmed up to Afghanistan by announcing a generous package of compensation for Afghans who had fallen or were injured during the strike.

The bonding between New Delhi and Kabul contrasted sharply with the sudden dip in India’s ties with Pakistan, whose Deputy High Commissioner was summoned to South Block on Tuesday.

India sees Pakistani instigation behind the Jalalabad attack but the immediate provocation for summoning the Pakistani diplomat was the cross-border firing that killed five Indian troops patrolling the increasingly fragile Line of Control (LoC) between the two countries.

In Jalalabad, India’s Ambassador to Afghanistan, Amar Sinha, announced compensation – described as ``token assistance’’ – of dollars 10,000 (about Rs. 6 lakhs) to the families of each of the victims. He also announced a reward of $ 20,000 for the Afghan security detail that was on duty outside the Consulate when the attack took place. In addition, $ 2,000 were to be given to the Afghan soldier who gunned down one of the suicide bombers and stopped the attackers in their tracks.

During his visit to Jalalabad in eastern Afghanistan, Mr. Sinha met the Governor of Nangarhar Province as well as the families of the victims who died in the suicide attack.

While visiting the city hospital, the Ambassador announced that New Delhi would handover $20,000 to the local government for the treatment of those who were injured in the attack. Another $10,000 dollars would be given to the local government for the repair of the mosques, which were damaged by the bombings, which also killed a number of children who were returning after studying Koran.

The attack in Jalalabad illustrated the sharp upturn in civilian casualties in 2013. According to a report by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA), there has been a 23 per cent increase in civilian casualties in Afghanistan during the first half of 2013 when compared to a similar period last year. Jalalabad, a bustling commercial city, continues to remain restive with one more person dying on Tuesday following the detonation of a magnetic mine that had been attached to a police vehicle.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 06 Aug 2013 20:12

Idiot Hindu paper. Should report the award in Rupees only. Why use Dollars to report the figure? Oh forgot the editor is NRI from USA!!!!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20112
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Philip » 11 Aug 2013 02:54

Putin goes on a solo walkabout in St.Petersburg,after attending the funeral of the death of his judo instructor and close friend.The human side of the man.watch the clip.

On my own: Vladimir Putin walks alone through the streets of St Petersburg

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 54927.html


Russian President Vladimir Putin cut a lonely figure today after he was spotted wandering by himself through the streets of St Petersburg.

The Russian leader was seen pensively walking through the city following the funeral of his Judo instructor Anatoly Rakhlin. Putin marched on wearing a moody look and avoiding eye contact, while his aides and security rushed to catch up with him.

Putin is known to be a master in the dojo when it comes to Judo and it is clear that the death of Rakhlin has affected him deeply. Rakhlin had reportedly been battling a long illness and considered himself to be a second father to the President.

Putin's behaviour today contrasts sharply with the more macho persona he usually likes to portray in the media. He is known for his outlandish displays of prowess, from piano playing to bear hunting there is nothing that is beyond him.

Most recently Putin was seen delving into the depths below to inspect the ruins of Russian sailing frigate which sunk in 1869.


SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 14 Aug 2013 10:19


So long as the US does not realize that the Al Qaeda, Taliban and Pakistan (its government, army and the dozens of jihadi tanzeems) are all one and the same, there will be no end in sight. The US is going to leave Afghanistan in exactly the same position as it left in c. 1989-1990.

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

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Virendra » 14 Aug 2013 11:15

Philip wrote:Putin goes on a solo walkabout in St.Petersburg,after attending the funeral of the death of his judo instructor and close friend.The human side of the man.watch the clip.

On my own: Vladimir Putin walks alone through the streets of St Petersburg

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 54927.html


Russian President Vladimir Putin cut a lonely figure today after he was spotted wandering by himself through the streets of St Petersburg.

The Russian leader was seen pensively walking through the city following the funeral of his Judo instructor Anatoly Rakhlin. Putin marched on wearing a moody look and avoiding eye contact, while his aides and security rushed to catch up with him.

Putin is known to be a master in the dojo when it comes to Judo and it is clear that the death of Rakhlin has affected him deeply. Rakhlin had reportedly been battling a long illness and considered himself to be a second father to the President.

Putin's behaviour today contrasts sharply with the more macho persona he usually likes to portray in the media. He is known for his outlandish displays of prowess, from piano playing to bear hunting there is nothing that is beyond him.

Most recently Putin was seen delving into the depths below to inspect the ruins of Russian sailing frigate which sunk in 1869.

Thanks for the post but I couldn't draw its link with the topic of this thread.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 27 Aug 2013 11:00

Peace Process will be Afghan-led, Sharif Assures Karzai

Karzai knows that such an assurance from Nawaz Sharif is utterly worthless. But, what to do ? He has to pretend as though his country has reached some understanding with Pakistan. The US has forced upon Karzai to go and meet the Pakistani leadership, especially the military because it wants progress at Doha. The suspended Doha meeting cannot re-start unless Pakistan wills. Karzai has been made to crawl in front of the PA.

Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai is looking to Pakistan to help in the peace process and provide an opportunity for talks involving the Afghan High Peace Council and the Taliban.

Reading out a statement to the media after his one-on-one meeting with Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Mr. Karzai said, “We discussed in this regard primarily and with emphasis, the issue of joint fight against extremism and reconciliation and peace building in Afghanistan with the expectation that the government of Pakistan will facilitate and help in manners it can to the peace process in Afghanistan and in providing opportunities or a platform for talks between the Afghan High Peace Council and the Taliban movement.”

On his part, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif assured Mr Karzai of Pakistan’s strong and sincere support for peace and reconciliation. He also agreed that this process had to be inclusive, Afghan-owned and Afghan-led.

Mr. Karzai arrived on Monday with his official delegation which met government and military officials and also signed agreements on trade and economic issues. In June Mr. Karzai had refused to be part of the U.S. talks with the Taliban after it opened an office in Doha as he wanted the process to be Afghan-led.

While publicly the two leaders did not refer to the Afghan President’s demand for release of Taliban prisoners, it is an important issue for Mr. Karzai and did form part of the discussion, it is learnt.

Mr. Sharif in his statement said Pakistan’s security and future prosperity is linked to that of Afghanistan in multiple ways. The year 2014 is particularly crucial for Afghanistan and this region, he pointed out saying he hoped this milestone would be crossed peacefully and extended all possible support.

The Finance Ministers met on Sunday to discuss various projects and finalise trade and economic agreements. The two countries have agreed to the early and full implementation of Afghanistan Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement. {But, one that would exclude transit trade with India both ways. Anyway, the agreement was signed over 18 months back and so far no progress has happened.}

Mr. Karzai’s visit has been marked by scepticism in his own country and contempt from the Taliban. Former Pakistan ambassador to Afghanistan Rustom Shah Mohmand said Mr. Karzai knew that the U.S. was an indispensable partner in the peace process but he wanted to assert his Afghan nationality. There are powerful forces against reconciliation in Afghanistan and the true potential of the relationship will be realised after the coalition forces leave next year and Pakistan too is free of the overarching U.S. influence, he said.

Support

President Asif Ali Zardari on Monday said Pakistan had been consistently extending every possible support for promotion of peace and stability in Afghanistan as a peaceful, stable and united Afghanistan was in Pakistan’s own interest.

Speaking to Mr. Karzai at a meeting , Mr. Zardari stressed the need for joint efforts and close coordination to cope with the evolving situation in the region.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 27 Aug 2013 11:22

From NightWatch for the night of 26th August 2013
Afghanistan-Pakistan: President Karzai flew to Islamabad to hold meetings with the new government in Islamabad. Karzai is seeking Pakistani assistance in facilitating talks with the Afghan Taliban.

Comment: Karzai's instincts are accurate in focusing on Pakistan. Without Quetta and continuous Pakistani official protection, the Afghan Taliban leadership would have had no place from which to operate. Pakistan has placed no restrictions on Mullah Omar except to focus on undermining US and NATO operations in Afghanistan and leave Pakistan alone. Omar and the Pakistani government have both been faithful to the agreement. President Karzai's visit is nearly a last ditch effort to get help from Pakistan by reaching out to the new government in Islamabad. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif cannot control the Pakistani Taliban and has made no policy statements about controlling the Afghan Taliban leaders. They have lived with impunity, comfort and freedom of movement and communications in Quetta since 2001. Nawaz Sharif has shown no inclination to change Pakistan's permissive policy towards the Afghan Taliban leaders. A direct appeal to a new prime minister after years of frustration in dealing with the former government is worth a try. Nevertheless, the prospects for greater cooperation are vanishingly small. After 12 years, the conclusion is inescapable that Pakistani intelligence and security agencies never have had any intention of arresting or restraining Mullah Omar and his Quetta Shura advisers. They have enjoyed more and more effective protection than Osama bin Laden. Thus, Pakistani policy has ensured that NATO forces would win every battle, but ultimately lose the war when the Afghan Taliban returned to power in Kabul. That is the only outcome that would guarantee that Afghanistan would remain pro-Pakistan in the larger strategic struggle between China with its proxies - Pakistan and the next Afghan government - and India, standing alone. {Folks, internalize this} Under any other outcome, Afghanistan would remain neutral or pro-India. Pakistan, including the Nawaz Sharif government, will not tolerate either other outcome.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 29 Aug 2013 04:12

SS, I swear I thought you wrote that piece by Nightwatch!!!


yes its all about making sure the two front war is successful.


MMS like Neville Chamberlain has been deluded about peace in his time and been sellin gout as much as he could.

Now the economy is in the brink. After all the genius years claiming more mercantilism is more important than national security.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 30 Aug 2013 03:45

Security of Pakistan is Tied to Afghanistan: US - Business Line
Welcoming the recent talks between Hamid Karzai and Nawaz Sharif, the US has said that security of Pakistan is tied with the successful outcome in Afghanistan.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai and newly elected Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif held talks this week.

“We said that Pakistan’s own security and stability is tied to a successful outcome in Afghanistan. And we’ve been appreciative of Pakistan’s efforts to further reconciliation."


Nonsense. The two underlined parts in the statement above are oxymoronic. Pakistan's 'security & stability' is linked solely with its reversal of policy towards India, a reversal which is not happening and is unlikely to happen at all. With egging-on friends like the US or China, Pakistan feels particularly vindicated with its implacable enmity and enduring hostility with India. Pakistan's Afghan policy is therefore totally centred around its 'strategic depth' military doctrine. In fact, with the turn of events in Afghanistan, with Pakistan once again being sought after by the US for getting a successful outcome in the 'peace talks' with the Taliban and for safely extricating its men and material, and with a 'sweeter than honey' China that is deeply interested in Afghanistan now (which was not the case in c. 1989), Pakistan feels buoyed up more than ever before that its 'strategic depth' is all set to regain its prominent place come c. 2015. In fact, if the US persists with its idea of stationing its forces in Afghanistan beyond c. 2014, and if the Taliban agree to that, then that outcome would frther embolden Pakistan because it would be sure that the US would continue to lean heavily on India not to retaliate against Pakistan for any terrorist acts. Such an outcome is neither going to enhance the security & stability of Pakistan nor that of the region as such. The US is mouthing inanities just to please Pakistan, directly at the cost of India once again.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 30 Aug 2013 09:02

Indian Missions in Afghanistan to get More Commandos - Sandeep Joshi, The Hindu
The blast that killed 12 persons near the Indian consulate in Jalalabad in Afghanistan early this month has forced India to enhance the security cover of its Embassy and consulates there. Soon 79 more Indo-Tibetan Border Police commandos will guard diplomatic missions in Kabul and other places.

“We are deploying a fresh contingent for security duties at all vital Indian facilities in Afghanistan,” ITBP Director General Ajay Chadha told journalists here. At present, there are 219 ITBP commandos deployed in Afghanistan.

Sources said new inputs of more terror attacks against Indian diplomatic missions in Afghanistan have prompted the government to revisit the security arrangements. Intelligence inputs and recent threat analysis suggest that apart from al-Qaeda and the Pakistan-based Haqqani network, some other Pakistan-based terror groups may target Indian assets.

The fresh ITBP deployment will cater to the main Embassy complex in Kabul, and the consulate offices in Mazar-e-Sharif, Jalalabad, Kandahar and Herat. The paramilitary force commandos guard perimeter security and access control duties at Indian installations, besides being trained in undertaking special rescue operations and VIP security duties in cases of emergency.

Shanmukh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Shanmukh » 03 Sep 2013 02:58

Looks like the Taliban are already ruling the roost.

http://news.yahoo.com/afghan-police-dea ... 41089.html

Now, even with US air support, the state of affairs is that the Afghan policemen are dying left, right and centre, as nearly 2K cops have died in the last six months. How are they going to hold up once the US leaves?

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21084
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Prem » 03 Sep 2013 03:33

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2013/09 ... .html?_r=0
Taliban Attack U.S. Base in Afghanistan

MOHMANDARA DISTRICT, Afghanistan — Militants attacked a U.S. base in Afghanistan near the border with Pakistan on Monday, setting off bombs, torching vehicles and shutting down a key road used by NATO supply trucks, officials said. At least three people — apparently all attacking insurgents — were killed. .The Taliban claimed responsibility for the strike in the Torkham area, the latest in a surge of attacks in Afghanistan as U.S.-led foreign troops reduce their presence en route to a full withdrawal by the end of next year. Militants frequently target NATO's supply lines in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. In a brief statement, NATO confirmed an "unsuccessful coordinated attack by enemy forces" but said none of its personnel were killed. The military alliance generally does not release information on wounded troops. No members of the Afghan security forces or civilians were killed or wounded, according to Esa Khan Zwak, chief administrator in Mohmandara district, in which the base is located.

Ahmad Zia Abdulzai, spokesman for the governor of Nangarhar province, said several militants wearing suicide vests and carrying other weapons staged the attack, and that Afghan and U.S. forces exchanged gunfire with the insurgents. NATO helicopters joined the fight, he added. An Associated Press photographer at the scene saw three bodies of suspected attackers — apparently shot dead from the NATO helicopters. The suspected insurgents didn't manage to enter the main base area, but had tried to hide under a small canal bridge near it when they were hit. The highway between Jalalabad city and Torkham, an important route for NATO supply trucks, was closed, Abdulzai said. Militants on both sides of the Afghan border have frequently targeted the supply line, leading NATO to shift much of its supply delivery toward routes from Central Asian states instead of through Pakistan. Afghan officials say a parking lot at the outpost was a stopping point for many types of vehicles used by U.S. and other NATO forces. Hashimi said four U.S. vehicles there were completely burned. In an emailed statement, Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said the insurgent group was behind Monday morning's attack, and claimed it had destroyed several tanks — an assertion Hashimi denied

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

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Virendra » 03 Sep 2013 14:37

Shiites have been targeted in recent Baghdad bombings. As many as 66 feared dead.


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby ramana » 03 Sep 2013 21:23

X-Post...
Rony wrote:Cementing Pashtun-Baloch unity essential

Pashtun-Baloch Unity Day was observed in Kabul on Saturday where Pashtun and Baloch leaders gave vent to their views how to address the issue of militancy, insecurity and Talibanization. The crux of what they say is that the military establishment in Pakistan has been responsible for the current day plight of the two peoples—Pashtuns and Balochs. This Unity Day has been observed since 1949 aimed at cementing relations among Pashtuns and Balochs, who are straddling on both sides of the Durand Line. The day has been observed in such a while when Pashtuns and Balochs have become a worst victim to an international conspiracy—the war on terror. Their voices are being gagged and their leaders being killed.

In such a critical juncture, the unity of the two peoples, living in a strategically important region, needs to be cemented more and more. The contentious Durand Line has undermined the strength of the two peoples. On the Afghan side of so-called line, the de-facto frontier stretches from Nimroz in the southeast to Nuristan in the northeast. On the other side of the line, the de-factor border includes the provinces of Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and the tribal belt—the seven tribal agencies. The land where Pashtuns and Balochs live has been of utmost importance for the international powers because of its geopolitics and strategic location. For certain strategic, economic and other objectives the land of Pashtuns and Balochs have been pushed into a perpetual state of mayhem and confusion. The lives of these two peoples have become miserable at the hands of those who cannot tolerate their political, educational and economic development. To be specific, it is Pakistan that’s blameworthy. Being obsessed unhealthily with Pashtun-Baloch unity, Pashtuns have been given over representation in Pakistan army and its top spy agency, the ISI, while throwing the human and political rights of Balochs away. It is a deliberate attempt by Pakistan military strategists and establishment to bring a cleavage between the two ethnic groups.� Pakistan has long been supporting the Taliban because they also alienate the ethnically, religiously and linguistically diverse populations in Afghanistan and Pakistan. For instance, the Taliban chauvinism has led to the failure to unite with the adjacent Baloch, who at times have demonstrated even greater hostility to the Pakistan state, with their continuous history of insurgent resistance. This is highly advantageous for Pakistan—a country that has already lost its eastern wing in 1971 when one ethnic group, the Bengalis, successfully tore the Pakistan state into two. With secessionist movement in Balochistan, and disgruntle among Pashtuns of Pakhtunkhwa and the tribal belt, Pakistan is once again faced with the same situation. Being fallen victim to its own strategy, Islamabad has nothing to say but to blame India for security situation in Balochistan. Pakistan is also squaring off with India in Afghanistan but it has lost the race, which is why it has hell-bent on blaming New Delhi for insecurity in the tribal belt in Pakistan. But the allegations of Pakistan seem to be unfounded as Baloch resistance movement started in 1948. It continuously remained a serious challenge for Pakistan in 1958-1959, 1962-63, 1973-77, and 2002-2009 and onward. Instead of waning, their resistance against the Pakistan state has become more vigorous with the passage of time. Pakistan considers the Taliban an effective tool in undermining and gagging the Pashtun irredentist movement and as well as causing a schism among Pashtuns and Balochs. Ethnic Balochs live on both sides of the Durand Line as well as in neighboring Iran. People on both sides of the Durand Line consider it just a line and not an international boundary. The ongoing war on terror has been going against the interests of Pashtuns and Balochs as the war has become directionless. Unlike the Taliban, Pashtun nationalists and Balochs consider the Punjab-led establishment in Pakistan responsible for their backwardness. The war in Afghanistan should have come to an end after the USSR pulled out its troops but it didn’t happen. Why? Because the military establishment in Pakistan didn’t want peace in Afghanistan. It is well evident from the statement of Pakistan’s then Lieutenant General and head of ISI, AKhtar Abdur Rahman, who was assassinated in a plane crash along with then Pakistan President Zia-ul-Haq. He said that Kabul must burn and it is burning even today. Why did he say that Kabul must burn? Because they knew that Kabul has been a symbol of Pashtun-Baloch unity and once that’s destabilized their unity will be undermined forever. But those who are against the unity of Pashtun-Baloch should know that their turn is coming to and end that will be followed by our turn.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23746
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby SSridhar » 10 Sep 2013 04:52

Globemaster deployed for overseas missions - Rajat Pandit, ToI
The above has no relevance here except for the excerpts below, which show that India is indeed preparing for the post-2014 scenario.
Defence ministry sources on Monday said while one C-17 made a trip to energy-rich Tajikistan in August, another is slated to fly all the way to Rwanda later this month. "The Tajik flight carried special equipment, including instrument landing aids.

The overseas missions are being seen as "crucial" to Indian interests abroad. India has forged a "deep strategic partnership" with Tajikistan, which shares its borders with Afghanistan, China, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. In March-April, India had also used its C-130J 'Super Hercules' aircraft to airlift a military hospital with doctors, paramedics and equipment to Tajikistan.

Moreover, the Indian military presence at the Ayni airbase, around 15 km from Dushanbe, helps New Delhi keep some tabs on its strategic interests in Central Asia as well as terrorism-infested Af-Pak region.

Samudragupta
BRFite
Posts: 625
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 23:49
Location: Some place in the sphere

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby Samudragupta » 14 Sep 2013 12:38

Why these type of news does not appear in the Western Press???

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world ... 720443.htm

38 Taliban militants killed in Afghan raids
Thirty-eight Taliban militants have been killed in cleanup operations since early Friday, authorities said on Saturday morning.

"Afghan National Police (ANP) conducted several clean up operations with the cooperation of Army, National Directorate for Security and Coalition Forces in Kandahar, Uruzgan, Ghazni and Helmand provinces over the past 24 hours, killing 38 armed Taliban insurgents, wounding 15 and capturing 13 others," the Afghan Interior Ministry said in a statement providing daily operational updates.

The ANP also found and defused 10 bombs in Laghman, Kunduz, Kandahar and Herat provinces over the last 24 hours, the statement added.

In addition, five Taliban were killed and two militants were arrested following an overnight clash in surrounding areas of Sari Pul city, the provincial capital of northern Sari Pul province, a provincial police source told Xinhua, adding one army soldier was also wounded in the engagement between security forces and Taliban there.



http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world ... 719064.htm

Afghan forces kill 18 militants, but denied by Taliban
Afghan forces operations against Taliban militants have claimed the lives of 18 Taliban fighters and led to arresting 35 others over the past five days, officials said Friday.

In the latest crackdown against Taliban militants, the security forces raided Taliban hideouts in Charchino district of the southern Uruzgan province 370 km south of Kabul on Thursday and so far 18 insurgents have been killed, police asserted.

"Security forces launched cleanup operation in Charchino district on Thursday and so far 18 rebels including a Taliban local military leader Mawlawi Islam have been killed," the statement added.

Twelve more militants have been captured, it contended.

In a similar development, the Afghan police backed by the national army have arrested nearly two dozen Taliban militants over the past five days in Dasht-e-Archi district of Kunduz province 250 km north of Kabul, provincial police chief Khalil Andarabi said Friday.

"During the five-day operations which concluded Friday morning, the police have captured 23 Taliban rebels and ensured law and order in 10 villages of Dasht-e-Archi district," Andarabi told Xinhua.

There were no casualties on police and civilians during the operations, he contended.




Afghan police capture 23 militants in northern province

Units of Afghan police backed by the army have arrested nearly two dozen Taliban militants over the past five days in Dasht-e-Archi district of Kunduz province, 250 km north of Kabul, provincial police chief Khalil Andarabi said Friday.

"During the five-day operations which concluded Friday morning, the police have captured 23 Taliban rebels and ensured law and order in 10 villages of Dasht-e-Archi district," Andarabi told Xinhua.

There were no casualties on police and civilians during the operations, he contended. Taliban militants have yet to make comment.


Afghan forces kill 37 militants in operations: official
The Afghan Ministry of Interior Affairs on Wednesday said that the country's security forces have killed 37 militants during a series of operations.

"In past 24 hours, Afghan police, army and the National Security Directorate, the country's intelligence agency, conducted several joint clearance operations in Nangarhar, Jawzjan, Kandahar, Zabul, Uruzgan, Wardak, Logar, Ghazni, Paktika, Paktiya, Herat and Helmand provinces. As a result 37 armed Taliban were killed, 16 wounded and one was arrested," the ministry said in a statement issued here Wednesday afternoon.

They also found and seized weapons and ammunition besides defusing 21 rounds of different types of mines, it said, adding that the NATO-led coalition troops also supported the local forces in some operations.

The Taliban insurgent group, which has been waging an insurgency since its regime was toppled by a U.S.-led invasion in late 2001, has not made comments so far.



These are all major operations and quite a massacre for the Talibs....why then th Western press not picking up these news???

kuldipchager
BRFite
Posts: 117
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:35
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Postby kuldipchager » 15 Sep 2013 00:11

These are all major operations and quite a massacre for the Talibs....why then th Western press not picking up these news??


This kind of news Mr. Oboma people don't like it. Because it is bad for there friend Pakistan.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests