Afghanistan in Taliban control? No cause for Indian worry.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Feb 2010 15:32

I was going to start this topic with a rhetorical question on the lines of "Is it such a big deal for India if the Taliban gain power in Afghanistan?". But apart from being too long for the circumcised word length limit on BRF topic titles. I decided that it would be better to state my opinion in the title itself.

Like others I love Asterix comics but when I first read of the irrational fear of the sky falling on our heads my first thought was "So what? What will happen if the sky falls?". I keep hearing dire warnings about the impending return of the Taliban in Afghanistan and these warnings come filled with foreboding and predictions of doom for India.

But before I get to that I must state that I would rather not see the Taliban back in Afghanistan. They represent distilled pigshit - and raped Afghanistan more than anything else has raped that nation in the past. But they raped Afghanistan. Not India. For the sake of the Afghan people I hope, nay pray, that the Taliban do not return. Of course I pray for the people of Haiti too and hope that they can face a happier future. But in the end I am India and I am forced to selfishly think of India.

Now what happened when the Taliban were last in power? As I stated earlier, the Afghan people suffered. Pakistan was fine. Oh yes they had lost American aid but they had their strategic depth. So the Paki army and ISI were happy.

But what of India? How did India suffer because of the Taliban in Afghanistan? I believe that all of India's "suffereing" was because of Pakistan, not Afghanistan. the Taliban were essentially Pakistanis who controlled Afghanistan. India's problems were separate and distinct from this.

In the late 80s India had two problems brewing. One was the Sri Lanka crisis and the other was the Khalistan issue. The Khalistan issue clearly had a Pakistani hand. oh yes it also had a Canadian and US hand, but heck even the Taliban (and Pakistan itself) have a US hand. As the decade of the 80s rolled on into the 90s - the Khalistan issue was settled and terrorism from Pakistan started in Kashmir.

The only things that control of Afghanistan did for Pakistan was
1) Give them a sense of strategic depth (which is funny - but for that you need to read a Paki article about what Pakistan could do with that depth)
2) Allow them to claim that "training camps" for "Kashmiri freedom fighters" were in Afghanistan and not in Pakistan.

And so what happened to India in the decade 1990 to 1999? We had terrorism in Kashmir, and we responded by making Kashmir more and more impervious to all those thousands of terrorists who were being trained to pour into Kashmir. There was always a "backlog" or a "tailback" of terrorists waiting to cross into India. Once they entered they were eliminated within a period of a few weeks to a few months. This was the story until 1999 when the Kargil war broke out. Now everyone knows that Pakistan was getting nuclear weapons ready to use in 1999. I state this as a data point to remember. I will come back to this point later. India's only rub with the Taliban came with the IC 814 hijacking and that proved that Taliban and Pakistan were one and the same. That's all.

Then came 9-11. After 9-11 the Taliban were "defeated"

What happened to India after the Taliban were defeated? Well we had Kaluchak, We had the parilament attack and from 2001 till 2008 we had 8 years of terrorism all over India. Pakistani terror groups who promised to attack all over India and claimed to have set up modules all over India lived up to their promise until Nov 2008. We have anentire thread on BRF to document this - all after the Taliban were defeated. Someone please tell me what this has to do with the Taliban?

So a brief look back at history shows that the Taliban in Afghanistan only made Pakistan happy. They did not make things any worse for India. So exactly who had a problem with the Taliban in Afghanistan?

The US of course. The jihadis of Pakistan in dozens of camps across PoK and Afghanistan were bottled up there. they were setting off attacks all over the world until 9-11 when the chewed at the backside off the US. In fact I have referred to exactly this in my ebook in Chapter 13.

What I am trying to say is that an unchecked Taliban in Afghanistan is a headache for the US and the west more than India. So let them sift through shit like a 2 year year medical student looking for worm eggs and find some "good Taliban". Let them bribe that good Taliban and hand them power in Afghanistan. And let the Pakistan army try to keep control of that good Taliban as they crush the Afghan people.

After Pakistan gets control of a good Taliban in Afghanistan, it will still have the problem of funding. The US will still have to feed Pakistan. If the US keeps funding Pakistan - the US will get hit. It will be no worse fro India. And all those scaremongering stories of Paki nukes? Pah! Don't give me that crap. Paki nukes were aimed at India as far back as 1999. So what's new?

Let the US hand over Afghanistan to the Taliban. I am sure India can handle that situation. And handle Pakistan to boot.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 05 Feb 2010 16:25

Shivji, Wonderful post. Finally a contrarian POV on A'stan. I think the challenge for India is to have a friendly Govt in A'stan, nothing more or less. It hardly would matter to us if that govt is friendly or unfriendly to rest of the world.
Why India should be worried with Taliban like Govt is because such Govts do try hard to remove any vestige of Indic civilization from their History and culture and slowly turn from Friendly to neutral and finally hostile neighbors.
Well we can say , No skin off our nose if presence of Talibani Govt means status quo in security situation as far as India is concerned but that would would b very myopic view.
For long term security we need to have as many friendly Govt in our neighborhood as possible.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 05 Feb 2010 16:31

You are basing your analysis on the assumption that the 9/11 attacks were planned by Osama sitting in Afghanistan. By now, anybody with the slightest curiosity knows that 9/11 was executed by western elites. It is not polite to say that the western emperor is wearing no clothes, but it will be rather tiresome to base an entire thread on a false premise.

The attitude of western elites to Islamists like the Taliban or the Pakjabi Army is the same as the attitude of the ISI towards the LeT. The western elites are confident that the Islamists can never be a viable nation, and are therefore controllable. The aim is to direct the rage of the Islamists against viable nations like Russia and India. Once the Islamists have played their role in destroying Russia and India, they will themselves be destroyed.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 05 Feb 2010 16:55

Kudos VikasRaina, excellent post.

For some reason this thread reminds me of another one which Shivji started a while back on the lines of "The impending demise of Pakistan and end of Pakistan and idea e Pakistan for Indian muslims"

Afg Taliban would be no worse for India than repeated bombings in India, repeated terror attacks, multiple genuflections by Shri Singh (and his successor) to the ruler of Pakistan and its proxies, Indian PMs loosing sleep over the fact that their citizens are being arrested outside (on completely unfounded suspicion being part of Terror rings) etc etc

In addition we will have massive security issues due to a land which can stage fairly offensive weapons etc (such as airstrips to support hijacked and other planes, firing missiles on overflying civil aircraft, general staging area for xyz).

I guess we are by now in the mindset that general massacre of Indians is ok as long as the current rate goes no worse.

Yeah I guess I can live that.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 05 Feb 2010 18:59

Shiv,

I am sorry that I do not have time right now to go through the posts. I just had a quick glance of your post. So if I missed nuances or sentences,...

What you are saying rests on two very very cruicial assumptions.
i) The only thing bad for India from Pakistan is terrorism - everything else is chaman ki tamasha.
ii) Afghanistan will be seen through the lens of terrorism inside India only and there is no other use from Afghan.

This is what I would call tunnel vision and trying to paint everything to the colour of terrorism.
If I make the above two assumptions, I will definitely agree with you. But I do not make those assumptions.

Let me put more clearly, taliban doesnt matter much wrt terrorism inside India and thus a discussion focusing on that aspect alone is not worth it.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 05 Feb 2010 19:17

I haven't read the entire post and I will read it later in the day.

shiv wrote:So a brief look back at history shows that the Taliban in Afghanistan only made Pakistan happy. They did not make things any worse for India. So exactly who had a problem with the Taliban in Afghanistan?

This may not be accurate statement. Go back to the time period between 1990 and 2001 where 80% of the Terrorists (so called militants) killed/arrested are foreigners in JK. Bulk of these foreigners are Talibs.

Let me crosspost my own post from TSP thread. Ignore the domestic politics portion but see if it makes any sense regarding the rest and also see if the scenario of India between 1985-2000 is okay? Even if it okay with such attrition levels we should think if it is ok with all the parties have now more sofisticated weapons and approaches. Does India and Indian Armed forces want to erase the progress so far is the question we need to discuss?

Muppalla wrote:Though, some stalwarts on this forum disagree, I am of the firm opinion that talking to Pakistan has everything to do with apeasing Indian muslims. From 2004 onwards, every terror hit only helped Muslims moving towards INC. Some think here that Indian Muslims have moved on since 1947 and Pakistan is not a factor in their lives but I respectfully disagree.

Off cource there is no doubt that US also want India talking to Pakistan for a different but similar reason.

Both domestically and internationally if we go back in a time machine to 1980s ( my favorite period of analysis) and early 1990s, I beleive we have answers regarding why US wants us to talk to Pak and why INC also wants to talk to Pak.

Internationally
* Jihadi factory is busy with anti-Isreal and anti-Russia operations. Kashmir was third in the priority hence India did not face the entire factory output
* Both the West ( US and Western Europe) milked cheap Oil from middle east using the favorable regimes while these regimes in collusion with west funded the entire factory.
* First problem - Some of the factory became job-less to an extent after Rubin and Arafat made a deal.
* Second problem - End of cold war released all the factory employees

At this time the best visible thing available for Islamic factory was Kashmir. Using Robin Raphel etc., they decided to make all the factory employed against Kashmir and which is also direct interest to our western neighbor. West failed and there was a time-lag to make Kashmir fight equivalant to that of Israel or Russia. Meanwhile unemployed factory employees turned their guns on the west which is called as alkeeda.

Bush wanted to confront it and change the world order in a different way. The Dems admin still has confidence that they can return back to golden 80s and make Kashmir as next employable area for all the Jeehadis. It is this thought process where they want to see good Taliban, someone equivalant to Zia (in Kiyani) and then operationalize the factory slowly in Kashmir. Here is where even Saudi's importance in solving Afghan problem comes into picture.

The challenges:
1) Western Europe is not keen in this rollback to 1980s as they are getting equivalant free oil from Russia.
2) There are no strategies for US regarding how to keep the non-pasthun areas of Afghan happy in this factory-restart deal

India domestically
* In 1980s Muslims voted to INC as a single block. Apeasement of those days is multi-fold at micro/macro level.
* Even post 1965 and 1971, INC had to do a rope trick to get alienated Muslim vote into its fold. 1971 was easy because of Bangla Muslims. Post 1965, INC lost a lot of seats and Indira was also dependent on Left to survive ( INC split also is the reason)
* The first anger of Muslims was visible when Ayodhya temple was opened by Rajiv. It did not move away totally.
* It started moving away after India started diplomatic relations with Israel
* It got wiped out when Babri collapsed

From 2004 onwards, INC did all the manoverabilty it can do after every terror attack. Most of us blame Shivraj patil as dumb etc. but his non-decision making is the real reason for Muslims to beleive that their past glory will be returned only if INC comes back to power and not Mulayams and Left. The approach is very simple as they show every apeasement openly with (1) stop Afzal hanging (2) Never allow arrests from sleeper cells and on top of that protect them (there are several examples) (3) Open channels with Pak (aman-ki-asha types). It paid rich dividends at elections.

In their onward march on this pursuit - Mumbai blasts and IPL types are just hurdles. They have the will power and they will march on with slight delays.

Kashmir burning and once in a while terror attack on India are very convinient things for US, Pakistan and Indian ruling congress party. All these three entities will keep trying to achieve that. The only challenges they will face are certain game changing events that happened in late 90s and the first decade of 21 century.

For US: Kashmir burns so that jehadis are having fulltime job and also 9/11s may not repeat and Middle Eastern kingdoms will survive
For Pak: Can be united using Islamic takleef and jeehad for Kashmir could be uniting factor
For INC of India: Every Terror attack will give them oppurtunity to show to IMs that how loyal they are to them by not taking action on any criminal even though they are caught red handed. Few people here and there dead is not going to change anything in India. Soldiers are anyway paid to die. Few Unnikrishnans are alway expendable. There are Padma awards and Ashok chakras for such folks.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Feb 2010 19:41

The tunnel vision comment is certainly fair.

Having accepted that I must point out that I believe too many people are weighed down by the burden of all the fears that seem to come to the surface at the thought of the Taliban taking over Afghanistan. Being ful of anxiety is one thing - but parsing those anxieties into individual streams of concerns that ned to be addressed is another matter altogether.

I have not seen that happen on BRF or off BRF. Hence the thread.

OK fine. Let me assume that a Taliban take over of Afghanistan means no more terror than we already have and (IMO) a lot more terror for other "world players" - which is their problem.

So what else is the problem with a Taliban takeover?

Vikas Raina has said that a Taliban takeover will gradually remove all vestiges of Indic civilization from Afghanistan and convert a friendly to neutral nation into one tha is hostile to India.

The only comment I have about that (perfectly valid) concern is that an active attempt at guiding the maintenance of an Indic civilization is the leisure pastime of the wealthy of India. The need to maintain that civilization outside one's home comes across clearly only when:

1) one learns enough of the world to see what is happening, and
2) when one has a full stomach and has the time to hold on to civilization

The point here is that it is only a subset of people for whom both the above points are true actually worry abut it. In other words if a majority of Indians had both points true for themselves a majority of Indians would probably worry about Indic civilization in Afghanistan.

Do a majority of Indians fall into that group? If not what can a minority who feel the pain of loss of Indic civilization in Afghanistan do other than lament? I believe not much is possible in the short to medium term other than lamentation and we have a lot of that.

In a more pragmatic sense - what are we going to do about it if the US chickens out of Afghanistan, tail between its legs, and whimpering while it licks its wounds. After all we have spent a joyous few years toasting expressions like GUBO and Amritraj and generally having a good laugh. What if payback time comes?

AnimeshP · Post by **AnimeshP** » 05 Feb 2010 20:18

Shiv sir ... that is a very valid question you have raised ... but then if things for India don't get worse with Taliban coming to power in Afghanistan, my question is that why not extend that logic and see if things will get worse for India if Taliban come to power in Pakistan as well ... because I feel that contrary to what Pakis are thinking, once the Taliban come back to power in Afghanistan, they will no longer be content playing second fiddle to the Pak Army .. they will have their sights on bigger things and the next big thing for them will be Pakistan.

Now I know that we all consider Pak army and the Taliban to be two sides of the same coin, but my question is what will happen if the Afghan taliban end up supporting TTP and someone like Hakimullah Masood ends up coming to power in pakistan?? I think along with Afghanistan, this is a question that we must ponder over ...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Feb 2010 21:19

AnimeshP wrote:... if things for India don't get worse with Taliban coming to power in Afghanistan, my question is that why not extend that logic and see if things will get worse for India if Taliban come to power in Pakistan as well ... because I feel that contrary to what Pakis are thinking, once the Taliban come back to power in Afghanistan, they will no longer be content playing second fiddle to the Pak Army .. they will have their sights on bigger things and the next big thing for them will be Pakistan.

Now I know that we all consider Pak army and the Taliban to be two sides of the same coin, but my question is what will happen if the Afghan taliban end up supporting TTP and someone like Hakimullah Masood ends up coming to power in pakistan?? I think along with Afghanistan, this is a question that we must ponder over ...

This is how I see it. What is the worst that Pakistan can do? IMO that is to use its entire conventional and nuclear forces against India. India is already facing that threat from the Pakistan army. How will that threat change if one of the Talibaniacs come to power?

If we can defeat the Pakistani military and survive a limited nuclear conflict - that will be true no matter who heads the Pakistan military. A change of government in Pakistan, in my view makes zero difference to the threat that India faces.

But part of the reason for starting this thread is the tantalizing possibility that a powerful Taliban with Paki army level weapons will a\want to defeat other enemies as well. Maybe that high hopes - but it would give me great joy to see a raving nuclear lunatic threatening the US and Israel and perhaps China. That would be a dream to live for..

Currently those lunatics are aiming ONLY for India.

If the Taliban was in power in Pakistan, would they cooperate with the US and would the US give them aid. if they behaved exactly like the Pakistani army, they would not attack the US. But they are attacking the US now and are not behaving like the behavior the Paki army wants to show. So would Talibs change their behavior if the took over Islamabad?

In fact it i possible that the Pakistan army's best chance for survival is to keep the Taliban out of power in Islamabad. The Taliban have to be placed in liquid oxygen no? If the Paki army wins, and the Taliban are defeated, the US will lose interest. if the Paki army loses and the Taliban will win, the US will be forced to expand the war into Pakistan. So a continuous conflict is in the Pakarmy's interests. I would like to hear objections to this conclusion that I have made. if any.

Rampy · Post by **Rampy** » 05 Feb 2010 21:39

Shiv Ji

Excellent points.. but I just wanted to put into two points here

I guess it was parthasarthy who pointed that India's Interest in AF is not from Pak POV but from Central Asian POV. Unstable or fundamentalist AF can cause lot of trouble for India in Central Asia, be it Tajik or Iran( Jundullah). This can cause long term problems for us. AF being a gate way for everything ( going by the history) be it central or South east asia, we led go AF and we had 1000 yrs of slavery and attacks
IMO this should be the only reason for us to handle AF. If AF is in safe hands PAk can be handled but if AF gets into Talib hands we have to watch out as they will become users for many players for plotical gains

kulhari · Post by **kulhari** » 05 Feb 2010 21:43

Afghanistan under pakistan was (and will become again) remain a terrorist training camp. Hhese terrorists will target not only India but also US/Russian interests (as has happened in the past) We will continue to suffer from more Dec 13, Nov 26 etc - possibly also more 9/11s.

This time pakistan can pass on some of its nuke forces in Afghanistan and claim enlightened ignorance incase ISI-Jihadi nexus want to punish India by nuke attack. This would also ensure that Jihadis get nuke umbrella to play around.

IMVHO we will not suffer more than we are now in short term but in long term our fight against terrorist will become more difficult and costly.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 05 Feb 2010 21:54

I disagree
The reason it is a source of worry for India is because the violence will be directed towards India

There seems to be some backdoor agreement to compromise India to placate the Taliban. It is a trade that has been made in the past sort of like redirecting the pitbulls

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 05 Feb 2010 21:57

One big disadvantage on the economic front is that once again our links to CAR via Chabahar, Iran will be nulled. We've made the road at some cost. Anothr as mentioned is long term disadvantages. Indeed Pakistan is slipping into Talibunny mode slowly and gradually. But if a person like Hakimullah takes over in Pukistan with a complete ideological ally in Afghanistan, wecan certainly say that there'd be a massive increase in recruitment activities for Jihad in India and elsewhere too.

The West is making a BIG mistake in thinking a moderate version of the Taliban can rule in Afghanistan. It's not possible as the more pious will kill any moderate version. Once the Black Flag is raised it's only the hardest and most literal interpretation that comes into power play. Moreover even if a guy like Hafeez Sayeed comes into power, the Anti Hindu/ Kufr hate will not cease. We'll begin to see direct nuclear threats and provocations almost on a weekly basis as opposed to the the present yearly affair. JMT/s

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 05 Feb 2010 22:08

Since Pakistan is the problem, having Pakistan "surrounded" with significant Indian presence in Afghanistan, the Indian base in Tajikistan, etc., is useful; and having Afghanistan under the Taliban would vitiate this strategy.

Shiv is right in addressing the vague fears and anxieties that BRFers express. Best make them explicit.

I disagree with Shiv that since certain kind of thinking or interests are the concern of a minority elite and since filling the stomach is job #1 and survival of civilization within India itself is higher in the list than what happens in some neighboring country, that these concerns are trivial. That is absolutely wrong. My favorite way of thinking about it is that if we could have conveyed to say, people in Assam, what would happen to them in the next few centuries because of the trivial non-event of Vasco da Gama's arrival in Kerala, they would have sent armies down, as would the rest of India. Or when Mahmud of Ghazni's father was building his approach roads for an attack into India.. or so on. This general ignorance about what is happening around you, the unwillingness to look beyond immediate concerns is what has brought India into this sorry mess in the first place, where filling the stomach itself is a difficult job.

A more correct way of looking at this is - given India's current resources, what is the right balance of things for it to do? Otherwise all strategic thinking is irrelevant, we become a people who can't see beyond their daily bread.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Feb 2010 22:16

IMHO, Paki doing also provide the oppertunity to fix the wrongs of many centuries. We keep talking about Indic heritage etc but to reclaim the losses require initiatives on many fronts . Who in the world gonna lift eyelid if and when these yahoos get nuked? I am assuming that GOI still have some true Indians running the power wheels , if not then back to medieval time. There is is onle old ,time tested solution, Destroy Pakisantat, both physical and ideological. The big question we should ask is are Indian security interersts secured in the hands of current ruling elites who shows no sign of spine in any manner of speaking.

AnimeshP · Post by **AnimeshP** » 05 Feb 2010 23:14

shiv wrote: This is how I see it. What is the worst that Pakistan can do? IMO that is to use its entire conventional and nuclear forces against India. India is already facing that threat from the Pakistan army. How will that threat change if one of the Talibaniacs come to power?

I totally agree with you here ... that is the key question that we need to figure out because IMHO Taliban is not people, it is an ideology. The Taliban don't need to mount a physical coup to get to the top in Pakistan. They need more people at the top to turn over (and we at BR know that a lot of them have done so ... but not enough as of now)

shiv wrote: If we can defeat the Pakistani military and survive a limited nuclear conflict - that will be true no matter who heads the Pakistan military. A change of government in Pakistan, in my view makes zero difference to the threat that India faces.

But part of the reason for starting this thread is the tantalizing possibility that a powerful Taliban with Paki army level weapons will a\want to defeat other enemies as well. Maybe that high hopes - but it would give me great joy to see a raving nuclear lunatic threatening the US and Israel and perhaps China. That would be a dream to live for.. Currently those lunatics are aiming ONLY for India.

My question regarding the bold part is that are we as a nation willing to pay the price of a limited nuclear conflict? What is the definition of a limited nuclear conflict? If it means that 1 or 2 cities will be blown up before we turn Pakistan into a wasteland, are we ready to accept the loss of cities such as Mumbai or Bangalore or Delhi to this conflict?

The premise of my argument is that the image that we have of the Taliban is that they are irrational actors who have no concern of the consequences of their actions. Is this really true ?

If yes, then we do need to worry about the consequences of them taking over Pakistan.

If no, then I would agree with you that from India's POV nothing much will change. In fact I would argue that it would be better for India as we will not have to face the "Aman ka Tamasha" kinda BS.

shiv wrote: If the Taliban was in power in Pakistan, would they cooperate with the US and would the US give them aid. if they behaved exactly like the Pakistani army, they would not attack the US. But they are attacking the US now and are not behaving like the behavior the Paki army wants to show. So would Talibs change their behavior if the took over Islamabad?

In fact it i possible that the Pakistan army's best chance for survival is to keep the Taliban out of power in Islamabad. The Taliban have to be placed in liquid oxygen no? If the Paki army wins, and the Taliban are defeated, the US will lose interest. if the Paki army loses and the Taliban will win, the US will be forced to expand the war into Pakistan. So a continuous conflict is in the Pakarmy's interests. I would like to hear objections to this conclusion that I have made. if any.

The premise for your argument in this para is that Paki Army will always remain the masters in the Paki Army-Taliban relations. We also have to think as to what would happen if the opposite were true.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 05 Feb 2010 23:20

What were the statements and gestures that emanated from the Talebs in power in AFG, that points to their neutrality towards or lack of interest in worsening conditions further for India? Iam not sure, but was not Taleb occupied AFG one more safe haven to divert hijacked Indian plane? Well, well, assume that they did only "act" against India on the orders of their Pakistani masters! But then that is perhaps not fear-mongering and an obsessive blind anxiety that paranoidly assigns each and every action against India to Pakistan!

But keeping that all-source-in-Pakistan hypothesis alive, a Taleb controlled Pakistan will then provide a non-state state which will follow and execute all TSP orders against India ans there will be nothing that India can do to pin it down on TSP.

It is time we understand the complex process by which characters of aggressive, imperialistic ideology driven regimes change. The TSP gov used US Cold war interests to expand into AFG for its overall imeprialistic and Islamist agenda on the subcontinent. THis expansion was not for any obvious resource useful for modern technological development - but for an important tactical political weapon - the incorporation of perpetually starved, subsistence economy, trade-smuggling-looting-marauding dependent society also firmly held in the grasp of Islamism. Such a population provides ready recruits for Ghazwas and Jihad. Holding on to such a resource, TSP can blackmail world powers and extract virtual Jizyia.

In trying to use such forces as mercenaries to further imperialistic ambitions - always have led in history to an eventual reverse coup. The converted of such rootless, vicious, and hungry hordes always come to a point where they take over the regime that initially recruited them. The more radical and ruthless among the older regime usually come to arrangement with the equally ruthless neo-converts to imperialism to finish off the more moderate of the older regime. No empire in the world has been an exception - including the latest one.

The TSP regime will simply change - more and more - with the more radical elements acting in tandem with the Talebs. They influence each other - towards increasing ruthlessness.

One of the greatest blunders we indulge in when trying to interpret systems way different from what we are used to - is to model such systems by what we expect ourselves to behave as in given situations. This has led some of us to claim that Pakistan would implode "shortly", or "subnationalism" will soon split TSP into many parts, or that "terrorism"somehow will "level" off, no additional hazard in formal re-entry of Talebs in AFG, etc. None of these will take place - and that can only be understood, if we drop our "models" based on ideas of "rationality" we attribute to Talebs/Afghans/TSP-rulers - that we think we see in "ourselves".

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 05 Feb 2010 23:42

Shiv garu, there is a saying, "you can't step in the same river twice".

Meaning that the dynamics if the taliban come back to power will be different from when they first came to power. If it was (at least debatably) "not too bad" for India the first time around, it doesn't follow that the same would be the case this time.

For one thing, your analysis doesn't take into account the dynamic of TSP experiencing the re-throning of the taliban as a triumph of its strategy and tactics, including, ominously, the idea that they have "defeated" the US, using the US's own money at that, therefore subduing India with a mix of honeyed words and sustained aggression would be a cakewalk. We can't simply say, "ok, let them come, we'll deal with them" because the dynamics in India are also changing rapidly. We are seeing an increasingly clueless and out-of-touch Indian elite that has no concept of defending the country and its people, and is obsessed with the good life that includes bonhomie with the RAPE classes. That particular train was only getting started in the 90s, now it is well under way and hard to stop and reverse.

The 800 pound gorilla in the room is the nuclear dimension. You mentioned that Paki aggression in kashmir started in 1989; which is of course the point in time when Pakistan (but not India) had a nuclear bomb ready to go.

The only thing India should be doing is to work assiduously to deal as many setbacks as possible to Pak, to weaken and destroy it, while guarding against an influx of paki refugees. Anything resembling complacency will be suicidal.

There is another aspect: all evidence suggests that Afghans are essentially friends of India. Think of the ramifications of Pak (once again) being able to turn them into expendable slaves in the war against India.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 06 Feb 2010 01:58

KLNMurthy wrote:Shiv garu, there is a saying, "you can't step in the same river twice".

Meaning that the dynamics if the taliban come back to power will be different from when they first came to power. If it was (at least debatably) "not too bad" for India the first time around, it doesn't follow that the same would be the case this time.

This whole thread is being discussed on some straw called "Talibs did not do anything to India and hence we don't need to worry". If that is not true there is no use for this thread. We should first debate that and if we are convinced then we can go to the next step whatif they comeback. Otherwise we will be buiding a fantacy and justification for whatever GOI does is alway correct onlee.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 06 Feb 2010 05:23

Brahaspati hit the nail on the head. We cannot model perspectives for others the way we rationally do for ourselves. To understand pakistan one need's to understand and focus on the imperative in Ghazwa/ jihad. An aim central to both AQ/ Taliban/ LeT/ PA/ ISI. No amount of piskiology will let that get away as a core principle of Pukistans dealings with India.

Pakistan means business with India. It does not want to exist as a peaceful state neighbouring India and being a beacon of Muslim hope. It wants to devour India. Kill India. Rape India. Humiliate India. Fight India. If our planners and many Politicians/ posters here have not understood that who do we blame? Tell us where we put the blame?

Put a question on yourself. What is/ would be your response if you were in power in India instead MMS: be to nuke attack that killed 50,000/ 1 million plus Indians, destroyed a massive section of the economy..and Paki's played the same inevitable plausible deniability game and said it was launched by groups based in Afghanistan?

My response would be too hard hitting to say it here. I am interested in yours. I know Shiv ji's. Getting Taliban in Afghanistan is not going to help us one bit. It will increase the Paki plausible deniability ability, while fooling our civil society to the maximum.

India must even if it's alone, desist and walk out of talks if there's any compromise with ANY Taliban. This is for our own good. It's stupidity to think that they will be hitting the west with more vigor and leave us alone.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 06 Feb 2010 05:32

The way I see it, the Pakistan Army is the king of the hill because of its possession of nuclear weapons. If the Taliban come back to power in AFG, they have to be provided with nuclear weapons so the Pak Army and the Taliban can duke it out as to who is the natural leader. Better we provide the nukes to the Taliban and get it on our side (before the Chinese/American nukes are gifted) since the Pak Army shows no inclination of making peace with us.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 06 Feb 2010 05:43

^Idiotic. What do you think you are saying? India providing nukes to Taliban in Afghanistan? Are you DRUNK? Do you have a clue to what you just posted?

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 06 Feb 2010 05:44

Shiv wrote: Vikas Raina has said that a Taliban takeover will gradually remove all vestiges of Indic civilization from Afghanistan and convert a friendly to neutral nation into one tha is hostile to India.

Shiv: I have highlighted, above, what I think are the key words. Vikas points out to the strategic vision. From a strategic perspective, India can not sit idle till all its citizens have full stomach.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 06 Feb 2010 05:52

harbans wrote:^Idiotic. What do you think you are saying? India providing nukes to Taliban in Afghanistan? Are you DRUNK? Do you have a clue to what you just posted?

It's an argument. Explain why its wrong. I was trying to find a way in which the Taliban can continue to fight the Pak Army to deny it "strategic depth". It is a cynical course of action - no doubt - but no more cynical than the arming of Pakistan.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 06 Feb 2010 06:19

vera_k wrote:
harbans wrote:^Idiotic. What do you think you are saying? India providing nukes to Taliban in Afghanistan? Are you DRUNK? Do you have a clue to what you just posted?
It's an argument. Explain why its wrong. I was trying to find a way in which the Taliban can continue to fight the Pak Army to deny it "strategic depth". It is a cynical course of action - no doubt - but no more cynical than the arming of Pakistan.

Do you really think Pak-Army and taliban are fighting against each other? phyrring bullets and shells and killing two-three kabootars is not waging a war... all the supposedly "Big catches" are made by unkil and bakistan's national pird...

The Pathan lobby of western UP which were zamindars and which went to bakistan after partition (Descendants of Najib Khan Rohilla) makes up the baki elite today... They along with punjabi zamindars are tightly in embrace with wahabi mullahs of KSA..

Pathans and Punjabis dread of invasion from central asia, traditionally. It is said that where anger of pathan ends, love of a tajik begins.. They have been dreading this threat from scythia (now CAR) since ancient days of rigvedic war of 10 kings.

although they have problems amongst themselves (pathans and Punjabis), their insecurity vis-a-vis central asians is valid and runs deep. in case of that incursion, ganga-plains act as strategic depth for Punjabis and Pathans. it has never been vice-versa. There is strong tendency of people in that region to form one political entity time and over again (eg. Kushans, Gaznavi, Ghori, Shahi - both hindu and turk)..Now, in case of hindu and buddhist shahis, they were not really a threat to heartlands of india. But in case of kushans, ghoris, gaznavis, durranis, they always have been one. the latter three possess an additional zeal of political islam which aims at conquest and conversion of unislamic lands, in return of paradise.

Punjabis and Pathans are showing that tendency and inclination again. The irony is that GOI can't do anything today to stop this, unless it does something which is not systemic to the incumbent government. enunciate the true understanding of pakistan as its pakistan-policy and show commitment towards executing that policy.

One word of caution - India taking help of central asians to calm and discipline af-pak is antithetical. Iran's help is most welcome (a al seleucus and CM). The whole PRC thingy complicates the matter.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 06 Feb 2010 06:23

We can no longer be sure that the Talebs are purely an expression of Pashtuniat. That they will not lend themselves to be used as part of global jihad. They allowed Laden to operate and were prepared to be bombed out of power simply because of staying loyal to Laden. People can find n-number of supposed economic/real-politic excuses behind the support - as say, for example, Laden provided the money etc. But giving away the crown of Kabul when it would be real-politic to denounce Laden and pretend simple Pashtuniat "nationalism" onlee!!!

We have to understand that a section of the Afghans realize that after a long time they can glorify themselves as part of a super-Afghan identity. An identity that can give them motivation and justification to expand into neighbouring regions and extract resources from them - just as they did in historical times. If they stop only at Pakhtunistan, they are restricted to a marginal-subsistence region eternally at the mercy of trade routes and drugs. If they can take over leadership of global jihad or share in the venture - they can potentially takeover much juicer pieces of real-estate.

Not all common Afghan will think this way. But their mobilization is still possible in the name of Islamic duty and hope of loot by their elite. The nature of "intra-Muslim" conflicts is changing. The Islamic countries are all seeing a tendency towards populist Islamism under the leadership of a section of theocracy who are not averse to challenging the existing elite Muslim regimes. It is the natural outcome of desire for empowerment in the common Islamic, channelized into following theocracy led populist revolutions because of Islamic preconditioning against western style democracy.

When the Talebs come to power again in AFG, a predictable sequence of events will take place. First will be the call for reimposition of the more stricter form of the Sharia - specifically targeting educational reforms and women's rights, as well as media. Second will come increased militarization, and enhanced drug exports (a doubly satisfying weapon - it helps in making the hated "west" more decadent, while at the same time generating profits to carry out jihad). Third, a tussle with remnant tribal leadership seen as western "stooges". This time around the tribal loyalties will prove weaker than the appeal of Islamist unity - mainly because of intense corruption seen at the top fueled by "external monetary aid". Fourth, once meddlesome tribal leaders are neutralized, AFG will host again the world jihad. This time around USA will be licking its war weary legs, and potentially financially hamstrung to mount another massive campaign in AFG.

Among the other powers only Russia will have any interest in militarily facing up - China and Iran have their own reasons to stay away and play a more manipulative game.

Fifth, Talebs enegage in tussle with TSP elite and the elite splits into two. One side goes with Taleb, the other either moves base to the west or goes into safe custody in KSA. From there, the intentions and moves of the TalebPak regimes should be obvious.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 06 Feb 2010 06:35

Watch for this guy becoming a "central figure" http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/26/magaz ... .html?_r=1

Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, the talib who joined Yale

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 06 Feb 2010 06:41

The nookes of TSP are only a threat till India retaliates only against TSP. The day India has declared policy that for each nook on India 2 will fall on TSP and 3 on KSA, even the maddest of mad Talib straight from Tora Bora cave will shave and become a gentleman. Not cause of TSP getting nooked as they have anyway nothing to save, but their one and only KSA becoming unlivable for 10000 years. That's the reason why Israel has survived so far and will always will.

shiv wrote:
This is how I see it. What is the worst that Pakistan can do? IMO that is to use its entire conventional and nuclear forces against India. India is already facing that threat from the Pakistan army. How will that threat change if one of the Talibaniacs come to power?

If we can defeat the Pakistani military and survive a limited nuclear conflict - that will be true no matter who heads the Pakistan military. A change of government in Pakistan, in my view makes zero difference to the threat that India faces.
.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Feb 2010 07:00

Lots of opinions and I was considering putting down a reply to individual views regarding which I have a response, counter view or counter question. But no, it is simpler to demand of all responders the question, if you disagree with the scenario I have proposed what actions should India take NOW in anticipation of what you think will happen.

The easiest thing on earth is to hear someone out and say "I disagree with this" or "This mode of thought is wrong". I gets much more difficult to build up a scenario and put it down - open for being knocked down by others.

I believe that absence of strategic thought in India is exactly this - an unwillingness to talk about realistic and achievable responses to scenarios based on real history. I am making 3 accusations here. I am not saying that people do not know history. Too many people know history on here, but nobody is willing to take a shot at realistic outcomes and responses without succumbing to emotion and giving up at the hopelessness of it all. Most people soon collapse into laments.

To me a sense of hopelessness and lamentation are a realization that the situation that most people want to see is pretty unlikely and far fetched. What is really going to happen is not what people want, but what people fear. Fine, if we are internally afraid of the worst outcomes we still have to move forward. That is what I am demanding on here. Speak up and state those fears, but don;t just state them. State also what can realistically be done. If nothing can be done realistically, what is the expected outcome? After all - unless people commit suicide many people will have to live with a poor and less than acceptable outcome. Why not get ready for it? But get ready for what? State the outcome please.

Someone mentioned the fallacy of imagining that another person will think and behave as you do. That actually has a name - its called a cognitive trap. When you start digging too deep into piskology - one finds that one is personally suffering from some types of bias and misinformation and others suffer from other types. Nobody is exempt. This is why I believe it is important for people to put down what they think and face up to the flak that it gets as people see things in a different way. Firing flak is easy when you disagree. Taking flak is a side effect of saying what you think. But one must say it first.

So what the hell are Indians going to do as so called Indic culture and influence are gradually eliminated from the extended subcontinent? That is inevitable and I see it. Isn't it? Can we save our own asses in India from catching fire before we worry about Gandhara?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Feb 2010 07:11

Karna_A wrote:The nookes of TSP are only a threat till India retaliates only against TSP. The day India has declared policy that for each nook on India 2 will fall on TSP and 3 on KSA, even the maddest of mad Talib straight from Tora Bora cave will shave and become a gentleman. Not cause of TSP getting nooked as they have anyway nothing to save, but their one and only KSA becoming unlivable for 10000 years. That's the reason why Israel has survived so far and will always will.

This is certainly one way of dealing with the situation. Of course the use of nukes or the threat of the use of nukes falls under the usual definition of "irrational behavior". I agree with you wholeheartedly on the idea that India must begin to threaten irrational behavior as a means of modifying Pakistani behavior.

Of course this assumes that Pakis think like we do and are afraid of being hit by nukes. It has been pointed out on this thread that one must not think that the other person thinks like you. That means that a nuclear threat or even nuclear use may not scare Pakis or Talibs.

Nevertheless I believe that Pakis and talibs are scared of defeat by something - be it by djinns or Unkil or India. One way of pinging them is to aggravate by making threatening noises and seeing what response is obtained. I believe that Deepak Kapoor's recent statements fall exactly in that genre.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 06 Feb 2010 07:18

Pakistani Army is bound to win if we continue with status-quo (gathering more and more money i.e. better economy). A prosperous India is like a ripened fruit to be eaten by these looters (as they have always done from last 2000+ years. Taliban if left alone in Afghanistan will consolidate their win for at least a decade., while trying to take over Pakistan through proxy. Then they will divert their total effort against India. If Bin Laden had not attacked USA., pulling USA into Afghanistan we could already had a Talibani in control of Pakistan.

So! only way is to make sure that Indeed good Taliban is brought to power in AFGhanistan., be there for at least 20+ years

1. Negotiate the induction of Indian armed forces in Afghanistan for training, logistics and operations along with NATO., and keep couple of divisions (at least 30,000+ soldiers). Sell guns, weapons, etc to Afghani armed forces.

2. Scholarships for Bright Afghani students in India for higher studies.

3. Make sure that in the Talibani council (Shura) at least 25% of the leaders are india-centric (Shias, moderate, etc). Help them in setting up the Afghani Election commision., and couple of pollings.

4. Make sure that Afghanistan wins more medals in any games they participate around us, than Pakistan. (for example current SAF). This is humiliation for Pakjabis.

btw... Back in 1970s one of my close relatives (who was a doctor ) was sent to Kabul to work in a hospital donated by Indira Gandhi. He lived there for long time (teaching Afghanis and working in the hospital) and when battle intensified between the USA backed Muj vs. Soviet army., India abandoned the hospital and brought everybody back. Later Talibaniees used the hospital building to store their ammunition. and now we are back to square one! trying to rebuild the same old ties due to the grand old mess of our leaders who never learn from their past mistakes.

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 06 Feb 2010 07:35

I specifically did not mention that Pakis are afraid of Nookes. Maybe they are not, maybe they are. Who knows and who cares.
What I am saying is just like TSP policy that no matter who hits TSP with Nookes(maybe Israel), TSP hits India.
If India has a similar policy that no matter who hits India(TSP or talib), India would hit KSA, it would stop even the cave dweller Talib in its place, as the capital and heart of TSP or AfPak is Riyadh and not Islamabad.
That's Israel's tactic to avoid a Nook on it as just one nook is enough for Israel as most of Israel is actually just the coastal plain less than 200 kms where 80% of pop lives.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Coastal_Plain
Doesn't matter whether its Hezbulah or hamas, or LET , JUD or whatever.

Once nook threat is neutralized thus by bracketing with KSA, it does not really matter if Talibs are in Afpak or Pak.
Few terror incidents cannot stop Indian civilization as long as India keeps on strengthening its Internal security.
In fact, it's outside terror that keeps on uniting Indians and in a way its good or else politicians like Krishna Menon will be in-charge for ever.

shiv wrote:
Of course this assumes that Pakis think like we do and are afraid of being hit by nukes. It has been pointed out on this thread that one must not think that the other person thinks like you. That means that a nuclear threat or even nuclear use may not scare Pakis or Talibs.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Feb 2010 07:37

Chiron wrote: although they have problems amongst themselves (pathans and Punjabis), their insecurity vis-a-vis central asians is valid and runs deep. in case of that incursion, ganga-plains act as strategic depth for Punjabis and Pathans. it has never been vice-versa. There is strong tendency of people in that region to form one political entity time and over again (eg. Kushans, Gaznavi, Ghori, Shahi - both hindu and turk)..Now, in case of hindu and buddhist shahis, they were not really a threat to heartlands of india. But in case of kushans, ghoris, gaznavis, durranis, they always have been one. the latter three possess an additional zeal of political islam which aims at conquest and conversion of unislamic lands, in return of paradise.

Punjabis and Pathans are showing that tendency and inclination again. The irony is that GOI can't do anything today to stop this, unless it does something which is not systemic to the incumbent government. enunciate the true understanding of pakistan as its pakistan-policy and show commitment towards executing that policy.

One word of caution - India taking help of central asians to calm and discipline af-pak is antithetical. Iran's help is most welcome (a al seleucus and CM). The whole PRC thingy complicates the matter.

Very lucid summation IMO.

But the history you have summarized documents continuously changing boundaries. To me that means one of two things for the future:
1) We accept that changing boundaries (or perhaps shrinking boundaries for Indian influence) are inevitable
or
2) We decide that history needs a change of course by taking steps to ensure that the boundaries of India as we know them today are stabilised rigidly for the near term future with a view to expansion in the longer term

The latter course requires a temporary acceptance of Indian boundaries along a militarily defendable line and not compromising on that unless it is for expansion, while allowing Pakistan. Afghanistan and CAR to change their boundaries. What this amounts to is that we do not need to give a dam about who runs Afghanistan as long as we can take steps to protect our current boundaries without shrinkage.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 06 Feb 2010 07:42

So what the hell are Indians going to do as so called Indic culture and influence are gradually eliminated from the extended subcontinent? That is inevitable and I see it. Isn't it? Can we save our own asses in India from catching fire before we worry about Gandhara?

For starters....
1. Make a point to never secede territory to Pakistan or China.
2. Identify a circle of countries on the rim of Indian Ocean. There are currently two Ministers of the State in Ministry of External Affairs. Make one responsible for these rim countries; and make one responsible for handling China, Pakistan & Afghanistan; and induct another one to handle rest of the World. If necessary after 5 years can add more Ministers of State.

But this requires the leadership to identify what India wants to do

Last but not least do something about this website: http://www.mea.gov.in/ ; while they are at it maybe ask an intern to look at this website as well: http://fsi.mea.gov.in/

From MEA's website:

Career
A Foreign Service Officer begins his career abroad as a Third Secretary and is promoted to Second Secretary as soon as he is confirmed in service. Subsequent promotions are to the levels of First Secretary, Counsellor, Minister and Ambassador/High Commissioner/Permanent Representative. Officers can also be posted to Indian Consulates abroad where the hierarchy (going upwards) is Vice-Consul, Consul and Consul General.

The hierarchy at the Ministry of External Affairs includes 6 stages: Under Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Director, Joint Secretary, Additional Secretary and Secretary.

Functions
As a career diplomat, the Foreign Service Officer is required to project India’s interests, both at home and abroad on a wide variety of issues. These include bilateral political and economic cooperation, trade and investment promotion, cultural interaction, press and media liaison as well as a whole host of multilateral issues.

The functions of an Indian diplomat may be summarized as:

* Representing India in its Embassies, High Commissions, Consulates, and Permanent Missions to multilateral organisations like UN;
* Protecting India’s national interests in the country of his/her posting;
* Promoting friendly relations with the receiving state as also its people, including NRI / PIOs;
* Reporting accurately on developments in the country of posting which are likely to influence the formulation of India’s policies;
* Negotiating agreements on various issues with the authorities of the receiving state; and
* Extending consular facilities to foreigners and Indian nationals abroad.
* At home, Ministry of External Affairs is responsible for all aspects of external relations. Territorial divisions deal with bilateral political and economic work while functional divisions look after policy planning, multilateral organizations, regional groupings, legal matters, disarmament, protocol, consular, Indian Diaspora, press and publicity, administration and other aspects.

See:
1. Not enough diplomats

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 06 Feb 2010 10:20

If the Taliban returns, then the geographical extent of Pakistan would encompass Afghanistan; even if it is not declared territorially as Pakistan property. Pakistan, the failed state, would get a financial fillip since it would then directly control the illegal poppy cultivation and sale (they indirectly still control, but it is in the hands of private individuals and military satraps). This would thus assist Pakistan to rise from their begging bowl culture and may give them some freedom of action to perpetuate heinous crimes against the world; more so, India.

The biggest issue would be that if Taliban was in governance, it would release their ‘fighters’ to plague India in Kashmir and elsewhere. Unemployed, disgruntled, illogically charged with religious frenzy, such ‘fighters’ channelized to wreak havoc and run amuck, away from Pakistan, would be a huge problem for all, more so, for India.

As it is ‘the surplus to the establishment’ is in Kashmir, and so with no problems in the NWFP, Afghanistan and Swat, they will swarm into Kashmir and India. The terrorists in Kashmir are basically Talibans with the plethora of foreign Islamic individuals including from Pakistan. The local terrorists are used basically as porters, guides and gathering intelligence.

It would be worth noting that Terrorism in Kashmir started in the 80s but it intensified once the Taliban took over Afghanistan. This freed much of the Mujhs, who were thus unemployed and required to be kept busy lest they created problems in Pakistan. Frenzied with religious zeal they were ideal for the Holy War in Kashmir - the war of a thousand cuts. That is where the first brush India had with the terrorists (Taliban unemployed being the frontliners)

Strategic depth is a term in military literature that refers, broadly speaking, to the distances between the front line or battle sectors and the combatants’ industrial core areas, capital cities, heartlands, and other key centres of population or military production. Therefore, one wonders what strategic depth is achieved by Pakistan by having influence in Afghanistan. As I see it, it is hype to build a bogey as to how important Afghanistan is to Pakistan and thereby nullifying Indian interest in Afghanistan and declare it as Indian interference and hegemonic desires!

By having influence in Afghanistan, Pakistan can dismantle the terrorist training camps in Pakistan and shift it to Afghanistan and sit back smug and pretend she is clean and earn brownies from the world.

Let those battling the Taliban stew in their own juice and let it continue as long as it can since if it is solved, then it would release the Pakistani Army to once again stew up issues on their Eastern borders as also release the unemployed Taliban to wreak havoc inside Kashmir. Currently, the Taliban is also depleting the Pakistan Army of trained soldiers by making them become martyrs.

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 06 Feb 2010 11:08

for a moment if we think that the cold start doctrine should be executed from 2 different borders? the Indo-Pak and the Af-Pak borders, the need of the hour is to strengthen the Afgan army and allow for sharing of bases and provision them with common mil equipment to use when the need arises

In this case don't we need more IBGs?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Feb 2010 17:36

RayC wrote:If the Taliban returns, then the geographical extent of Pakistan would encompass Afghanistan; even if it is not declared territorially as Pakistan property. Pakistan, the failed state, would get a financial fillip since it would then directly control the illegal poppy cultivation and sale (they indirectly still control, but it is in the hands of private individuals and military satraps). This would thus assist Pakistan to rise from their begging bowl culture and may give them some freedom of action to perpetuate heinous crimes against the world; more so, India.

The biggest issue would be that if Taliban was in governance, it would release their ‘fighters’ to plague India in Kashmir and elsewhere. Unemployed, disgruntled, illogically charged with religious frenzy, such ‘fighters’ channelized to wreak havoc and run amuck, away from Pakistan, would be a huge problem for all, more so, for India.

As it is ‘the surplus to the establishment’ is in Kashmir, and so with no problems in the NWFP, Afghanistan and Swat, they will swarm into Kashmir and India. The terrorists in Kashmir are basically Talibans with the plethora of foreign Islamic individuals including from Pakistan. The local terrorists are used basically as porters, guides and gathering intelligence.

It would be worth noting that Terrorism in Kashmir started in the 80s but it intensified once the Taliban took over Afghanistan. This freed much of the Mujhs, who were thus unemployed and required to be kept busy lest they created problems in Pakistan. Frenzied with religious zeal they were ideal for the Holy War in Kashmir - the war of a thousand cuts. That is where the first brush India had with the terrorists (Taliban unemployed being the frontliners)

Strategic depth is a term in military literature that refers, broadly speaking, to the distances between the front line or battle sectors and the combatants’ industrial core areas, capital cities, heartlands, and other key centres of population or military production. Therefore, one wonders what strategic depth is achieved by Pakistan by having influence in Afghanistan. As I see it, it is hype to build a bogey as to how important Afghanistan is to Pakistan and thereby nullifying Indian interest in Afghanistan and declare it as Indian interference and hegemonic desires!

By having influence in Afghanistan, Pakistan can dismantle the terrorist training camps in Pakistan and shift it to Afghanistan and sit back smug and pretend she is clean and earn brownies from the world.

Let those battling the Taliban stew in their own juice and let it continue as long as it can since if it is solved, then it would release the Pakistani Army to once again stew up issues on their Eastern borders as also release the unemployed Taliban to wreak havoc inside Kashmir. Currently, the Taliban is also depleting the Pakistan Army of trained soldiers by making them become martyrs.

Thank you RayC, and sorry for quoting the whole post. i believe you have managed to bring out the fallacies and mistaken assumptions in my first post. I have to accept your points as a seriously destructive critique of the idea that a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan will be harmless to India.

So what to do?

As I see it, if India is not ready to wage war with Pakistan, the only other soft option is to beg the US to help and bandwagon with the US. Or to do the latter and prepare for the former?

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 06 Feb 2010 17:41

On the brighter side, there might be a price reduction for opium if Taliban comes back to power in Afghanistan.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 06 Feb 2010 17:56

So what to do?

Shiv Ji, i think India has no option but to do the following:

1. Stop moronically parroting the cliche 'Stable Pakistan is in India's interests'
2. Stop saying Pakistan always will have to exist as India's neighbour.
3. Start building an opinion pool within the establishment that supports a breakup of this abomination into Sindh, Baluchistan etc.

Since we are starting talks and Baluchistan was mentioned in SeS, why not raise rights issues there when Paki's raise the K word for a change? I can imagine the Paki delegations going completely ballistic, walking off in a rage etc etc..Why not sponsor resolutions in UN for self determination in Baluchistan when these folks raise the K word.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 06 Feb 2010 18:42

shiv wrote:Thank you RayC, and sorry for quoting the whole post. i believe you have managed to bring out the fallacies and mistaken assumptions in my first post. I have to accept your points as a seriously destructive critique of the idea that a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan will be harmless to India.

So what to do?

As I see it, if India is not ready to wage war with Pakistan, the only other soft option is to beg the US to help and bandwagon with the US. Or to do the latter and prepare for the former?

There are couple of time tested options. As I wrote the rollback happening in my post above, India also can do certain rollbacks. India needs to nurture non-pasthun warriors of Afghanistan especially those of erstwhile Northern Alliance. That way India will have atleast some defence from the otherside. India need improve/upgrade our military alliances with Tajiks and may be we need to put some boots there. Regarding supplies, India should outsource to Russians for the supplies as it may difficult to get from India to Tajikisthan.

Return of Taliban is the return of glorious-ISI and glorious-TSPA era. India has certain lesson learnt from that era and can do certain thing preemptively.