A_Gupta wrote:If IS directly threatens Russian and Chinese interests, can we discuss and understand (on the ISIS thread), what, if anything, these two countries are doing in the motherland of ISIS - Syria, Iraq - to curb IS?
If it is "IS in Afghanistan" that directly threatens Russian and Chinese interests, how is it different from "Taliban in Afghanistan"? Perhaps we can discuss this here or on the Afghan thread (if there is anything to discuss)?
IS is only a direct threat to China if it becomes a significant force in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
For the Chinese the number one thing was always keeping jihad and weapons out of Xinjiang. Number two was economically integrating western China with the global economy.
The Afghan Taliban never rejected the idea of nation-states, or the basic idea of the international system which meant China and them had a common language and could cut deals. The Taliban if anything had more of an issue with the Pakistani border than the Chinese one.
I'm not sure if the IS franchise that's opening up in the region shares exactly the world view and operating system of the original, but if they are anything like the originals there can be transactions, but anything mutual understanding will be much harder.
In particular successful IS growth will threaten CPEC and everything its supposed to achieve for the Chinese in terms of regional stability and growth, and the stability and growth of Xinjiang which is again what they really care about.
Why, hello there internet stranger! Good to see you lurk in the shadows.
Here are some thoughts on both your above posts:
1. In both IS and Taliban cases (or for that matter the LeT/JuD/HuM/blahblah) a far more serious claim can be made now that they are proxy arms of the bakistani government than ever before. This is due to the events surrounding the now departed dear leader mullah omar. It runs counter to any claims of organic development of either the new talipaan or any IS nomenclature. Our dear nonNATO allies are prone to name changes, and fake operations whenever coalition support fund payments are in danger. I posit that the whole show is for US populace consumption only. Neither talipaan nor IS/Bakistaan will ever be a threat to china. Not even Russia, if CSF aid goes away.
2. Talipaan never had any intention of forcing the boundary issue with pakistan. They never established firm control of chunks of northern afghanistan. This again, was a show, only to play to the US gallery that talipaan have some independent elements.
3. The CPEK, one road/silk canal/red river/whatever through bakistan is less important to china than south china sea. They are going to put their eggs (in shape of submarines, 20k ton coastguard cutters, aircraft carriers) in the sea to expand first. The bakistani road plies no traffic today, and thus it shall remainfor another decade. Even this was based on the chinese economic bubble not unpredictably deflating, rest of the world economy continuing to do business with china regardless, AND the middle east actually not disappearing off the face of the earth. None of these are certainties anymore. If IS from iraq, syria or yemen were to make geadway into either the emirates or the southee arapia, a lot of equations will change. The horn has ethiopia, somalia,and yemen now. And egypt isnt quite a havenof peace. The chinese cant get to europe without access there, bakistan is a long long far belated afterthought. Lets see any elements of that $43B first materialise.
Lastly, this army chief too shall a. retire, b. pecome bresident. And that will change in a meaningful way how bakistan functions. So the chiness are barely in the picture here. The bakistanis have $20B and oil, even though mostly free, is heading to free for anyone. The only "heat" given this freedom will be on the insia bakistan border. Theafghanistani government is pluant enough that whatever noises the IS talipaan etc make will be limited to southern afghanistan and the occassional foray into kabul.
It is not the right time to expend your soosai mujahids, far too many others are vying for attention, so the bakistanis will simply play to their domestic audience and distract them with their moral and diplomatic commitment tothe core issue, as they always have. Everything else is simply a money making scheme.