Afghanistan News & Discussion - April 2016

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 25 Nov 2017 14:25

Just to be clear: eventually this will involve screwing over Indian interests. But we are still some way off all of that. Next elections are some time away. If you look back at what happened after Ghani came to power and what he was saying to TSP about india you'll have a better understanding......

The fact that some of this has got you all so upset is probably why it's not in public domain.

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 25 Nov 2017 20:24

shtyamd: The fact that some of this has got you all so upset is probably why it's not in public domain.

Not upset. Just amused that you write drivel because you think your "source" is a fount of truth, when the story is self-contradictory, when considered against other evidence. Why would India offer any cooperation on Af-Pak if the "cooperation" undercuts India's interests? The current PM and his advisors are hardly this naive to a accept and support such advice from the babucracy.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 25 Nov 2017 21:28

* Delete *

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 25 Nov 2017 23:32

shyamd: Look sh!t head, why don't you quote the 'drivel' and the bit where I said GoI accepted anything... rather than throw insults - Have you no shame? clearly you haven't been taught basic etiquette.

etiquette?

why all this anger, your lordship? Unhappy at your stupid nonsense being called out? you spew some ridiculous drivel about India cooperating with its adversaries to its own detriment, making India's acceptance of such a "strategic alliance" with the US in this domain highly unlikely. Regardless, no need to get hot under the collar --perhaps you need to be more skeptical of your "highly placed sources", yes?

The pakis have always blackmailed the US with their "nukes may fall into the hands of terrorist" scam...when the terrorists are running their country. USA has been sacrificing Afghan (and Indian) interests at the altar of Pakistani interests under the charade of preserving their "supply line to the troops"...when they deliberately undercut their central asian supply line to afghanisthan by destroying their relations with russia in the past 8 years.

And if the GoI has not accepted any of this, there is no value of this information, because this is not the first time the USA has screwed India and Afghanisthan to further Pakistan's interests in Afghanisthan. This is not the first time the US and China and Pakistan would have met to "solve afghanisthan" either.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Nov 2017 00:15

* Deleted *

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 26 Nov 2017 01:11

shyamd, Yes it's about basic etiquette and debating skills (you just proved my point that you have no shame and have no idea what basic etiquette is....I'm sorry its taken someone on BR to explain this to you...)..

Bite me, your lordship. Fine etiquette is beside the point here, if you are going to make silly claims that are vague and uninteresting. Anyone can come around on a public forum pretending to have talked to informed sources, and make any claim they want. Other people are free to point out that the claims are not interesting or otherwise highly dubious and does not withstand scrutiny.

here is news from a month ago with exactly this claim -- that Pak, China, and US were to meet on Afghanisthan. Clearly, nothing much came out of it, as has been the case for years.

link

and Pakistan and China and Russia meeting on Afghanisthan for a year ago.

link

Afghan PM Ghani and Indian PM Modi met in New Delhi just before a recent visit by US defence sec to New Delhi. None of this is interesting, since nothing on the ground has changed -- India is working with Afghanisthan, and US and China continue to work with Pakistan, and are now joined by Russia.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Nov 2017 02:21

* Deleted *

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 26 Nov 2017 05:52

shyamd: Thanks for selectively posting links to meetings and provide zero regional context at the time meetings occur and not comment on any outcomes/key discussion points.. then magically claim nothing changed on the ground.

What exactly has changed on the ground? What has changed in the regional context in the past month? Do tell. I am sure it will all be enlightening to everyone.

You have been writing half-baked nonsense for a while now, though it used to be about the middle east in the past, most of the time regurgitating stuff from stratfor or some other source , which usually turn out to be utterly false. Now, you seem to have gone to etiquette school and learnt how to repeat falsehoods very politely, not to mention demanding high etiquette of all and sundry. Extremely charming, but still wrong.

And meanwhile....

ADB loans to afghanisthan

GoA collects 20M$ tax from tobacco sales

Afghan Lithium for German automotive industry

link

US and EU policy on afghanisthan seems to have diverged significantly, and the US is on the "wrong" paki side of the equation as usual. At least the EU, like India, is taking positive steps to boost the afghan economy.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 Nov 2017 23:58

* Deleted *

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 27 Nov 2017 00:02

shyamd: < rhetorical nonsense deleted>

So you just made random statements about a "change in the ground situation" but don't really have much to support that statement. Summarily, you have nothing useful to add to match your claims of some deep insight from "sources". Very nice. If only you focussed as much on facts and matters of substance related to the topic as you seem to be on "etiquette", like a good old poxford-educated brown sahib. wot wot.

Meanwhile, Iran meets with Afghanisthan officials

Iranian FM Meets High-Ranking Afghan, Latvian Officials in Tehran

He also referred to cooperation between Iran and Afghanistan and the necessity for accelerating it in different political and economic fields, stressing the importance of confrontation against the spread of threats and danger of the ISIL in the region, including Afghanistan, given the terrorist group's recent failures in Iraq and Syria.

Afghanisthan seems to be diversifying its partnerships outside of its relations with USA (with Iran, India and EU countries). US seems to seek pakistan in a central position when it comes to Afghanisthan, notwithstanding bogus statements outraging about the release of Hafiz saeed.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 27 Nov 2017 01:53

periaswamy wrote:
shyamd: < rhetorical nonsense deleted>
So you just made random statements about a "change in the ground situation" but don't really have much to support that statement.

Errr.... please quote the said random statements. It was you who started talking about "no change on the ground" without offering any evidence whatsoever.. hence why I responded to say.. just coz you say there is no change doesn't mean there is no change on the ground (as I said you seem to have your head shoved up where the sun doesn't shine preventing you from seeing anything).

Summarily, you have nothing useful to add to match your claims of some deep insight from "sources". Very nice.

LOL! Another golden post with more accusations but ZERO evidence. stop chatting Sh!t and lets talk about the "drivel" and "nonsense" you were claiming I'm posting... stop p*ssyfooting around - come up with all the quotes of "nonsense" and "drivel"... Why are you skirting it every time you are called out? You have the bravado to preach about substance but you can't even follow it...

Ah yes... anyone who asks for a civilised debate based on FACTS and you run for cover like a little p*ssy saying "Poxford" "brown sahib" ...

when all that was asked for is a little basic etiquette (which you still can't seem to comprehend

).. what a disgrace to humanity. As I said earlier - empty vessels make the loudest noise.

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 27 Nov 2017 03:38

Meanwhile, my "informed sources" at NBC say that US is tripling its number of bombs dropped on afghanisthan. After all the bombast from pentagon and the US State dept. about Pakistan being the problem, same old nonsense from the US..talk tough for pakis while allowing them a central place in US afghan policy.

U.S. on track to triple bombs dropped on Afghanistan against Taliban

Nicholson has set a two-year target of getting the security situation under control, with a goal of 80 percent of the population under the control of the U.S.-backed Afghan government — a figure he described as a “critical mass” to “drive the enemy to irrelevance.”

same old nonsense the US has been saying for a decade now.

The improving security situation in Iraq and Syria had also allowed a shift in airpower to Afghanistan, he said.

In August, the Pentagon acknowledged that the U.S. military had thousands more troops on the ground in Afghanistan than they had ever reported to the public. The Pentagon deployed more than 3,000 more troops to the war zone as part of the Trump administration’s new South Asia strategy.

After supporting ISIS and losing the ground war to Russian backed groups, the US apparently has more "airpower" for afghanisthan. seems like a shift in focus out of syria, so "victory" has been declared in syria, just like it was declared in Iraq and Afghanisthan earlier.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Nov 2017 19:56

shyamd & periaswami: enough is enough. Now, stop.

komal · Post by **komal** » 27 Nov 2017 20:17

periaswamy wrote:
Nicholson has set a two-year target of getting the security situation under control, with a goal of 80 percent of the population under the control of the U.S.-backed Afghan government — a figure he described as a “critical mass” to “drive the enemy to irrelevance.”
same old nonsense the US has been saying for a decade now.

After supporting ISIS and losing the ground war to Russian backed groups, the US apparently has more "airpower" for afghanisthan. seems like a shift in focus out of syria, so "victory" has been declared in syria, just like it was declared in Iraq and Afghanisthan earlier.

This is actually frighteningly reminiscent of what I heard in the 1960s regarding Vietnam.

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 27 Nov 2017 21:35

komal: This is actually frighteningly reminiscent of what I heard in the 1960s regarding Vietnam.

Of course, it did not help the US win the vietnam war back then, and is unlikely to help them now.

SSridharji, sorry. my bad. cleaned up my posts.

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 28 Nov 2017 20:02

US has "new approach" with India-pakistan apparently

The US govt. must consist of the lowest IQ imbeciles or they must think Indians are a bunch of morons.

The US govt. is working with Pakistan to "deny safe havens in Afghanisthan" it seems

--- like it has worked so well in the past decade.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 29 Nov 2017 06:12

periaswamy wrote:The US govt. must consist of the lowest IQ imbeciles or they must think Indians are a bunch of morons.

The US govt. is working with Pakistan to "deny safe havens in Afghanisthan" it seems --- like it has worked so well in the past decade.

The more things change, the more they remain the same..If 9/11 coudn't change America policy what why would Afghanistan?

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 29 Nov 2017 06:49

Kashi: If 9/11 coudn't change America policy what why would Afghanistan?

Right, and this is being done at the loss of a great number of american lives and 100s of billions of $s. This new "shift" is just another data point to support the notion that staying is the goal for the US, not a means to some other goal. Fighting the GOAT or terror or stabilizing afghanisthan are all just a bogus feint to distract from their real intention for South/East/Central Asia and East Europe, period. Afghanisthan allows them to be able to stand in the cross roads of those regions and create trouble with the help of the rentier state, in the name of stabilizing afghanisthan. I mean, there has to be a reason why these scumbags in DC are pretending that Pakistan is central to "stabilizing" Afghanisthan, when it is obvious that Pakistan's "strategeric depth" is all about destabilizing Afghanisthan. The excuse of "supply line" to Afghanisthan is perfect for this purpose.

arun · Post by **arun** » 29 Nov 2017 07:48

X Posted from the Pakistani Role In Global Terrorism thread.

CNN reports that US General, John Nicholson says that senior leadership of Afghan Mohammadden belief based group, Taliban, are living in comfort in the Mohammadden Terrorism fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan on the proceeds of illicit narcotics trade:

Top US general says Taliban 'living in comfort' in Pakistan

arun · Post by **arun** » 29 Nov 2017 08:33

Slowly and steadily Afghanistan’s ability to resist economic blockade threat by the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan, gains strength.

Close on the heels of the opening of the India-Iran-Afghanistan trade corridor via Cha Bahar port, the Lapis Lazuli Route / Corridor that will connect Afghanistan directly to Europe and completely by passes the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan, inches forward:

Lapis Lazuli Nations To Form Three Technical Working Groups

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Nov 2017 08:46

Chabahar port ready, next stage for India - The Hindu

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani will inaugurate the first phase of the Chabahar port development project on Sunday, with senior Afghan and Indian Ministers travelling for the event, diplomatic sources said here [New Delhi] on Tuesday.

The External Affairs Ministry would not confirm who would represent India at the inaugration ceremony, but Iranian officials said they expected Road Transport and Shipping Minister Nitin Gadkari would travel to Chabahar for the event.

“The building of Phase 1 of the Chabahar port has been completed by the Iranian side,” an official said. “President Rouhani will inaugurate the port with all regional beneficiaries and neighbouring countries.”

Iranian media quoted President Rouhani as saying that the port “will enhance trade in the region”, with a final aim to connect not just to Afghanistan via rail but also to the 7,200-km International North-South Transport Corridor to Russia.

Iran’s parliament, or Majlis , recently ratified the trilateral trade agreement signed by Prime Minister Narenda Modi, President Rouhani and Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani in May 2016, officials said.

The inauguration of the port on Sunday will effectively pave the way for India to carry forward the next phase of construction and development of two berths for its use, particularly for trade with Afghanistan. Next, the government, which has committed $500 million to the port project, will develop a free-trade area around the port, and finally will complete the loop with a $1.6-billion railway line to Zahedan.

India has already completed the Zaranj-Delaram highway in Afghanistan, which would facilitate the trade to Kabul and eventually beyond to Central Asia. Mr. Gadkari, who visited Iran in August, said the first part of India’s construction would be finished in 2018.

At present, India is using the port’s existing commercial route to transport more than 1.1 million tonnes of wheat to Afghanistan, of which the first consignment of 15,000 tonnes from the Kandla port came to Zaranj, via Chabahar, on November 11.

arun · Post by **arun** » 29 Nov 2017 13:04

Article on Sahid Beheshti Port at Cha Bahar from the Iranian financial newspaper Financial tribune:

Super-Large Container Ships to Dock in Iran's Chabahar Port

arun · Post by **arun** » 03 Dec 2017 19:33

X Posted from the Terroristan thread.

Extract dealing with what the US Secretary of Defense General James Mattis (Retd) had to say of the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan just prior to his visit there.

Gen. Mattis dodges responding to a question on what leverage the US can bring to bear to bring its Major Non NATO Ally to heel.

News Transcript
Media Availability with Secretary Mattis En Route to Egypt
Press Operations
Dec. 1, 2017 ………………………………

Q: On Pakistan, General Nicholson said, recently, that nothing has changed with Pakistan, in regards to the new South Asia strategy. Were there some steps that you are looking for Pakistan to do, to help with Afghanistan...

SEC. MATTIS: In Afghanistan, we have heard from Pakistan leaders that they do not support terrorism. So I expect to see that sort of action reflected in their policies. They have said that they do not support havens for any terrorists, and Pakistan has taken significant casualties -- both innocent people and their army -- significant casualties from them. So we expect them to act in their own best interest, and in support of peace and regional stability. …………………….

Q: So on Pakistan -- on Pakistan, this has been going on a decade. You've been trying to get -- you -- the United States has been trying to get more cooperation into FATA on the borders. What leverage do you have, 10 years into this, to force compliance?

SEC. MATTIS: What was the last one?

Q: What -- what leverage do you have? You've cut off, like, $600 million to their coalition support fund in the last two years. You've got another $400 million being reviewed. What leverage do you have to compel them to act beyond what they’ve already done?

SEC. MATTIS: Tony, as I said earlier, they -- they have had many of their innocent people killed. They've had many of their soldiers killed and wounded. And the bottom line is that Pakistan has to act in its own best interest. They know this. In many cases, they are. But what we're looking for is to broaden the common ground and make certain that no terrorist organization is seen as able to operate from a haven there.

There's plenty of things our two countries do together, there's plenty of things the international community and many other nations do with them. And remember that 39 nations have their troops on the ground in Afghanistan, fighting this enemy. And those are 39 very important nations. If you look at their -- their roles on the world stage, their economies, their military capabilities.

So we're looking to make common cause with them. There's plenty of -- of collaborative areas, right now, still in effect. There's been some areas that have -- we have lost over the years, because of -- of disagreements about what we need to do. So this is an effort by the new -- by the American administration, to go in and set the conditions for future collaboration that leads to reconciliation in Afghanistan and a denial of safe havens for any terrorist group that would attack anyone in the region or elsewhere in the world, which a number of countries have suffered from.

Let's -- let's go to off the record, now, OK? Because I really do have to leave here in just a couple of minutes.

From the US DoD website:

Clicky

arun · Post by **arun** » 04 Dec 2017 08:05

Good to see India’s efforts to provide Afghanistan with alternate sea port access that completely bypasses the Islamic Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan via Chabahar in Iran so as to mitigate the consequences of any future blockade by Pakistan that targets Afghanistan, steadily moving forward.

Looking forward to Afghanistan carrying out significantly more aggressive counter moves to stand up to any bellicose behaviour on the part of the Islamic Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan as the India induced ability of the Islamic Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan to blockade Afghanistan ebbs.

The Joint Statement of Afghanistan, India and Iran Trilateral Meeting on Implementation of Chabahar Agreement follows:

December 03, 2017

The 2nd Ministerial level trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, India and Iran to discuss the implementation of Trilateral Agreement on Establishment of International Transport and Transit Corridor was held at Chabahar, Iran on 3 December 2017. The Minister of Roads and Urban Development of the Islamic Republic of Iran H.E Dr. Abbas Ahmed Akhoundi, Minister of Commerce and Industries of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan H.E. Mr. HumayoonRasaw and the Minister of State for Shipping of the Republic of India H.E. Mr. P Radhakrishnan led the respective delegations.

The three Ministers welcomed the inauguration of Phase-1 of the Chabahar Port by the President of Iran earlier in the day.

The Ministers recalled the decisions taken at the last trilateral meeting that was held in New Delhi in September 2016, and expressed satisfaction on the completion of the ratification procedures of the Trilateral Agreement by Afghanistan and India. They welcomed the steps taken by Iranian Majles to complete the ratification process.

The Ministers discussed the next steps for full implementation of the Agreement and moving towards its operationalization. Towards this endeavor, it was decided to finalize protocols related to transport and transit, ports, customs procedures and consular affairs. It was also decided to convene an Expert level meeting of senior officials of the three countries at the earliest.

Reiterating the importance of Chabahar as a hub for regional economic connectivity and their commitment to work towards this objective, the Ministers commended the joint efforts of the three countries in the recent successful transit of wheat from India to Afghanistan through Chabahar. It was also reiterated to organize a connectivity event involving all stakeholders at Chabahar at the earliest so as to increase awareness about the new opportunities offered by Chabahar Port.

The Ministers agreed that an integrated development of connectivity infrastructure including Ports, Road and Rail networks would open up greater opportunities for regional market access and contribute towards the economic integration and benefit of the three countries and the region.

From the website of our Ministry of External Affairs:

Joint Statement of Afghanistan, India and Iran Trilateral Meeting on Implementation of Chabahar Agreement

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 08 Dec 2017 23:45

shyamd wrote:
shyamd wrote:Pak is fretting because India may be asked for boots on ground and joint ops with NATO. Hectic activity/lobbying between Beijing & Riyad. PRC was asked to cover/deploy in FATA/NWFP. Can't see how it is conceivable.
Just to provide an update on this. Spoke to someone who is a go-between between the players (US, PRC, TSP, Tehran, GoI, Kabul, Taleban).

It is official - GoI has signed a major strategic security partnership with the US. GOI/US not making too much noise about it. All decisions are in coordination with GoI

The quoted action was done by Trump admin to get TSP to the table - its worked. GHQ told my source "Tell Trump admin we will be a part of peace talks".

Basically, the plan was to use Indian troop threat. TSP now willing to talk. Additional NATO troops is to send message that the powers will not allow Taliban win.

Plan is to use the quadrilateral of US PRC TSP AFG to work out a peace deal in the future. US PRC will agree GOI influence doesn't exist. But at present nothing on the cards - this is how people think it will get solved.

Next AFG Presidents may run on a 'peace' ticket. There'll be an effort on peace soon. Deal with Hekmatyar was done in Delhi by this gentleman.

India - Pak issue: Beijing doesn't like what TSP is doing but has no choice but to prevent TSP getting isolated. They view TSP = NoKo. If TSP regime changes then PRC is worried it'll be anti PRC - the same excuse used for NoKo. PRC has no choice but to back TSP.

Issue with Pak is that no nation was willing to deal with TSP-ISI. 'Too Nuke to Fail' is the term used.

Tie the above to the US brokered deal to allow access to Khulbushan Jadhav. US has forced the new rounds of talks/concessions

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 09 Dec 2017 03:52

What sort of concessions are we talking of?

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 09 Dec 2017 04:50

shyamd wrote:
Tie the above to the US brokered deal to allow access to Khulbushan Jadhav. US has forced the new rounds of talks/concessions

No, Pakistan has forced new rounds of talks/concessions by kidnapping Jadhav from Iran in the first place. US has facilitated that process, no doubt, but in the end it is exactly the same Pak-US double teaming we have always seen.

Pak commits a terrorist act (abducting Jadhav) and gains a hostage as leverage. Then James Mattis, playing the "hostage negotiatior", quietly persuades GOI to give in to Pak's ransom demands, all the while mouthing niceties about how US and India are strategic partners who will never, ever negotiate with terrorists.

Ack-thhoo.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 09 Dec 2017 04:54

^ I wonder what story Trump Administration sold to GOI to convince us to fall victim to this scam. No doubt something about how China is gaining influence in Pakistan, and it's better for India that America retains influence in Pakistan, so India should help America retain such influence by rewarding Pakistan's terrorist blackmail and giving Slumbad what it wants in a "compromise" brokered by Mattis.

In fact, do we know that Jadhav (while working on Chahbahar with the Iranian govt) wasn't actually picked up and handed over to the Pakis by Culinary Institute Assets? That would work out great for Washington on multiple counts, wouldn't it? India-Iran cooperation stalled, Pakistan given a bargaining chip, America getting back into the good graces of an increasingly Cheen-dominated Islamabad by helping force India to the negotiating table.

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 09 Dec 2017 05:21

I have not read any news about India resuming talks/negotiations with pakistan, let alone giving concessions to the pakis. Mattis was going around wearing pin of Pakistan, so some US sucking up is going on. India's work with Afghanistan involves Iran, and given Trump's anti-Iran stance, I don't see how the US can insert itself into India's afghanisthan policy.

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 09 Dec 2017 11:44

Rudradev wrote:^ I wonder what story Trump Administration sold to GOI to convince us to fall victim to this scam. No doubt something about how China is gaining influence in Pakistan, and it's better for India that America retains influence in Pakistan, so India should help America retain such influence by rewarding Pakistan's terrorist blackmail and giving Slumbad what it wants in a "compromise" brokered by Mattis.

In fact, do we know that Jadhav (while working on Chahbahar with the Iranian govt) wasn't actually picked up and handed over to the Pakis by Culinary Institute Assets? That would work out great for Washington on multiple counts, wouldn't it? India-Iran cooperation stalled, Pakistan given a bargaining chip, America getting back into the good graces of an increasingly Cheen-dominated Islamabad by helping force India to the negotiating table.

Rdevji, I respectfully disagree :

1) Lets just go by what you wrote, that Yadav was kidnapped by Culinary Institute Agents and given to porkis (completely possible) however he was abducted some time in May 2016 as per reports and right now it is end of 2017. What massa gained from 16 to 17 with porkis is completely out in open. And with PAF chief announcing openly to give order to shoot drones you can say where the things stand (Previously no one from military has announced any measures against massa dronacharya), and afghans are pounding porkis everyday from other side. With respect to India obliging is also not true because we have upped the pressure ever since the revenge was taken via Nepal where one of the members of that team was taken away.

2) At the most what Pakistan gets wrt India is a face savor with a swap as far as Yadav goes.

Here is my theory :

1) Yadav was abducted by Culinary Institute guys and handed over to porkis, remember the day announcement was made Rouhani was visiting porkistan and he was asked the question of they are supporting India. To me this was a warning against Chabahar

2) India and Iran held through and now Chabahar is reality, Afghanistan gets another option and is no longer depending upon porkistan for its supplies.
Net loss of only valuable asset porkistan has : Geography.

3) India up's ante on eastern border with summer of great blood. Porkis thought their yahoos will be able to create havoc, again wrong assumptions India held through stone pelters and has successfully broken down the backbone of another 90's style uprising.

4) Afghans raise up ante too (With massa blessings of course) with another front. Here massa wants the leverage back with porkis, porkis went china route and here massa shows we got your undies under our control so don't try new master tricks with us. We still rule the roost here.

5) With winter here porkis know they will be able to do zilch in cashmere, and if afghans and India pound porkis everyday they got taste of what two front fighting is all about. And if this is allowed to continue porkistan breaks quickly so cannot let that happen.

==============================================================

Massa brokered down deal in which it gets what it wants (most probably help with afghan operations, keeping bases alive and future conflict with Iran)

Porkis get relief from afghan side and Indian side (on the borders), also since their Saudi masters are also aligned with massa against Iran it shows their commitment and gets Saudis off their back too. Porkistan lives to fight another day

India gets Wassenger club membership and probably Kulbhushan back safely with promise of calmer borders provided porkis also keep their part of the bargain.

================================================================

Here is what I believe will happen in near future :

There will be short lived calm on the LOC,

India, afghan and Iran continue Chabahar port as viable alternate route for commerce

India's Strategic access to this base will depend upon porkis joining the Saudi and massa let coalition (to what extent they help these guys will dictate Iran obliging to India)

I see Indian, afghan and Iranian interests co-inciding with probably Russia as well on how this will pan out against massa led group.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 09 Dec 2017 14:44

US is using india as leverage to win concessions from Pak on Af pak (and its had some success).
GoI gets access to tech, greater military political economic cooperation from US/allies and trade deals in return.
Talking to Pak is always a precondition that is set by some powers historically. Even if talks are going nowhere, its one barrier removed to get better deals.

All of this is a massive topic of discussion in itself....

Parasu · Post by **Parasu** » 09 Dec 2017 16:33

The growing population in Afpak is unmanageable. If US and/or India fail to create pockets of influence inside Pakistan/ Afghanistan, the region will be lost to islamists. No amount of force or economic assistance can stop the tide.

India needs to separate Baluchistan from Pakistan. And perhaps also the tajiks and hazaras from the pashtuns before islamists overwhelm these pockets of sanity.

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 09 Dec 2017 21:31

USA has used pakis fear of India to win concessions, which is not the same as using India as leverage. India's afghanisthan strategy has already diverged from USA's strategy, so any claims of India sacrificing its Afghanisthan interests to win "Economic cooperation" from US and its allies is a load of absolute nonsense. India is not going to talk to pak unless and until the pakis satisfy the precondition of talks -- an end to terrorism in India -- and the pakis are not doing any such thing. All of this cr@p is not worthy of a minute of discussion. The usual "USA is so power and India is so weak that it has to talk to pakistan to win favors from the US" record has been played and replayed a 100 times over on various threads. These talking points sounded more credible during a MMS/Congress regime since GUBOing came naturally to them, especially when it came to US and pakistan. The current dispensation is a lot smarter and aggressive.

India has been working on its own in Afghanisthan, and the US has made things harder for India, not easier. If the US has stopped doing that, or is threatening to stop doing that to win concessions from the Pakis, there is not going to be any change in India's actions or strategy in pakistan.

Parasu · Post by **Parasu** » 09 Dec 2017 22:31

India had already lost everything in Afghanistan when Taliban took over and controlled 95% of Afghan territory. India has only Osama bin Laden to thank for whatever little `leverage`, if any, it has in Afghanistan today.
India gave away PoK which severed last direct land link it could have with Afghanistan. It now depends on others (Iran/US/Russia) for any link, influence in Afghanistan.

India does not have to talk to anybody if it does not want to. But to indulge in chest thumping is silly.

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 09 Dec 2017 23:32

parasu :India had already lost everything in Afghanistan when Taliban took over and controlled 95% of Afghan territory. India has only Osama bin Laden to thank for whatever little `leverage`, if any, it has in Afghanistan today.
India gave away PoK which severed last direct land link it could have with Afghanistan. It now depends on others (Iran/US/Russia) for any link, influence in Afghanistan.

That is all past, and other than PoK (which is still lost to us due to the vermin in the Nehru clan).

Perhaps you need to pay attention to India's afghanisthan policy before wailing about "chest thumping". India has opened a front in Chahbahar which is in Iran, a country that the current US regime will not do business with. One does not have to be a brain surgeon to figure out that one of the implications of this, when combined with the usual US afghan policy which places paki interests above afghan interests: India's afghan policy has divered from the US policy.

US allegedly needs pakistan for the supply lines for its presence in Afghanisthan, or at least that is their yarn for supporting the pakis. India is working with Iran. These are the facts and if you want to call it chest thumping, well, it is a free country and you are entitled to your opinion.

Parasu · Post by **Parasu** » 09 Dec 2017 23:34

A year ago. For reference
http://www.khaama.com/all-unquiet-on-th ... ntier-4736

he Russian 201st Division has remained stationed in Tajikistan since the 1991 collapse of the U.S.S.R. and, as recently as late 2015, Russian military officials spoke about augmenting its forces there. However, the Russian military declared at the end of January that it would reduce the number of troops in Tajikistan. This news came after the 201st withdrew last year from Kulob — one of its three bases in Tajikistan and the base closest to the Afghan border.
The announcement about troop reductions also came after Russia’s ambassador to Afghanistan confirmed late last year that Russian officials met several times during the summer of 2015 at the Kulob base with Taliban representatives from northern Afghanistan.
A December 29 article from the independent Tajik news agency Asia-Plus identified one of the Taliban officials at the Kulob meetings as Qari Dinmuhammad Hanif, a commander who controls the Darqad district in Takhar Province, “which borders on the Farkhor district of [Tajikistan’s] Khatlon region.” The article said that Afghan government forces could not retake the Darqad district from the Taliban because “it is guarded with Russian weapons, and this province will remain the point of Russia’s link with the Taliban.”

Parasu · Post by **Parasu** » 09 Dec 2017 23:40

India has opened a front in Chahbahar which is in Iran, a country that the current US regime will not do business with.

India has managed to open a trading post in Chabahar, not a front.
US has turned a blind eye to it. Not opposed.
Rest is literary laffaaji.
https://swarajyamag.com/insta/us-signal ... bahar-port

periaswamy · Post by **periaswamy** » 09 Dec 2017 23:58

Parasu: The article said that Afghan government forces could not retake the Darqad district from the Taliban because “it is guarded with Russian weapons, and this province will remain the point of Russia’s link with the Taliban.

This appears to some Paki-pasand news source, given that it claims that pro-russian taliban are the bad taliban. The Afghan govt. is not going after these taliban because these taliban are not the threat to afghanisthan -- they are not shy when it comes to stating their threats and their statement indicates that these "bad taliban" are not a problem for them at this time. The pakis do not have easy access to Takhar province because the himalayas get in the way between paki border and this location.

It is the "good taliban" from the pakistan border to the east and south that regularly kill afghan forces and bomb Afghanisthan at the behest of the paki army. Folks who are spreading FUD about US "leverage" on India to talk to pakistan are just repeating some US/paki leaning source of information.

ndia has managed to open a trading post in Chabahar, not a front.
US has turned a blind eye to it. Not opposed.
Rest is literary laffaaji.

literary laffaji, it seems. When I say "front", it is in the strategic sense -- pakistan has been bypassed in India's afghan policy. Now India gets to trade with Afghanisthan without US/NATO and Pakistani support.

So WTF is the US going to do about Chahbahar when it stops turning a "blind eye" to India's involvement in Iran and wants to "do something" about it? do explain if you are able and willing. We all keep hearing the same old stupid nonsense that pretends US is some sort of superpower with the ability to screw India on a whim, when the USA has not managed to get a failed state like Pakistan to listen to it these days. US using the India bogeyman to get pakistan's support (and, conversely, pakistan pointing to India bogey man to get the US to make noises about "solving Cashmere") is not some recent change in policy -- that is how it has been for decades.

Parasu · Post by **Parasu** » 10 Dec 2017 00:11

Folks who are spreading FUD about US "leverage" on India to talk to pakistan are just repeating some US/paki leaning source of information.

Insinuating that others have hidden motivations is poor argument on your part. Link and source are given in the article. You are welcome to refute what is written.

So WTF is the US going to do about Chahbahar when it stops turning a "blind eye" to India's involvement in Iran and wants to "do something" about it? do explain if you are able and willing.

WTF is anybody going to do to anybody on the planet.
Didnt India start having problems paying Iran for oil after the sanctions were slapped by US on Iran?! And India was having problems investing in Farhad B gas field due to on and off sanctions?

Parasu · Post by **Parasu** » 10 Dec 2017 00:19

When I say "front", it is in the strategic sense -- pakistan has been bypassed in India's afghan policy. Now India gets to trade with Afghanisthan without US/NATO and Pakistani support.

Pakistan has been bypassed for trade and Iran has been added to the list. Besides, what is strategic about `trade`?
US/NATO arent opposed to India investing in Afghanistan. Why would they be interested in stopping India-Afghanistan trade.

Your angst against US/Nato isnt supported by Indian govt of your choice. The relations between India and US are improving under BJP govts since the Talbott-Singh talks.