India / Afghanistan - A New Strategic Relationship

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 06 Oct 2011 21:33

Sridhar wrote:Is the infrastructure fully in place to support the logistics of Indian presence in Afghanistan, beyond a token presence. I know that the Delaram-Zaranj road is now complete. But are there other infrastructural needs that need to be urgently worked on?

I think the plan is to get the job done without military presence in Afghanistan.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 06 Oct 2011 21:41

chaanakya wrote:RajeshA ji

If this grows into critical mass, direct land route through POK would have to be found. That involves taking up of part of POK and your idea in another thread about Chitral route might be of interest to explore further.

Push will come from the Afghan side . They will take the initiative to recover their land lost to Poaks in 47. India as a strategic partner will be oblidged to extend all the support requested by Friend and partner Afghanistan .
Afghanistan is our Israel
Afghanistan is our deeper, taller , hardest,higher, sweeter than Mewa friend. Enemy of Afghanistan is an enemy of India and V.V

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 06 Oct 2011 21:45

Dilbu wrote:
Sridhar wrote:Is the infrastructure fully in place to support the logistics of Indian presence in Afghanistan, beyond a token presence. I know that the Delaram-Zaranj road is now complete. But are there other infrastructural needs that need to be urgently worked on?
I think the plan is to get the job done without military presence in Afghanistan.

I think the ANA is meant to be the Indian proxy. But that will take time, so that's TSP's window.

Unkil can force matters by putting crippling sanctions on TSP but I trust unkil to not do that. Sad to say, our best bet is TSP showing it's pakiness by attacking unkil openly.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 06 Oct 2011 22:59

exterminating the Taliban will come later. for now, it is not beneficial to be talking about such things. for the first time since 2001, India has finally got the "official" credibility to assert its interests in the region. we now have a foot in the future of Afghanistan. so now India is "part of the group" which decides on Afghanistan. this is very significant. to begin with, a gradual process of showing the Taliban a lot of carrots might be the least controversial policy for India. if a significant section of the Talibs can be weaned away from Talibs and be made to be content with being Pashtuns, I think that's a very good beginning.

brihaspati ji's warning should be remembered though. we will have to constantly check the pulse, so to speak.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 06 Oct 2011 22:59

double post...

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 06 Oct 2011 22:59

What must be worrying pakis is the fact that India had kept its powder dry all along these long 10 years while they had to toil away in blood, sweat & echandee loss. Now finally when unkil is about to be thrown out from the region and it is time to reap benefits, India walks in with all options on the table. India is different from unkil in the sense that we know exactly what TSP is upto and there will be no room for manoeuvring this time.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 06 Oct 2011 23:03

Some thoughts on the afghan intervention

I think we cant get militarily tangled in Afghanistan yet.
Pakis have to be starved of finances first and for that it has to be declared a "Terrorist state" by USA.
After stewing under sanctions for 2-3 years , the tactically brilliant brains in Pakbarian army will have little juice at their disposal to maintain taleb fighters on payroll (presently 300$ per footsoldier per month).

In such a scenario we will be left with hardcore Jihadis onlee (theoretically). Then the fight will be even.

Further Iran has to be 100% on board for ensuring our supply lines through zahedan at minimal cost. That is Iran should'nt pull a PakUnkil on us .. working for a grand objective (checkmating USA) against the objective at hand (snuffing out Taleban).
Right now both Pak and India are courting Iran.
We have to ensure and make sure it is understood that the payoff to Iran with a quick demise of Taleban is many times high but will exponentially decrease as the fight drags on (which will be Paki grand strategy ). So Iran must not play both sides.

Russia has to be given a fair piece of pie for Tajik support . Better if they can provide military support themselves.

Hence to prop up afghanistan, we need a tripartite pact between Iran-India-Russia with US support in mutinational fora and CIA support in Intelligence gathering in Pak and drone ops.
End game could be a constitutionally sanctioned confederation in Afghanistan with its Pasthuns up in arms against a motheaten pakistan for a greater Pakthoonwa province.
This should be the ideal state of affairs in 2025 for all parties concerned.

Downside: (purely hypothetical - put here only to get a measure of whats in store)
4000 Indian Army casualities over a 15 year period
2000 Iranian Army
500 Russian Army
20000 ANA casualities.
100000 Afghan civilian casualities .
2000 Indian civilian casualities in India from terror attacks.
30 basis points shaved off GDP growth rate in India due to the security premium.

Result:
Pakjabi rump state.
"Greater Afghanistan" open for business with its mineral wealth and markets for trade with India,Iran,Russia.
Better access to India for central asian stans.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 06 Oct 2011 23:18

What are the Indian objetives for going into Hindukush?
Certain immidiate points.....

1. Stop the the Pakistanis to storm Kabul.
2. Deradicalization of Pustuns.
3. Bringing Persian speaking populations under the Indian influence.
4. Improving the community agriculture specially now that Afghanstan is facing long term drought situations.
5. Connecting the CAS grid with the Indian ocean through Iran.
6.Harnessing the mineral resources of Afghanistan and to shut out the Chinese and the Persians from the Afghan board.

What the Afghans interests which merge with the Indians...
1.Agriculture.
2. Security from Pakistan.
3. Integrating the the Persian speakers with the Indic speakers.
4. Modernizing the society.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 06 Oct 2011 23:25

Samudragupta wrote:What are the Indian objetives for going into Hindukush?
Certain immidiate points.....

1. Stop the the Pakistanis to storm Kabul.

Sji,

They are in a little position to do that till 2014 when USA withdraws its regular troops leaving behind its JSOCs and counterterror apparatus.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 06 Oct 2011 23:36

For Iran to cooperate with India US has to move North to Stans.....all significant US assets will move out to stans by 2014....Afghanistan is actually the next stage of outsourcing amid a dangerous one.....

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 06 Oct 2011 23:38

Altair wrote:
Muppalla wrote:a real first gingoistic move by India.

Pak lurkers - watch this space.
It appears that Pakistan actually walked into a well laid trap set by Americans in Afghanistan. Consider all the pieces here.
1. Mullen gives a statement knowing fully well how Pakistan would react and vehemently deny everything.
2. The escalation ladder is climbed by Pakistan very quickly (The psycho-behavioral analysts can easily predict such primal responses)
3. India-Afghanistan ink a deal well prepared in advance.(How many really think that there was less than 6 months preparation for this deal?)
4. Anwar-al-Awlaki, Dilawar(principal subordinate to Haji Mali Khan) killed this week alone signalling things to come.

Pakis lurks: Jab geedar ki maut aati hai to woh shahar ki taraf bhaagta hai

Wouldn't it be great if they deliver mango crates to Kiynahi and Pasha and Musharaff letting Puke RAPEs that they have to pay for their betrayal and murders. The message of blowing Pasha into million pieces would not be lost on the RAPEs and ISI officers. Would it?

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 06 Oct 2011 23:42

K will need to be protected at all costs by India given the fact that Pakis and its nefarious arms believe in assassination . many attempts were already there on K in past and he is not perceived too Us friendly.

kasthuri · Post by **kasthuri** » 06 Oct 2011 23:42

surinder wrote:... Turkey did not even invite India on the A'stan meeting a year or two back. ...

India gets invite for Afghan meet

Making amends, Turkey is pulling out all stops to ensure India's participation in the crucial conference on Afghanistan it hosts next month. External affairs minister SM Krishna will take part in the conference slated for November 2 in Istanbul. The conference, which will be attended by

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton among others, will focus on the transition, political situation in the regional cooperation and the overall security issues.
The meeting is taking place at a time when the reconciliation process in Afghanistan has been derailed after the killing of Burhanuddin Rabbani and President Karzai proclaiming that he will now onwards talk to Pakistan, not to the Taliban.

Not being invited to a similar conference hosted by Turkey last year had angered India. New Delhi had protested against the move, which seemed to have taken at the behest of Pakistan. However, this time around Turkey left no stone unturned to ensure India’s participation.

Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu persuaded SM Krishna to be there when the two leaders met on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meet last month.

Changed geopolitical scenario, strain in the Afghanistan-Pakistan and US-Pakistan ties have ensured President Hamid Karzai and his government are in greater need of India.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 06 Oct 2011 23:47

The Nato and US regular troops will go .... that itself imo is enough to get Iran into play.

....Afghanistan is actually the next stage of outsourcing amid a dangerous one.....

i didnt get this.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Oct 2011 23:49

Note the Turkish invite is after the pact. Of what relevance is the Turkish initative to peace in Afghanistan? Zilch.

Reasons are :
- Turkey initiative was based on appeasing TSP as key concession- Rabbani the face of reconicliation was murdered by TSP agents
- Afghanistan has signed a security pact with India because they are tired of the appeasemtn policy of NATO towards TSP
-Indian pact ensures retaining Afghanistan as a whole dejure and defacto
- No nonsense about good Taliban in Kandahar and northern Allaince in rest of Afghanistan

Someone look for comments from Blackwill or kala vasiyat.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 06 Oct 2011 23:50

Lilo, he is referring to outsourcing of US jobs to India.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Oct 2011 23:55

Something I wrote in Dec 2001 for BR Monitor:

Indian Interests in post Taliban Afghanistan

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 07 Oct 2011 01:31

Prem wrote:
chaanakya wrote:RajeshA ji

If this grows into critical mass, direct land route through POK would have to be found. That involves taking up of part of POK and your idea in another thread about Chitral route might be of interest to explore further.
Push will come from the Afghan side . They will take the initiative to recover their land lost to Poaks in 47. India as a strategic partner will be oblidged to extend all the support requested Afghanistan .

i have always assumed that the only way india can get access to AFG is if AFG takes over POK and connects to india. ANA is the vehicle. ralph peters map suggests that as well.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 07 Oct 2011 02:07

Ramana,

Turkey does have its hand in the Afghan pie, although in a limited way. For instance, I think they are connected with the Uzbek faction of the Northern Alliance, i.e. Gen Dostum primarily.

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 07 Oct 2011 07:23

V_Raman wrote: i have always assumed that the only way india can get access to AFG is if AFG takes over POK and connects to india. ANA is the vehicle. ralph peters map suggests that as well.

IMO, and that is the problem with ralph peters as to his understanding of the issues involved.

Pranay · Post by **Pranay** » 07 Oct 2011 07:27

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-15209793

After 10 years in Afghanistan, the US still lacks the knowledge to bring the conflict to a successful end, retired Army Gen Stanley McChrystal has said.

Gen McChrystal said US and Nato allies were barely over half-way towards reaching their goals in the country.

Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, Gen McChrystal, who commanded coalition forces in 2009-10 before being forced to resign after a magazine interview, said the most difficult task would be to create a legitimate government that ordinary Afghans could believe in and that would balance the influence of the Taliban.

"We didn't know enough and we still don't know enough," he said. "Most of us - me included - had a very superficial understanding of the situation and history, and we had a frighteningly simplistic view of recent history, the last 50 years," he said.

Gen. McChrystal has, by the above statement, demonstrated a clarity of the American conundrum in Afghanistan that is not echoed in the wider establishment.

As India will undertake a more pronounced role in Afghanistan post 2014, India will have to deal with the "Mayor of Kabul" Mr. Hamid Karzai till then, and post 2014, be a catalyst in the next presidential elections in Afghanistan where a leader with a much wider acceptance becomes the next President of Afghanistan, who should not been seen as an Indian lackey.

India has a historical understanding of Afghanistan that can come in good stead as it charts a unique course for itself in the region.

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 07 Oct 2011 07:29

Editorial in Dawn
India-Afghanistan pact

THESE have been a frenzied few weeks for the region. Pakistan`s relations with America had barely hit another roadblock over the Haqqani network when President Karzai issued statements after the assassination of Burhanuddin Rabbani describing Pakistan as a stumbling block for peace in Afghanistan. Now comes the signing between India and Afghanistan of what the two countries are calling a Strategic Partnership Agreement. While the pact was reportedly in development for some time, the timing of the announcement — or perhaps the decision not to delay it despite recent events {?, and for what they should have waited}— also turns it into a signal from President Karzai to Pakistan that he has other friends in the region. On Wednesday he said the agreement will not affect ties with Pakistan, but given the region`s dynamics there is no doubt it will raise eyebrows among the establishment here and possibly lead to ill-advised efforts to ramp up Pakistani involvement in Afghanistan{More terror attacks} as well.

.
.
.

And given its history of turmoil, Kabul`s search for allies it can trust is understandable. But this diplomatic manoeuvring should also be a sign for Pakistan that it needs to reassure Kabul it will not seek to use Afghanistan for strategic depth to the detriment of that country, and instead is simply concerned that Afghan territory not be used against it. Both for the sake of peace in the region and for its own interests, Pakistan needs to see this latest development as a reason to reduce the trust deficit in its own relationship with Afghanistan. {for some reason, it is TSP with 0 credibility of itself is the one that needs to be assured of other countries intentions.}

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 07 Oct 2011 07:38

Lo and behold, in 1 day India has "already" converted its pact to reality

India wants an ‘anti-Pakistan’ Afghanistan: Musharraf

WASHINGTON: Pakistan’s former president Pervez Musharraf charged Thursday that arch-rival India seeks to “create an anti-Pakistan Afghanistan” as part of a bid to dominate South Asia politically and economically.

Musharraf said Afghanistan sends its intelligence staff, diplomats and soldiers to Pakistan where they are “indoctrinated against Pakistan,” something he said India must stop and the United States should be concerned about.

“In Afghanistan, there is some kind of a proxy conflict going on between Pakistan and India,” Musharraf told a leadership forum sponsored by the Atlantic media corporation.

“India is trying to create an anti-Pakistan Afghanistan.” It’s ambition, he said, is to “have a weak Pakistan so that it can be dominated, so that it doesn’t have any confrontationist attitude which doesn’t go well with India’s vision of dominating the region.”

Musharraf said he understood that India does not seek to take over Pakistan militarily {Someone forgot to tell this to Kiyani-Pasha & Co.}, but rather it wants to dominate Pakistan in the area of foreign policy, economic policy, trade and commerce.

“That is how you suppress, you control or dominate another country,” {Which is so much worse than trying to dominate using terror as state policy and promoting insurgencies in other countries.}
.
.
.
“Afghanistan’s intelligence, Afghanistan’s diplomats, Afghanistan’s soldiers, all the army, security people, they all go to India for training,” where they are “indoctrinated against Pakistan,” he added. {This is the really big bag of gas coming out of Musharraf, ALL "people" go to Afghanistan go to India where they ALREADY get indoctrinated against Pakistan as if India there is a need for India to do this. The Afghans themselves DO NOT have a brain of eyes of their own.}

While he was in power, he said he personally offered Afghanistan free training {we know where that is coming from} but “not one man has come to Pakistan for training.” {So as a result TSP is justified in supporting Haqqanis}

He added: “India must stop it {already!!? India didn't even start yet.}…. I would say that the United States needs to understand Pakistan’s sensitivities.{K} I see there is a lack of concern for Pakistan’s sensitivities.{K}”

Musharraf spoke after Afghan President Hamid Karzai signed a “strategic partnership” with India on Tuesday.

Musharraf ki awaz == Musharraf se awaz /(Voice of Musharraf == Sounds from Musharraf)

Added:
http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/06/india-wa ... arraf.html

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 07 Oct 2011 07:41

This is what Mushy said a week earlier on 28 Sep 2011

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... istan.html

Musharraf: Why Haqqani terrorist group can help Pakistan

Pakistan's interests are helped by the support of a feared terrorist group blamed for multiple attacks in neighbouring Afghanistan, former president Pervez Musharraf has suggested.

Mr Musharaff told The Daily Telegraph that it was important for his country to spell out to the world why the Haqqani network was being allowed to operate on its soil. {"allowed to operate", enlightened moderation}

.
.
.
He said the Haqqani group was the source of a “terrible” lack of trust and confidence and added: “The United States must understand Pakistan has its own national interest. The United States must accept the compulsions of Pakistan and give assurances.”

He added: “When the coalition talk of leaving in 2014, Pakistan has to really think, what will be the environment and fend for itself against all the exterior pressures, all the exterior manoeuvrings and political manoeuvrings against Pakistan.”

“I’m a straight talker and I accept straight talk and I do straight talk,” he said.

And NLI wore uniform...

“Are we some jungle people that you can do anything with? This is the feeling of the people of Pakistan, are we some animal that they are treating us like this? We are a sovereign country and we have our own human rights.”

IMO, this is the most revealing about his mind, which I read as in his mind 'jungle people' do not have human rights.

Siddhartha · Post by **Siddhartha** » 07 Oct 2011 07:42

The M16 is the standard issue to the 164k Afghan army. As per the pact when we start training and equipping ANA, what could be the items we would start with? Does Insas stand a chance?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Oct 2011 07:58

So in one little pact, the ink is not dry yet, India has made TSP's worst nightmare come true!

Folks please do full text of TSP anal cyst opinions as they need to be dissected.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Oct 2011 07:59

Rangudu, Can you find the best estimates of Taliban numbers in Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 07 Oct 2011 10:50

In as much the ANA shud be modelled on the Rasthriya Rifles and to develop into an anti-insurgency cum nation building force....The Americans blundered in limiting the capabilities of ANA to a slightly more than glorified police force...but now the bets are off it is necessary for the Americans to shut them off from the ANA......

The best bet for the Indians is to bring Amrulla Saleh and his remaining anti pakistani and anti-Iranian team right at the centre of the new security architecture...

It is very important to understand that Karzai is an Iranian stooge and actually may not be the best person post 2014..when Iran will increase its proxy war in Afghanistan both against the Turks/Pakistanis/and possibly Indians

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Oct 2011 11:41

10th anniversary of the "umpteenth" Afghan War....and not over yet!

With the signing of the Indo-Afghan accord,the shifting frontline between Indiaa nd pak will now be in Afghanistan.The Pakis will do everything in their pwower to defeat the Karzai regime and the fast-retreating west with their tails tucked between their legs had better provide the karzai regime the wherewithal with which he can fight back to stem the tide of the returning Taliban/Pakistan.India's task too will be cut out to train and provide the Karzai regime with enough support so that they can fight on and stem the anticipated onslaught from the Pakis.While one is absolutely against any Indian troops on the ground in Afghanistan-to suffer the same fate as the Brits,RUssians, and now the US and NATO,one cannot rule out air support in the form of drone strikes,intel support,etc.,along with a concerted effort involving the northern states of the region who are also alarmed at any return of rule of the Taliban/Pak in Kabul once more.Once the US has the supply routes firmed up from the north,its should severely cut all aid to Pak both eco and military so that the Pakis will find it diffcult to support the Taliban their proxies in Afghanistan.

The hatred of Gen.Bandicoot against India,the US,Israel and all other real or perceived enemies of Pakistan,the ISI,the Taliban,etc.,from his safe luxurious hide-out in a posh locale in thanks to London Majesty's Govt. !),with his security also looked after by HMG ,from where he fulminates against the world especially India,should remind the global powers that this is the man ,the architect of the Kargil War,who is a staunch supporter of every ungodly group of Islaimist fundoos on the planet operating out of Pak and the true arch-enemy of the civilised world.He represetns the Paki military tribe and all their "eviltude"s Dubya would've said.His staunch defence of the Haqqani network shows that it is most probable that he was the one who hid Osama,launched the Taliban against the western powers,orchestrated the ISI to plot and plan terror attacks against India and other democratic nations across the globe,as all plots seem to originate in Pak.Yet,despite his outrageous support for these terror outfits,he sits supremely secure in his London hideout and orchestrates propaganda in support of these ungldlies! What gives?

Is it possible therefore to deduce that the British govt. has something-skeletons in its cupboard that Gen.Bandicoot is blackmailing them with? Why is he being treated with kid gloves? Any sensible govt. would immediately either deport him or arrest him and send him for trial to the Hague.Yet for some unfathomable reaosn the Brits prefer to molly-cuddle him and treat him with deference and respect completely out of order with his terrorist-suppport rants and raves.What is Willliam Hague doing?

Meanwhile the betrayal of the Afghans by the West/Brits is being condemned by many as the foll. reports show.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 66790.html

Don't abandon the women of Afghanistan, aid agencies warn Hague

By Terri Judd
Friday, 7 October 2011
REUTERS

An Afghan soldier uses a stick to maintain order among women waiting for aid at a World Food Programme distribution point in Kabul in 2001

William Hague and his Nato colleagues are being warned that their efforts to extricate Western troops from Afghanistan threaten to "sell out" the women whose treatment was cited as one of the main evils of the Taliban.

A group of leading aid agencies is using the tenth anniversary of the conflict to demand that Mr Hague, the Foreign Secretary, and his counterparts in the Western alliance demonstrate their commitment to the country's women, who they say are being sacrificed at the negotiations with insurgents despite the fact that their fate was one of the original justifications for military action.

The West's final betrayal,which is why karzai is looking for solid support.
Leading article: Growing evidence of a final catastrophic betrayal

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/le ... 66635.html

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Oct 2011 11:49

^^^

The more interesting question is why is the TSP not seeking his extradition for the murder of the Botox babe.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 07 Oct 2011 12:36

India needs to develop relations with more Pushtuns. We cannot depend on Karzai for everything. Who knows when ISI succeeds in bumping him off! We also need a Pushtun strategy in Afghanistan!

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 07 Oct 2011 13:15

RajeshA ji

Karzai getting bumped off a la Masood is a very real scenario. What would be needed is to throw security cordon around him so that likes of Taliban assassins or ISI goons or TTP don't get to him. This is irrespective of whether the agreement takes off or not. It would take time to develop alternatives. After Masood , India was left on the margins in Afg.That should not happen as Pakistan would be only too happy to shred this agreement to pieces..

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 07 Oct 2011 13:20

sum wrote:
The agreement is indeed a good turning point . To view it narrowly as only militaristic would be a mistake. In the fine print there are many aspects which would help India in cementing the ties.However , all aspects would take at least two years to take root.
Have all parts of the treaty been made public or some juicy bits kept out of media ( like erstwhile Russki deals where Nerpa lease etc was hidden away in fineprint)?

Annexures to the treaty are not yet in public domain. Some would not make it anytime soon, I guess. So we are either to speculate or debate on only those parts made public. Somethings are better left unsaid.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 07 Oct 2011 14:10

I hope one main strategy should be to take the war to the enemy. One must be knowing who are the heads of the ISI. The war has to be taken to them and their families.

ISI would hit every Afghan who stands in their path, regardless of whether one talks peace with them or one wages war on them. So better to wage war. The killings of Ahmed Shah Masood, Ahmed Wali Karzai, Burhanuddin Rabbani, etc. have been significant attacks by ISI on Afghanistan.

Now one needs to start hunting ISI, TSPA big-wigs and Haqqani (P)Orcs. Also need to strike some deal with Quetta Shura. He have to try to turn Quetta Shura against the TSPA. If we weaken the Haqqanis to an extent where Quetta Shura can take over the fighters from the Haqqanis, then it may be possible to bring the war to an end in Afghanistan, and to fuel the war in Pakistan.

There should be no respite on the Haqqanis. And there should be no mercy for the ISI.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 07 Oct 2011 15:22

RajeshA wrote:I hope one main strategy should be to take the war to the enemy. One must be knowing who are the heads of the ISI. The war has to be taken to them and their families.

ISI would hit every Afghan who stands in their path, regardless of whether one talks peace with them or one wages war on them. So better to wage war. The killings of Ahmed Shah Masood, Ahmed Wali Karzai, Burhanuddin Rabbani, etc. have been significant attacks by ISI on Afghanistan.

Now one needs to start hunting ISI, TSPA big-wigs and Haqqani (P)Orcs. Also need to strike some deal with Quetta Shura. He have to try to turn Quetta Shura against the TSPA. If we weaken the Haqqanis to an extent where Quetta Shura can take over the fighters from the Haqqanis, then it may be possible to bring the war to an end in Afghanistan, and to fuel the war in Pakistan.

There should be no respite on the Haqqanis. And there should be no mercy for the ISI.

^^ Perfectly said Rji. One thing the Pak Jernails and Kernails haven't tasted is fear of retaliation ... neither from americans nor from indians ... any ISI officer (from major to Jernail ) who are involved in giving a go ahead for a terror strike should live in the fear of supari out on his name. Time to test their jihadi resolve in face of certain death.

It should rain mango crates in porkistan.

Pattom · Post by **Pattom** » 07 Oct 2011 15:41

Abhorrent as the concept is of retaliating against innocents, the only thing these ISI thugs would respond to is the fear of reprisal against their loved ones. They need to be cowed, demoralized, ground into the dirt. So I couldn't agree more with Rajesh. And as with the strategy of terrorists, a random act of retaliation has to be employed, but only on the near and dear of the higher ranks of PA/ISI. I should imagine that results would be quick, and gratifying!

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 07 Oct 2011 16:27

Pattom, Lilo,

With regards to reprisals againsts family members, the problem for the west is A/Human Rights laws and B/The Geneva convention.

It forbids reprisals against family members and also "collective" punishment.

I'm all for butchering family members of terrorists and their supporters.

The west I am afraid is just to week.

I believe Hafiz Sayeed's family members are resident in the USA.
Surely the west can do a quick audit of ISI/PA officers and find their family members in the west and then expel them in handcuffs!!

But they won't because they are morally weak. They don't wish to offend people who will kill them, that would be rude. Also there is the vote bank of the islamic community.

Here are a few links which show just how weak and twisted is the UK lefts/liberal position on AFG.

This first article is written by a prominenet Gay Rights campaigner Peter Tatchell
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... fghanistan

How the hell does he think the taliban will be defeated?

Then there is this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ly-expense

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... -editorial

The Telegraph has a different view, the comments are interesting
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... istan.html

There has been practically zero comment on India's position on Afg.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Oct 2011 16:30

google earth wolfhounds who routinely check pakistan, can take note of this new update in AfPak

http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2011 ... -by-india/

Pattom · Post by **Pattom** » 07 Oct 2011 17:12

Haresh, I'm talking about India, not the west. As the party at the receiving end of ISI brutality for decades, I don't think India needs to operate on the same moral premises as the west. India's (and Afghanistan's) priority should be to dissuade terrorism aided and abetted by the Pakistan Army. Recourse to courts, international censure, appeal to human decency, etc., just don't work with those scum. So, you have to let them know that their Ayeshas and little Abdul*n will pay the price for their terrorist actions. I think they would catch on real fast and desist in exporting terror.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 07 Oct 2011 17:18

chaanakya wrote:RajeshA ji

Karzai getting bumped off a la Masood is a very real scenario. What would be needed is to throw security cordon around him so that likes of Taliban assassins or ISI goons or TTP don't get to him. This is irrespective of whether the agreement takes off or not. It would take time to develop alternatives. After Masood , India was left on the margins in Afg.That should not happen as Pakistan would be only too happy to shred this agreement to pieces..

And here is the news item
Plot to kill Karzai through bodyguard foiled

KABUL: Afghanistan's intelligence agency said on Wednesday it had thwarted a plot to assassinate president Hamid Karzai after arresting a bodyguard and five people with links to the Haqqani network and al-Qaida .

The plotters, who included university students and a medical professor, had been trained to launch attacks in the capital Kabul and had recruited one of Karzai's bodyguards to kill the president , the National Directorate of Security (NDS) said.

"A dangerous and educated group including teachers and students wanted to assassinate president Hamid Karzai ," spokesman Lutfullah Mashal said. "Unfortunately they infiltrated the presidential protection system and recruited one of the president's bodyguards." Mashal said those detained had ties with three men, including an Egyptian and a Bangladeshi, who were all members of al-Qaida and the Haqqani network which is based in Pakistan's tribal region of North Waziristan, bordering Afghanistan.