India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Locked
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Kanson »

milindc wrote:CNN-IBN's Sagarika has a discussion about 'Can US rein in Pakis'.
Pramit Pal Chaudhary, HT Editor and KC Singh, MEA Secretary are asking what does India bring to US-India strategic partnership? They recommend that GoI needs to bring more ideas on table to solve US's afghan problem. KC Singh says that India is happy with just monetary help on Afghan front and needs to do more to Unkil.

Interesting discussion considering the 120k troops proposal...

Sagarika was trying to put words in mouth of all the participants, stating that India and US's GWOT should be to strengthen Pakistan's civil govt, and society and firm up democracy. All the three avoided stating the same.
I bet Sagarika is desperate to wear a shuttle cock burka.
KC Singh was saying that in diferrent ways for quite sometime. It is not the first instance.

And regarding Sagarika Ghose of CNN-IBN, she doesnt seems to have analytical depth to understand or she is simply another Burkha.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10205
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by sum »

And regarding Sagarika Ghose of CNN-IBN, she doesnt seems to have analytical depth to understand or she is simply another Burkha.
After seeing her "analysis" for many days now, i would think that its the former (with a small amount of WKK thrown in)
rahulranjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 14
Joined: 08 Nov 2008 10:05

Karzai arrives in India

Post by rahulranjan »

Karzai arrives in India
http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=64732

Updated at: 1700 PST, Sunday, January 11, 2009
KABUL: Afghan President Hamid Karzai travelled to India on Sunday for a two-day official visit that was to include talks on the fight against terrorism, his office said.

Karzai would also convey a message of "solidarity and condolences of the people of Afghanistan" to the Indian nation in the aftermath of the deadly November attacks in Mumbai, it said in a statement.

He was due to meet Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and other officials for talks on "the latest situation in the region, fighting against terrorism and enhanced economic cooperation," it said.

Karzai was accompanied by Foreign Minister Rangin Dadfar Spanta and National Security Adviser Zalmai Rasoul, among other officials.

India and Afghanistan have a strong relationship but both have difficult ties with Pakistan, which is wedged between them.

India has accused "official agencies" in Pakistan of involvement in the Mumbai attacks in which 174 people, including nine gunmen, were killed. Pakistan has strongly denied that accusation.

Afghanistan says the extremist campaign being waged on its soil has the backing of elements in Pakistan, where militants have safe havens in the lawless tribal areas along their common border.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19327
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by NRao »

The Mullen article resurrects Obama's dream theory. So, nothing new there - India has been forewarned.

However, a few items of interest. From what I have read India is included and India should proceed with that in mind. I do not believe anyone (from the US) who states that India is not part of the solution.

The next thing is what specifically does the US have in mind. Is the issue only terrorism - Taliban in specific? Or is the thinking more inclined to include Kashmir? Does "India part of the solution" mean that the US will dictate terms to the region or would India have a greater say in matters? Would TSPA have a say at all and if so to what extent? What happens to ISI. In short the definitions have to be very granular.

But, this strategy already comes in with a built in weakness - the perceived threat of TSPA moving their forces from one border to the other. This Pakistani self generated threat has to be stopped by the US and no one else. And, in addition the US cannot be a partner in such cooked up threats, this one weakness the US alone should overcome.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Lalmohan »

could just be a warning to kiyanahi that play ball or we let india kick your musharraff
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19327
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by NRao »

The US has not been able to stem the corruption in Afghanistan, they are not even close. So, to expect a "democratic", non-corrupt Pakistan is a pipe dream at best (and India seems to be sliding in that direction in some ways too - granted). This necessarily means that TSPA will have to be a force to deal with - the very thing (TSPA) that needs to be removed as THE authority in Pakistan.

So, I do not know what the US can be thinking. I would have thought that the US would have learnt from the lessons in Iraq, apparently not. Democracies take a long time to grow and needs a population that understands and wants it.

On the flip side a solution that includes India should NOT make India pay for a solution. Recall that India has already paid multiple time for solutionS, including the creation of a Islamic state called Pakistan.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19327
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by NRao »

ABC News just reported that advisors will be telling Obama that IF Afghanistan is NOT solved within a year it will go critical!!

Some urgency.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Prem »

If Pukes are not reined by their current paymasters then is there any possibiity of Indo-iranian joint initiative to neutralize Pakiban/ Talibans threat ? In my little understanding Russians wont mind extending support as it will be in their interest .
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19327
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by NRao »

The issue is not getting rid of Taliban/this-that. It is what will replace them. The Pakis would love to get rid of Taliban and replace ALL of them with ISI for instance. But they would hate anything lese replacing them.

The same goes for all of the rest: the US/UK, Russia, Indian, Iran, etc.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Philip »

"The winter of their discontent" what? Let's see what Obama does.I would suggest to him to bring in the B-52s and leather the Taliban wherever they can be spotted,as well as the hideoputs in FATA/NWFP/Pak too,with a "stray" bomb hitting ISI HQ! Another suggestion,use the old stocks of Agent Orange for the poppyfields,or better still use GM's genetically modified poppy seeds.That is an even more effective solution!

UK forces in Afghanistan in worst ever winter campaign

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 01083.html

By Terri Judd
Sunday, 11 January 2009

British Army soldiers with the Parachute Regiment's sniper section lead a strike against the Taliban

British troops are fighting their deadliest winter campaign to date in Afghanistan as the Prime Minister continues to resist calls to send reinforcements. Traditionally the onslaught from the Taliban has quietened over the icy winter. Less than three months ago Foreign Secretary David Miliband spoke of the “winter lull” offering a chance to plan the next phase of a campaign aimed at supporting Afghan governance. But the hiatus has failed to materialise this year and the fighting has been relentless.

The most recent soldier to die was killed in an explosion while on patrol in Helmand province yesterday. A Royal Marine operating with the 45 Commando unit, was killed in the Kajaki area. An MoD statement said the soldier, who has not been named, “was taking part in a routine reassurance patrol when the explosion occured. He received immediate medical attention but sadly died of his wounds.” The Marine has not been named but his family has been informed.

The death follows that of Serjeant Christopher Reed, of the 6th Battalion, The Rifles, a 25-year-old “talented, committed” non-commissioned officer killed in Garmsir on New Year’s Day, the 138th British serviceman to die in the country since 2001.

In the first two-and-a-half months in Helmand, 3 Commando Brigade has suffered 17 deaths. By contrast, the previous 2006 and 2007 winter tours cost 10 and 12 men respectively over a six month period. Fatalities have been matched by injuries. In the first half of December there were 58 wounded servicemen or women admitted to the field hospital in comparison with a total of 43 in January last year.

The death rate has already surpassed the equivalent period of most of the customarily-tougher summer tours, only matched so far by the toll wreaked on 16 Air Assault Brigade this year.

British commanders in Helmand insist the heavy losses are due to the fact that the Royal Marines and attached army units have been “taking the fight to the Taliban” in a previously untouched insurgent stronghold.

Experts, however, believe the surge has more to do with a build up of locally-based militants, increasingly sophisticated terrorist tactics and a pre-emptive strike to disrupt this year’s elections. Despite Afghanistan’s unforgiving winters, the insurgents now operate on a year-round basis.

“Casualties can be attributed to the unusually high presence of Taliban in certain areas. Also to the reaction of the international forces, particularly the British, who seem determined, quite rightly, to disrupt the Taliban presence,” explained Colonel Christopher Langton, a senior analyst with the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “It is hard to gauge numbers but it is certainly a firm impression, not just by me, that there is a larger presence. The numbers may not be bigger but it could be the fact that they are more active.” This, he added, was probably due to locals continuing to take up arms in the winter.

British commanders have long realised that they face a multi-tiered enemy of hardline Taliban emanating from Pakistan bolstered by locally-recruited fighters amongst the impoverished community. The battle to win the “hearts and minds” of “reconcilable” militants has always been foremost.

“The insurgency is fragmented, to simply refer to them as ‘Taliban’ is no longer sufficient. It is a complex patchwork of different actors, all with a vested interest,” said Paul Burton, Director of Policy Research at The International Council on Security and Development, formerly the Senlis Council.

These would include locals desperate to feed their families or coerced by the insurgents, criminals or drug barons trying to protect their revenues, as well as ideological fighters.

Col Langton agreed that the spike in violence could be due to factions fighting to protect interests in the face of a determined Helmand Governor Gulab Mangal, who has taken a hard line against corruption and the poppy trade. Last autumn Col Langton predicted a greater militant presence this winter “with the knowledge that this year is a critical year for both sides. They need to be in position to provide maximum disruption during the election period. They have to be in the area to start full-scale operations and carry on a relatively high level of activity leading up to that period.”

David Livingstone, Chatham House international security expert, said the increasing sophistication of insurgent tactics meant they were deliberately pre-empting an anticipated spring offensive by NATO forces.

However the British military in Helmand says the spike in fatalities could be explained by the fact that they had targeted the previously impenetrable Taliban stronghold of Nad-e-Ali. Operation Sond Chara (Pashto for “Red Dagger” after the commando patch) had successfully targeted the Taliban in their safe haven, dominating 180sq km in treacherous weather.

“We are taking the fight to the enemy and prodding and poking in areas he doesn’t want to be prodded and poked,” said Commander Paula Rowe, spokeswoman for the task force in Helmand said. “We do not underestimate that there are more challenges to come. This is the start, not the end, for 3 Commando operations. We are driving the tempo.”

Of the 18 British deaths this tour, five lost their lives in Sond Chara. By contrast 11 died in explosions with roadside and suicide bombs an expanding tactic that has taken a bloody toll on soldiers and civilians for the past year.

Mr Burton said: “Sticking an IED [improvised explosive device] by the side of the road in freezing conditions only takes two or three men in a small detail,” said Mr Burton. “It is showing a tragic trend in the country.”

Successive senior officers in Helmand have indicated a need for more troops to boost the current number of 7,300. Most notably the outgoing commander this summer, Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith, said the size of the force in Helmand had to rise by 50 per cent, while adding that the solution could not be entirely military.

In December Gordon Brown announced that 300 more troops would be sent with the deployment of 19 Light Brigade this summer. But despite this year’s Iraq withdrawal, he has resisted calls for greater numbers. Thousands of the anticipated influx of US troops are expected to be sent to Helmand.

Mr Burton said: “They [the Taliban] are agile in a way that is costing more lives. The military paint a positive scene – that they are on the run. That may be the case, but with such a hard winter one can only really look at the situation deteriorating, unfortunately.”
Prabu
BRFite
Posts: 423
Joined: 22 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: In the middle of a Desert

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Prabu »

Dawn News reports that the 63 acres of land allotted to PAF, at baluchistan has been cancelled due to public's opposition. This was annonced by their CM after a meeting.

Good thing. Why don't RAW develop covert cells (again) across pak, Afganistan and all across the globe, including US and hit where it pains, at our will ? Tit for Tat ! No mercy !
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: India to send 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Kanson »

negi wrote:
Kanson wrote: What if Karazi made a request ?
Ok .. what makes you think Karzai has more faith in GOI as against US and NATO forces ?, iow it is the other way round i.e. US/NATO might nudge Karzai to request India for troops but then it is a different ball game all together.All in all request has to come via US/NATO.
Karzai to support India in its fight against terror
It is a new beginning of the front against Pakistan sponsored terrorism in the region that is the significance of Afghan President Hamid Karzai's visit and his meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on January 12.

The two sides have chosen to dub the visit as symbolic and the official statement suggests that Karzai had come to express Afghanistan's solidarity with the government and people of India in the wake of the Mumbai terrorist attacks.

The joint statement issued at the end of the visit also indicated that cooperation in fighting terrorism figured prominently on the menu of the talks.

"The leaders called for the full compliance with bilateral, multilateral and international obligations of states to prevent terrorism in any manner originating from territories under their control since terrorism emanates from the sanctuaries and training camps and the sustenance and support received by the terrorist groups," it said.

"I have come to stand with you. We felt as much as a victim like your citizens and I have come to express solidarity with the Indian people", Afghan President Hamid Karzai told the Prime Minister, sources said.

In fact, both India and Afghanistan have talked about the common threat from terrorism emanating from Pakistan, and following the last year's suicide bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul where Pakistan was blamed, the security cooperation between the two countries have been intensified.

Following the Mumbai attacks, the need for a closer cooperation between intelligence and security agencies of India and Afghanistan has been reinforced further.

Sources say that Afghanistan which has been battling a resurgent Taliban is a strategic pivot for India, especially for its important anti-terror operations and in case Islamabad could not be reigned in through diplomatic means, India and Afghanistan could look at intelligence sharing and other.

Over the years India has managed a strategic foothold in Afghanistan with its goodwill diplomacy. India has pledged over $ 1.2 billion and after completing the strategic road from Zaranj to Delaram in south-western Afghanistan, a second major infrastructure project, the Pul-e-Khumri to Kabul transmission line and the sub-station at Chimtala in Northern Afghanistan, will be handed over shortly to the government of Afghanistan.

In fact, following the meeting India also announced a gift of 250,000 metric tonnes of wheat for the Afghan people. The details of the security cooperation between the two countries can not be revealed.
The new US President, Barack Obama, is likely to focus more on stablising the situation in Afghanistan and if India can put into place a strategic cooperation with Afghanistan and the US, it would be an important step for weeding out terrorism in the region.


CNN-IBN flashed news that Karazi requested Indian Army help.
kasthuri
BRFite
Posts: 411
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 08:17
Location: Mount Doom in Mordor

Re: India to send 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by kasthuri »

CNN-IBN flashed news that Karazi requested Indian Army help.
Is it ? Do you know if any other media has it ?
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Kanson »

Is it ? Do you know if any other media has it ?
Yes, CNN-IBN flashed that news. Not sure abt other media. I havent seen.
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by vsudhir »

So it begins.....
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19327
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by NRao »

IF, actually, some 75% of A'stan is under Taliban and now reports are stating that they have a huge chunk of Pakistan, India has to act. Is there any other option?

Loss in Iraq only means Shia rise to the top - no secularity between Shia and Sunni. Oil will flow and dust will settle.

A loss in Afghanistan means dust will rise in the US (and India).

Taliban are sure screwing up the 30K US troop schedule - needs to be speeded up.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19327
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by NRao »

Stratfor is predicting that "Pakistani Badlands" will fall to Taliban this year (IF they do).

IF that happens then there will be no A'stan/TSP border. Something TSPA and ISI would love.
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by vsudhir »

For starters, Dilli could start opening 'negotiations' with any non-aligned (with ISI, that is) pakhtunkhwa emirate phreedom fighters from oppressive porkistani rule in tsp. We'll give you recognition if you declare independence all the way to the indus types..... ANd yes, could you pass on more videos of emirate-style justice delivery plz??

IMHO, Dilli doesn't have as much to worry abt from small-arms toting tribal pushtu fighters as it does from an organized WMD toting tspa.

Meanwhile, would be so nice if sarkar at least uses its doordarshan channel to transmit some adult propaganda - of lynchings, beheadings, wanton killings, textbook jihads etc that routinely happen in the emirate and are videotaped and exported. Let our dhimmedia and IMs see for themselves the glorious effects of koran==constitution and sharia==constitutional law in our friendly neighborhood onlee.

The rapid, unconditional fall and breakup of tsp-stan is the first milestone after which other things can be planned and implemented.

JMTPs etc.
kasthuri
BRFite
Posts: 411
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 08:17
Location: Mount Doom in Mordor

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by kasthuri »

Link
Karzai to join hands with India against terror

CNN-IBN

TimePublished on Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 02:44 in Nation » India section

New Delhi: Afghanistan wants to join hands with India in the fight against terror.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai met Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh on Monday and sources have told CNN-IBN that Karzai's proposal for India includes a possible inclusion of the Indian Army in an offensive role in Afganistan.

The Afghan President discussed the role of pakistan based terror groups with Pranab Mukherjee as well as President Zardari's efforts on tackling terrorism.

He also talked about India's aid for reconstruction of Afghanistan and the US's strategic approach to the region.

This is the first visit of any head of state or government since India has collected and shared 26/11 evidence. It is also Karzai's second visit in five months. The last visit was in August 2008, after the Indian embassy bombing in Kabul.

India's External Affairs Minister, Pranab Mukherjee said, "President Karzai has come here to express his solidarity. We have a good bilateral relationship with Afghanistan."
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by ramana »

NRao wrote:Stratfor is predicting that "Pakistani Badlands" will fall to Taliban this year (IF they do).

IF that happens then there will be no A'stan/TSP border. Something TSPA and ISI would love.

Ssridhar and I had made the prediction in ppt charts developed separately in December!
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19327
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by NRao »

ramana,

This suspense is too much. What happens next? Taliban prevail or Mullen allows IA to - what is it called....... boost level contraceptive?
Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7115
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Muppalla »

boost level contraceptive :rotfl: :rotfl:
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by ramana »

NRao wrote:ramana,

This suspense is too much. What happens next? Taliban prevail or Mullen allows IA to - what is it called....... boost level contraceptive?
Taliban will prevail atleast West of Indus and dissolve the Durand line. That puts Afghanistan and TSP at risk. The jury is out on whether Pakiban will be content with realizing the Pashtunwa nation or will it want to spread its message as all newly formed nations from armed conflict. Will they adopt ummah goals or be content with realizing their nation state?
So based on that there will be different outcomes.

Karzai in Delhi means he wants to preserve the Afghan state including the pashtun regions. I dont know if India wants to or not. The tea leaves are not telling anything on this front. Raja Mohan article is interesting. An maximal accomodationist is turning hawk.

One thing to understand is Pakjabis wont fight they always surrender to superior force. It has been in their history since the earliest times. Unfortunately the WKK brigade doesn't understand that and weakens Indian resolve.

So in this equation its what the Pashtuns decide and not the Pakjabis with all their modern training and upper crust habits.

If my analysis is right then the Pakjabis will submit to the Pakiban.

This is not desirable. its here that India has a role to play.

uncle is to short sided to understand the long roll of history and will advice the Pakjabis to submit to the fundoos as they did to the Shahi Iranains in 1978. This they will do under the mistaken belief that KSA type Wahabis should be propped up over all other Sunni factions to keep getting their oil. And to balance their support for Israel in the Middle East.

More latter.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by RajeshA »

ramana wrote:One thing to understand is Pakjabis wont fight they always surrender to superior force. It has been in their history since the earliest times. Unfortunately the WKK brigade doesn't understand that and weakens Indian resolve.

So in this equation its what the Pashtuns decide and not the Pakjabis with all their modern training and upper crust habits.

If my analysis is right then the Pakjabis will submit to the Pakiban.

This is not desirable. its here that India has a role to play.
This is where a proper battle between the Pakjabis and the Talishtun/Pakiban is so very important. Without this battle, the demarcation between the two ethnicities and ethnicity based Islamic flavor will not take place. Without that vertical split, Talibanism will creep over Pakistan like an ink-stain and parts of the Pakjabi establishment, who feel comfortable with Talibanism or see it as an opportunity to grab power in Isloo as comrades-in-arms of Pakiban, will facilitate the ultimate takeover of Pakistan by the Pakiban + Pakjabi Jihadists Combine.

If a proper battle takes place, say for Peshawar, there will be enough bad blood, retaliation and ethnic cleansing to make the ethnic divide between Talishtun and Pakjabis permanent. On the one hand, Pakjabis will become a bit more motivated to take up arms and become the buffer state between India and Talishtunistan. This is of great interest to the Indian state. Secondly the divide, may convince the Talishtun that Talibanism/Islamism will not get them more converts or supporters amongst the Pakjabis, and hence this head-on clash will encourage their own ethnic identity and downgrade the Islamism component. Just like Islamism has failed to prove a credible bridge between the Taliban and other Afghan groups like the Tadjiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks and others, similarly a truly bloody battle will make Islamism ineffective as a bridge to the Pakjabis. That can change the complexion of Talibanism and it can revert to Pushtun nationalism, something that India will welcome.

I hope the media is around to film the mayhem. :twisted:
Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 587
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Raja Ram »

I had promised some old friends here that I would do a take on the possible Afghan move by GoI/IA. Here goes the usual ramble.

Let us begin, gentle readers, by a brief overview of the situation in Afghanistan today. The Karzai regime is struggling, and seems to be content with its writ running in the areas traditionally associated with the Northern Alliance and its presence in the important centres of Pashtun Afghania - Kandahar, Jalalabad, Kunduz, Herat etc. Today, the West, represented by NATO and the US have trouble in eliminating the Afghan Taliban. Going by recent trends, the US and west seems to be reconciling with a splitting of afghanistan. Pakistan seems to be ok with it. Ideally the PA would like to have the whole of Afghanistan as they did with taliban. But they may settle for Pashtunistan and a quasi autonomous pashtun area within pakistan.

Will this be in India's interest? My own view is no. It is not in our interest to have any form of radicalized Islamic territory in the region. One can even argue that it is not in the US interest either, but the US has demonstrated only profound stupidity when it comes to this region.

Indeed the insurgents have made a comeback thanks to the stupidity of the west. Long back in the early days of BR there were some here who used to boast about the superior arms, tactics, valor, leadership of NATO. Well, we can see that the NATO is reluctant to come out of their sanitized fortified camps and are looking at ways and means of cutting a deal and getting the hell out of there. So much for their superiority!

The US through its ill advised misadventure in Iraq lost focus on Afghanistan. The task was to rebuild and increase the presence of Afghan government and create a sense of stakeownership amongst the citizens in the new Afghanistan. It meant getting down and providing good security, building schools, hospitals, create transparent courts, training and equipping the Afghan army, building civic society, providing an ambience of peace and growth and ensuring that there are jobs. In short, helping Afghans rule themselves and getting out of centuries old feudalism combined with most virulent interpretation of Islam. It takes a generation to achieve this. That is what was and is needed. In this, the US has spectaculary failed - yet again. And gentle reader, guess which country actually did and continues to do all that?

Now let us examine what should be the objectives for India viz Afghanistan.

1. A strong, united, non-radicalized and independent Afghanistan that is not enimically disposed towards India and not in any way controlled or influenced by Pakistan.

2. An Afghanistan that does not provide Pakistan with any strategic depth or a logistics base for its terror machine directed at India.

3. An Afghanistan that will cooperate with India in its efforts to minimise the impact of the impending implosion of Pakistan so that it causes minimum damage to Afghanistan and India.

Of the three listed above, point 1 is something that there is convergence of interests between the West, India and Afghanis themselves. Points 2 and 3 are purely Indian objectives. Afghanis may have some interests in realising 2 and 3 but definitely not the west.

The GOI, right through, has been well aware of the convergence and divergence of interests. It has therefore calibirated its moves accordingly. Even before 9/11, India had rebuilt its lost influence considerably. Remember, post the fall of the Najib government, pakistan had successfully denied any role for India until the unravelling of Afghanistan started.

India made contact with the Northern Alliance and along with Iran and Russia held out against all odds - the US was fully in bed with Pakistan and the taliban to crush the NA. This has been one of the most under acknowledged Indian foreign policy achievements till date.

Then 9/11 happened and the US turned sides and forced Pakistan to pull the plug on taliban. It came with a price and the infamous Kunduz airlift is an example of the kind of price that they had to pay to Pakistan.

The NA too could make its sweep only because of the US and they way they turned away from Taliban regime in pursuit of Osama. Without NA the US would not have succeeded and vice versa too. Post the installation of Karzai government, the GOI has done everything possible with regard to all three objectives.

Now let us turn to examine the question of this thread, should India commit troops in Afghanistan? I am sure that all you rakshaks are concerned with this question from a purely Indian perspective. In this analysis I dont really care of how it serves US interests or paki interest at all. That should not be our worry really. After all in the long term, it is not in India's interest to have the US sitting around in our neighbourhood.

First what should be our objective right now with regard to Pakistan?

1. Destroy Pakistan's ability to wage any kind of overt or covert war including terror war with India. No matter who calls the shots in that country. This has to be achieved as quicky as possible.

2. In order to assure long term peace and well being of all concerned, make sure that the implosion of Pakistan happens and happens with minimum impact to us.


Here again, there is understanding and even agreement to some extent to objective 1 between the West and India. On objective 2 there is no agreement at all. The west would want a united pakistani rentier state and will never support anything that removes Pakistan forever as a single entity. This is therefore a point of divergence of interests. It is important to understand this very well.

Furthermore, on objective 2 I doubt if there is consensus within India itself. The PM does not seem to share this objective although it does appear that the officialdom and a majority of political class seem to have come to this conclusion judging by the level of anger and plain speaking that is being done. Let us leave that debate aside for a minute and assume that objective 2 is there.

If you now look at:
(i)the prevailing situation in Afghanistan, namely the predicament that the West is in and their gameplan of installing a friendly regime in Kabul, cutting a deal with pakistan and taliban to come to an agreement that there should not be any attacks on the west but against India is ok, and then getting the hell out of there.
(ii) Our objectives related to Afghanistan - points of convergence and divergence with the other parties involved are to be considered
(iii) our objectives related to pakistan - same as above

What will we achieve by putting 120,000 troops in Afghanistan? What strategic objectives are being served? If you look at this question from such an angle it is truly a mixed bag isn't it? One can make out a case for putting the boots on the ground and one can also make a case against it.

Seasoned military men will tell you the importance of a clear articulation of objectives. From it flows the military doctrine, strategy, operations and tactics. If that is not clear then it has been seen time and again as one of the causes for disasters. India's experience in Sri Lanka is a closer to home example, but military history is littered with a lot many more.

What should be therefore the objectives of an Indian force in Afghanistan? What are the chances that they can achieve those objectives? What is the price for this? How will the troops being in Afghanistan help India with its objectives with respect to Pakistan? The last question is the key.

Fortunately or unfortunately, gentle readers, I do not have the answers for these questions in its entirety yet. When I have crystallized my thoughts on these I shall share another ramble here.

All I can fathom at this point is that there is very limited scope for us to bring down pakistani capability to wage war and mount terror against us by boots on ground in Afghanistan. What we can achieve with troops is to have an ability to strike across from two borders and keep Pakistan guessing. So we can achieve quite a bit with respect to Objective 2 for Pakistan and far less in terms of Objective 1 which is our priority right now.

But we must also remember that by embroiling ourselves in Afghanistan with a full identification of India with the West will come with a cost. We must realise that there is more terror attacks planned agains India in Pindi HQ, Muridke in Lahore, Binori in Karachi than in Kandahar and even maybe Peshawar. By going in, and being seen as part of US/West, we may end up with more centers and guys planning terror against India.

Indian involvement in Afghanistan today is by an large seen as the most positive by a majority of Afghanis - from all regions except by the taliban. There is no point in creating new enemies.

Let us also briefly examine the operational readiness of the Indian Armed Forces to act in Afghanistan. It would involve having an integrated force that is expeditionary in nature. This is not going to be a UN mission.

We need to have a clear understanding of rules of engagement, and interoperability with the multinational force within Afghanistan. Then there is the question of command. Would India like to operate under an integrated command with the US/NATO? I am not sure that our folks in uniform would relish operating under US/NATO command. If India has to operate under its own command, then we need to sort out a lot of questions and issues before the first troops land in there.

From a capability perspective it is therefore important to understand whether India has the werewithal to allocate such a large force indifinitely whilst maintaining its ability to counter any moves that Pakistan and China may and will take as a reaction to the pressure (pak) or a way to exploit an oportunity (china)

Overall, the strategic planners in India who have the above mentioned objectives in mind will have to examine the troops in Afghanistan option as one amongst the many that are there. It will have to be a well thought integrated strategy. There could be a play for troops in Afghanistan, if there is a clear operational objective for them. It could be a mix of smaller contingents of special forces and airforce assets rather than spreading out 120,000 troops. The last thing that they would want is Indian troops being cannon fodder replacing a reluctant to fight NATO troops.

As usual a long ramble, please take it for what it is worth
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Lalmohan »

one scenario might be to use IA to secure the friendly parts of Afghanistan (North, West, etc.) which then 'frees up' NATO troops, e.g. French and Germans to fight alongside the US, UK, Can, NL together with Aus in the South and East. They are far more interoperable than we would be with them. at the end of the day, we don't need Unkil's eager boys LGB'ing lead IA units in the mistaken belief that they are enemy combatants getting too hot.

the other pro to his might be to really secure the western and north western supply lines into afghanistan, and accelerate the development work in these areas
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by RajeshA »

Raja Ram ji,

As usual, an excellent ramble.

I have been consistently of the view, that sending Indian troops to Afghanistan, will be extremely disastrous for India. Afghanistan is booby-trapped and everything will explode in India's face, should our boots hit ground there.

The best India can do is

o consolidate the defenses of non-Pushtuns in Afghanistan: the Tadjiks, the Uzbeks, the Hazaras, the Turkmen.

o build up capacity of Pushtun tribes at variance with Mullah Omar's hold on Taliban, the Haqqani gang and Hekmatyar.

o train and arm the militias and security circles around religious men in Pushtun areas, who do not agree with Taliban ways.

o create strong bonds between the educated and 'middle class' Afghans and India.

o control the poppy and heroin distribution and export routes out of Afghanistan.

Except for the last point which requires a strengthening of cooperation on border security between Iran, CAS, India and a board and search policy for Pakistan, all other points can be done relatively easily. One just needs to pump money and organization skills into the effort.

We need to reestablish strong military relations with the Northern Alliance component at the tribal level and at the government level. Also we need to help USA boost Afghan Army capacity and Pushtun tribal militias opposed to Taliban, very much on the lines of Petraeus Doctrine. We just need to ensure that it is not Pakistan, which has a say on which Pushtuns Petraeus accomodates and which ones he targets.

The point is, India needs a friendly and closely aligned force in Afghanistan, stronger and more motivated than the Taliban. There is no need for India to put Indian boots in Afghanistan. On the other hand, a constant feud between the Pakjabi Army and Pakiban would also be welcome.

The question to be asked is: why cannot Afghans go and hunt some Taliban on their own?
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by RajeshA »

Lalmohan,

the Germans do not want to fight in Afghanistan. It has nothing to do with their compulsions and work in Kunduz and Kabul.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Lalmohan »

RajeshA wrote:Lalmohan,

the Germans do not want to fight in Afghanistan. It has nothing to do with their compulsions and work in Kunduz and Kabul.
Yes i know, and i should have mentioned it. Nor do some of the other countries. But Unkil's patience with NATO might be wearing thin. Practically, its better for us not to be integrated with unkil forces right now - we are not ready. even brits who are the most integrated regularly suffer from blue on blue kills from eager Unkil faujis.

we can however take the load off other sectors and put lots of boots on the ground to serve other purposes
Yusuf
BRFite
Posts: 164
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 10:03

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Yusuf »

Why is our "thought/proposal" to send troops to Astan viewed from the prism of the US forces stationed there?
India has to get Karzai to request India to send troops out there, and Indian forces act independently of US command to protect Indian interests an not US. Off course the US will not like it, but then we have our own interests to protect.
Stationing troops in A-stan and in that numbers will surely give Pakistan sleepless nights. Hell they couldnt see 12 MiG 29s stationed in Tajikistan.
Mayura
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 14
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 09:15

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Mayura »

Guys, I am not sure if this should be considered a right post here;may be not.But, still.

I was shocked to read this news on CNN-IBN website and this is the top headline in BR news section?

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=10545

Is this another way to de-moralize our troops or are they talking the facts??

Are they (CNN-IBN) really considering to improve the standards of our troops by drawing the attentions of our politicians or is this otherwise??
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Lalmohan »

yusufji

if you're going to share a cage with an 800lb gorrilla, its best if you're his pal
Yusuf
BRFite
Posts: 164
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 10:03

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Yusuf »

Lalmohan wrote:yusufji

if you're going to share a cage with an 800lb gorrilla, its best if you're his pal
Sure we are friends. It can eat its bananas and we will find ours.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Lalmohan »

Yusuf wrote:
Lalmohan wrote:yusufji

if you're going to share a cage with an 800lb gorrilla, its best if you're his pal
Sure we are friends. It can eat its bananas and we will find ours.
yes indeed, which is why i was saying that we should operate in our own sector and let unkil eat his banana's at his leisure
Yusuf
BRFite
Posts: 164
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 10:03

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Yusuf »

Well my contention to put troops on ground has nothing to do with US led WOT. For me its a very big strategic move to station Indian troops on ground in A-stan even if the troops are doing nothing but playing Budkushi. It will keep the Pakistanis uncertain and jittery all the time knowing their are Indian forces in A-stan and MiG 29s in Tajikistan.

That will put paid to any of its threat to move troops from west and amass on Indian borders. If there is any war with Pakistan, then it will be shorter than the 71 war with Indian forces on both sides of the Pakistan border.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by RajeshA »

May be it has been discussed before, but I would want to put the question again:

o What can Indian forces in Afghanistan really achieve there?

o How will the supply lines of Indian Forces be ensured?

o Would it not make India more dependent on other countries in the region for our supplies, just as USA and NATO has become dependent on Pakistan?

o Why should Indian Forces be welcomed in Afghanistan? Just because an enfeebled Karzai invites India to come in, doesn't mean a large cross-section of the populace would be similarly welcoming. Also once we start encountering some opposition and our bullets and bombs start hitting innocents, the public opinion there can change there very quickly.

o If not even Kashmiris, who are supposed to be Indians, are welcoming our forces there, why should the welcome of the Afghans be different.

o It is easy to commit forces to some mission with diffuse mission goals, but very difficult to extract them afterwards.
Yusuf
BRFite
Posts: 164
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 10:03

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Yusuf »

RajeshA wrote: o What can Indian forces in Afghanistan really achieve there?
Apart from securing Indian interests in A-stan, it opens a second front against Pakistan.
RajeshA wrote: o How will the supply lines of Indian Forces be ensured?
We have good relations with Iran from which our logistics can be arranged. Iran is no friend of Pakistan and it will not mind Indians using its territory for transit.
RajeshA wrote: o Would it not make India more dependent on other countries in the region for our supplies, just as USA and NATO has become dependent on Pakistan?
Yes but then other nations are not rogue as far as India is concerned.
RajeshA wrote: o Why should Indian Forces be welcomed in Afghanistan? Just because an enfeebled Karzai invites India to come in, doesn't mean a large cross-section of the populace would be similarly welcoming. Also once we start encountering some opposition and our bullets and bombs start hitting innocents, the public opinion there can change there very quickly.
India has had historical ties with A-stan. India has invested heavily in improving the lives of common people like building hospitals,bridges,roads etc. We are welcome there in general except from the Taliban.
RajeshA wrote: o If not even Kashmiris, who are supposed to be Indians, are welcoming our forces there, why should the welcome of the Afghans be different.
The recent elections might show its otherwise.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3485
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Aditya G »

This talk of army offensive in afghanistan is of concern to citizens of India - since the the government has failed to provide sense of security in India - is it prudent for the govt to open a front on foreign land?
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by Sanku »

Sometimes the safety at home can only be ensured that you take the fight to the enemies home -- however having said that I find the post by RajaRam phenomenally accurate -- what charter should be given to the Mil arm.

The overall context needs to be nailed down accurately for sure.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India to consider sending 120,000 troops to Afghanistan

Post by RajeshA »

Yusuf,

Those are good points. However whatever we could achieve by opening a second front against Pakistan, is already being achieved by remaining passive and aloof as the Pakiban are already hemorrhaging and finishing off whatever presence TSPA has in the Pushtun areas of Pakistan. So why not let this process continue to its logical conclusion?! I hardly think Indian forces would have been able to do a better job at it! Why waste our blood and wealth on the Pakis?

My prediction is that in 2009 itself Peshawar will fall, and that will be the beginning of the end of Pakistan.

What we need to do, is simply play the various power brokers in Pakistan correctly and ensure a controlled implosion with the best possible power constellation in Pakjab, Sindh, Baluchistan and Karachi for India, and PoK reintegrated within J&K. Even if India allocates $ 10 billion dollars for a controlled Pakistani break-up every year, I think it will be well spent money.

There is no reason to give Iran an overwhelming influence on India's strategic vision and capacity for the region, even though a close cooperation with Iran on this score would be useful.
Locked