Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 May 2009 20:59

Guys, if you start on Conspiracy Theories then will have to close the thread and a lot of good stuff will go away.

Do you want that? Keshav please pursue those lines off line. Thanks,

ramana

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 21 May 2009 21:19

self delete..

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 21 May 2009 21:21

Chiron wrote:But, does it not create an atmosphere of doubt that the high probability of this being true might exist??

Just an attempt to analyse the scenario, if this is indeed true.

I could file a lawsuit against Barack Obama that he lied and is indeed a foreign born, secret Muslim, working for al-Qaeda and attempting to destroy America, lose the suit, and not be anywhere near the truth.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 May 2009 21:26

Folks again last request. Please look at elections thread and how it had to be locked up. Please be on topic or else every thread becomes nukkad. If you cant be on topic please desist. Am saying/requesting it. What excuse can be given for off topic posts?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 May 2009 22:26

We have been neglecting the developments in Myanmar. I had tried to draw attention to this some pages back. But, note that the ploy of the junta as being openly speculated on by the media, is that they want to keep Aung san SuuKyi away from the public in scheduled elections in the near future. The siginificance is that they are doing it on th excuse of her meeting with an American without permission.

Now, she is closely watched and guarded by the army. How could an "undesirable" person enter? Moreover, they are daring to specifically connect the issue to an American. Is it increased support or influence of PRC? What does this mean for Indian policy towards Myanmar?

GOI has been strangely recticent and non-engaging about Myanmar's junta. I would suppose an openly democratic posture, in favour of restoration of democracy in full fledged form, (not the military supervised one) should be the stance of GOI. This is a good place to expose the PRC, which will have to rush and do more to bolster the junta. The benefits of being able to remove the junta will be immense for India. At least it is not a Nepal like situation, where India's involvement will be seen as negative by the Myanmarese people.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 02:59

ramana wrote:Folks again last request. Please look at elections thread and how it had to be locked up. Please be on topic or else every thread becomes nukkad. If you cant be on topic please desist. Am saying/requesting it. What excuse can be given for off topic posts?

Ramana,

Why are you surprised at conspiracy theories ? Conspiracy theories are products of a culture that has 1) delusion, 2) its head in the sand and 3) demonizes other people. The first two are self-explanatory but let me give you a couple of example of the third, ie., demonizing of other people.

Who are the biggest conspiracy theorists in the world today ? The Islamic world. Everything is a Jewish/American conspiracy. 9/11 was a Jewish conspiracy. If it wasnt, it was the Americans who did it themselves. Everything going on in Pak is a Jewish-Hindu conspiracy. Baluchistan is a Hindu conspiracy. Even the Taliban........is a Hindu conspiracy (RAW). Then of course, you have the Indian intelligence agencies who pulled off the Mumbai attacks and the parliament attacks to give Pak and Islam a bad name. The economic collapse of Wall Street in 2008 is a classic Jewish conspiracy.

You get the drift.......the more a people can look at other people as less than humans, they also kinda assume that the other people are capable of doing monstrous things to themselves for no other reason than to make others look bad. Islamic peoples(common masses) today demonize others and look upon "others" as less than human and they easily get taken in by this kind of propoganda spread by their leadership.

I have warned many times on this forum against being delusional and sinking our head in the sand. In addition this forum has also become a "bash the West" forum, based on irrational rants and a lot of false arguments and to an extent is guilty of attributing fantastic stuff to the West, which sometimes is almost laughable. We should also look within us and check if we are not going too far in demonizing the Western people and are not demonstrating some minimal compassion and empathy that any humans deserve.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 03:09

Just a follow up.

The Americans are not super humans. They are humans with human frailties, massive inefficiencies and inertias within their ruling bureacracies, dogmas and orthodoxies within their governing doctrine and massively prone to errors and even stupidities. Living in Washington for decades and having observed the functioning of the government closely from many different angles, I find some of the "devious" and "chanakyan" stuff attributed to the US Govt laughable and pathetic. The US governement gets lucky to be somewhat intelligent and reasonable......its impossible for it to go as far as being really strategic or "chanikyan", of late......

So, lets give them a break and look at them through a human prism not look at them as this huge unfeeling, machine like automatons.......working with computer efficiency to dominate successfully every aspect of life on Earth......

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 22 May 2009 03:58

In a way, the cases of Myanmar and SL offer unique parallels and subtle differences. In all the peripheral countries, with respect to India, the central dilemma of Indian policy is that of humanitarian intervention versus nationalist backlash. In SL intervention was an even more of an agonizing double edged sword, because of domestic pressure in favour of Tamil ethnicity, and the corresponding danger of Sinhala nationalist backlash.

In Myanmar, with which India had close interaction both before as well as after colonial control, there is no such significant ethnic commitments. India also does not appear to be keen on repeating the Tibetan case, in highlighting or supporting the substantial Buddhist opposition to the regime.

US policy of "humanitarian intervention" has been indicted before as being opportunistic and essentially aligned to US foreign policy obejectives or strategic interests. But it is also significant to note the sources of such criticisms.(For example, the following is sourced from within the EU http://www.isdp.eu/files/publications/a ... yanmar.pdf)

However the question still remains, whether a "humanitarian intervention" becomes invalid and rejectable simply because it happens to coincide with the strategic interests of power that is able to carry it through. This is a question that needs to be settled by Indian policy makers too.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 May 2009 05:06

raji wrote:
I have warned many times on this forum against being delusional and sinking our head in the sand. In addition this forum has also become a "bash the West" forum, based on irrational rants and a lot of false arguments and to an extent is guilty of attributing fantastic stuff to the West, which sometimes is almost laughable. We should also look within us and check if we are not going too far in demonizing the Western people and are not demonstrating some minimal compassion and empathy that any humans deserve.

It is not about the western people but it is about the western govt and western institutions.
People are mostly not involved in their individual capacities. But the history and trends of the past show us that the govt and various agencies have set a pattern which is not public knowledge. What is not public knowledge becomes a surprise and it is not believable.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 22 May 2009 05:23

Washington is focused on the Pakistani province of Balochistan like a laser. In an evolving strategy of balkanization of the country - increasingly popular in Washington foreign-policy circles - Balochistan has very attractive assets: natural wealth, scarce population and a port, which is key for Pipelineistan plans.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 05:30

Acharya wrote:
raji wrote:
I have warned many times on this forum against being delusional and sinking our head in the sand. In addition this forum has also become a "bash the West" forum, based on irrational rants and a lot of false arguments and to an extent is guilty of attributing fantastic stuff to the West, which sometimes is almost laughable. We should also look within us and check if we are not going too far in demonizing the Western people and are not demonstrating some minimal compassion and empathy that any humans deserve.
It is not about the western people but it is about the western govt and western institutions.
People are mostly not involved in their individual capacities. But the history and trends of the past show us that the govt and various agencies have set a pattern which is not public knowledge. What is not public knowledge becomes a surprise and it is not believable.

Well, at least in the States, if not all of Western Europe as well, there is less of a disconnect between governments and people, then cultures elsewhere, including a democracy such as India. It is not an absolute difference, only difference of degrees, and degrees matter.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 05:31

VinodTK wrote:Washington is focused on the Pakistani province of Balochistan like a laser. In an evolving strategy of balkanization of the country - increasingly popular in Washington foreign-policy circles - Balochistan has very attractive assets: natural wealth, scarce population and a port, which is key for Pipelineistan plans.

Another conspiracy theory. What is the evidence that Washington even knows much about Balchistan. Hell, Washington to this day doesnt even know the true nature of Pak, despite being fooled countless times.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 22 May 2009 05:33

raji wrote:
VinodTK wrote:Washington is focused on the Pakistani province of Balochistan like a laser. In an evolving strategy of balkanization of the country - increasingly popular in Washington foreign-policy circles - Balochistan has very attractive assets: natural wealth, scarce population and a port, which is key for Pipelineistan plans.

Another conspiracy theory. What is the evidence that Washington even knows much about Balchistan. Hell, Washington to this day doesnt even know the true nature of Pak, despite being fooled countless times.

Do we have proof/evidence for the above?

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 05:56

Muppalla wrote:
Do we have proof/evidence for the above?

You want me to prove a negative ?

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 22 May 2009 06:00

I believe Washington know the true nature of Pakistan and it wants a particular behaviour from Pakistan and Washington will wait, coerce or do whatever in the book to do the cource correction. I don't think that "Washington does not know" is a correct statement. Just my opinion.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 06:11

Muppalla wrote:I believe Washington know the true nature of Pakistan and it wants a particular behaviour from Pakistan and Washington will wait, coerce or do whatever in the book to do the cource correction. I don't think that "Washington does not know" is a correct statement. Just my opinion.

I wish that were true. Then India would have been a major beneficiary.

But alas, so far it has been Pak that has waited out, corece(blackmail) and done everything in the book to "play" US for a chump, with a great deal of success.

Americans are frustrated in Pak because of this ignorance of Pak's true nature. They have come to believe that they have practically no leverage vis-a-vis Pak and therefore, the only strategy they can adopt is throw money at them, periodically have 3 way meetings, have a drone strike once every two weeks, and say "Pak is equally threatened by Talib as US" enough times, hoping Pak will actually come to believe it, if said loudly enough. While in fact, they are simply attempting to pay off Pak leadership (whoever happens to be in power) in the hope that the Pak leader of the day will do their job for them.

If US understood Pak's true nature, they would not ignore the greatest leverage they have against Pak. Think about it. What is the one thing that terrifies Pak ? What is the one thing that they have nightmares about ? INDIA. If the US wanted to develop leverage against Pak, all it has to do is make noises about a nuanced change in the US stance on Kashmir, specifically at least bringing out of the storage the Indian claims on Azad Kashmir and open up the possibility of at least understanding India's position, if not directly endorsing it..........and keep the issue simmering, until Pak cries "Uncle"....

Conversely, it is also a great opportunity missed by India, south block and Indian embassy, not to mention NRIs in the States, to point out to Foggy Bottom the availability of such leverage. Perhaps, it could actually educate the US on India's legitimate position on POK and how if India could reclaim it, it could potentially be an alternate transit route into Afganistan, in view of the other routes being constantly under threat......thus further reducing American dependence on Pak and thereby increasing American leverage and diminishing Pak's capability to blackmail....

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 22 May 2009 06:20

The possibility of using Balochistan area for opening a transit route to supply AFG was broached a long time ago in this thread and also in others. It is attractive also for both enemies and friends of Iran. It is strategically important as it looks in on the Persian Gulf, and could be a source route for the smuggling of men and resources into AFG that keeps the Talebs supplied

The difficulty will be that the port of Gwadar probably already has Chinese presence. US takeover or presence could mean an understanding with PRC. US or Chinese presence here does not work out nicely, as this is not very comforting for Iran, in spite of possible links and understandings with PRC. There is also the question of potential negative reaction of Balochi nationalism which can be utilized or instigated by the Talebs. To neutralize that, US or PRC will have to somehow assure the Balochs that their nationalistic aspirations will be looked after. This comes ind irect conflict with TSP interests, and both US and PRC can have difficulty handling this.

Things will depend a lot on how the confrontation between Iran and USA shapes up. If it remains a sparring of verbal abuse, there is not going to be any moves on Balochistan.

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 22 May 2009 06:31

The US knows it has no sustainable route to Afghanistan other than Pakistan. Its route through CAR is not that strong and its route through Iran is still a ways away. Whether their mission is "get Osama" or "transform Afghanistan" or "play the game" their route goes through Pakistan. This Pakistan knows all too well.

The Obama administration cannot afford a successful strike on US. They don't want news of body bags coming back home flooding the channels. Their mission has diluted. Their force levels have been forced up. Instead of compounding their problems by minimizing influence, they will seek to maneuver to maximize their influence with whoever is in Pak. Pakistan knows this all too well too.

If the US leaves, China walks in, and that Pakistan knows too and the US knows too. Once that happens Talibs fester freely, which China won't have a problem with as long as Pakistan controls em. This is not a desirable outcome for US. So US won't leave.

If only they can see that opening up a CAR route to India and holding that corridor is of benefit to them, which it is, if only they can see that clearly, then there is a chance it will happen. But not only are the above mentioned points difficulties to getting there, if they do that, China and US relations will implode creating a disaster for the economy. The present situation is a "local minimum" for them, getting out of which is increasingly difficult.

So they are doing the few things they know to do and they probably realize it is not working, though they would hope that it does. All they need India to do is sit quiet while the f*ck themselves in the process.

India needs to devise an alternative that holds on its own and will strengthen if the Americans join in. It will also benefit the americans. But because they don't see that, the Congress victory may have brought an unexpected, or may be not so unexpected, benefit to the yanks. If India takes the initiative, in the end, and for the first time, there will be a reversal in the great game. There is no other alternative left.

S

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 22 May 2009 06:41

raji wrote:
ramana wrote:Folks again last request. Please look at elections thread and how it had to be locked up. Please be on topic or else every thread becomes nukkad. If you cant be on topic please desist. Am saying/requesting it. What excuse can be given for off topic posts?
Ramana,

Why are you surprised at conspiracy theories ? Conspiracy theories are products of a culture that has 1) delusion, 2) its head in the sand and 3) demonizes other people. The first two are self-explanatory but let me give you a couple of example of the third, ie., demonizing of other people.

Who are the biggest conspiracy theorists in the world today ? The Islamic world. Everything is a Jewish/American conspiracy. 9/11 was a Jewish conspiracy. If it wasnt, it was the Americans who did it themselves. Everything going on in Pak is a Jewish-Hindu conspiracy. Baluchistan is a Hindu conspiracy. Even the Taliban........is a Hindu conspiracy (RAW). Then of course, you have the Indian intelligence agencies who pulled off the Mumbai attacks and the parliament attacks to give Pak and Islam a bad name. The economic collapse of Wall Street in 2008 is a classic Jewish conspiracy.

You get the drift.......the more a people can look at other people as less than humans, they also kinda assume that the other people are capable of doing monstrous things to themselves for no other reason than to make others look bad. Islamic peoples(common masses) today demonize others and look upon "others" as less than human and they easily get taken in by this kind of propoganda spread by their leadership.

I have warned many times on this forum against being delusional and sinking our head in the sand. In addition this forum has also become a "bash the West" forum, based on irrational rants and a lot of false arguments and to an extent is guilty of attributing fantastic stuff to the West, which sometimes is almost laughable. We should also look within us and check if we are not going too far in demonizing the Western people and are not demonstrating some minimal compassion and empathy that any humans deserve.

Raji, that is a vacuous post. Just because some conspiracy theories are outlandish, it doesn't mean that all people have stopped conspiring. I generally have reliable data points to back up everything that I say. As Kabir says, one should be like the wise ant, that can separate the sugar from the sand.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 06:48

Pranav wrote:
Raji, that is a vacuous post. Just because some conspiracy theories are outlandish, it doesn't mean that all people have stopped conspiring. I generally have reliable data points to back up everything that I say. As Kabir says, one should be like the wise ant, that can separate the sugar from the sand.

Where, even remotely, do you find in my post the notion that people have stopped conspiring or just because we should not be conspiracy theorists, we should ignore true conspiracies. You are attempting to pick up a squabble, where there is absolutely no room for any.......a la argumentative Indian style....

Although, in today's day and age, conspiracies are rare, because conspiracies by defnition have to be secret and in today's world it is hard to keep much secret.....particularly issues relating to international relations, treaties, troop movements, diplomacy etc.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 06:50

samuel wrote:The US knows it has no sustainable route to Afghanistan other than Pakistan. Its route through CAR is not that strong and its route through Iran is still a ways away. Whether their mission is "get Osama" or "transform Afghanistan" or "play the game" their route goes through Pakistan. This Pakistan knows all too well.

The Obama administration cannot afford a successful strike on US. They don't want news of body bags coming back home flooding the channels. Their mission has diluted. Their force levels have been forced up. Instead of compounding their problems by minimizing influence, they will seek to maneuver to maximize their influence with whoever is in Pak. Pakistan knows this all too well too.

If the US leaves, China walks in, and that Pakistan knows too and the US knows too. Once that happens Talibs fester freely, which China won't have a problem with as long as Pakistan controls em. This is not a desirable outcome for US. So US won't leave.

If only they can see that opening up a CAR route to India and holding that corridor is of benefit to them, which it is, if only they can see that clearly, then there is a chance it will happen. But not only are the above mentioned points difficulties to getting there, if they do that, China and US relations will implode creating a disaster for the economy. The present situation is a "local minimum" for them, getting out of which is increasingly difficult.

So they are doing the few things they know to do and they probably realize it is not working, though they would hope that it does. All they need India to do is sit quiet while the f*ck themselves in the process.

India needs to devise an alternative that holds on its own and will strengthen if the Americans join in. It will also benefit the americans. But because they don't see that, the Congress victory may have brought an unexpected, or may be not so unexpected, benefit to the yanks. If India takes the initiative, in the end, and for the first time, there will be a reversal in the great game. There is no other alternative left.

S

Are you refering to my post where I suggest a possible POK (northern areas) alternative route ?

What are the roads like from Muzzafarabad to Afgan border via the Northern Areas ? If they are not good, can they be constructed in short order ? Anyone knows ??

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 22 May 2009 06:51

Conspiracy theories are conjectures and not facts.

They are good for drawing room chatter.

Let's leave them in the drawing room.

Ramana has spoken.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 06:57

brihaspati wrote:The possibility of using Balochistan area for opening a transit route to supply AFG was broached a long time ago in this thread and also in others. It is attractive also for both enemies and friends of Iran. It is strategically important as it looks in on the Persian Gulf, and could be a source route for the smuggling of men and resources into AFG that keeps the Talebs supplied

The difficulty will be that the port of Gwadar probably already has Chinese presence. US takeover or presence could mean an understanding with PRC. US or Chinese presence here does not work out nicely, as this is not very comforting for Iran, in spite of possible links and understandings with PRC. There is also the question of potential negative reaction of Balochi nationalism which can be utilized or instigated by the Talebs. To neutralize that, US or PRC will have to somehow assure the Balochs that their nationalistic aspirations will be looked after. This comes ind irect conflict with TSP interests, and both US and PRC can have difficulty handling this.

Things will depend a lot on how the confrontation between Iran and USA shapes up. If it remains a sparring of verbal abuse, there is not going to be any moves on Balochistan.

You are right about problems with the Balochistan route. In any case, even if it were to become feasible, it would not as directly benefit India, as a POK route would, provided India gets control of POK in a quid-pro-quo. I mean if Pak can actually give away part of JK to China, why cant India grant a temporary lease on a transit corridor to US in POK, if it gets control ? The only thing I am not sure of is, the topography and whether there are roads or possibility of roads in that area.

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 22 May 2009 07:00

We've discussed in this thread or the great game thread, the "routes" that open India up to CAR. I myself had several maps, though not handy here. The pivot for all these is Ayni and the axis is Ayni-Skardu. There is some strategic thinking in Indian circles alright, because they have a presence at Ayni. May be I'll find them and post links. But all movement has frozen because of this alignment with "India sit tight" (which may not be so bad in the short term).

If you go to google earth, you'll see existing routes. It meanders, and will need a bit of work to re-develop, because most runs run NE-SW rather than SE-NW. But, holding those pivots are useful in of itself, to box the fight.

S

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 07:04

samuel wrote:We've discussed in this thread or the great game thread, the "routes" that open India up to CAR. I myself had several maps, though not handy here. The pivot for all these is Ayni and the axis is Ayni-Skardu. There is some strategic thinking in Indian circles alright, because they have a presence at Ayni. May be I'll find them and post links. But all movement has frozen because of this alignment with "India sit tight" (which may not be so bad in the short term).

If you go to google earth, you'll see existing routes. It meanders, and will need a bit of work to re-develop, because most runs run NE-SW rather than SE-NW. But, holding those pivots are useful in of itself, to box the fight.

S

Pardon my ignorance, but I really have very little idea on routes through POK etc. So please enlighten me.

When you refer to "routes that open India up to CAR", what exact route are you talking about ? In your mind, is it via Baloch or northern areas of POK ? Where exactly is Ayni and when you say that there is Indian presence in Ayni, what kind of Indian presence ?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 22 May 2009 08:04

the problem is that any route will cross territory in "Northern Kashmir" currently under TSP occupation and probably with PRC presence. So Any opening up of such routes still crosses TSP territory, and a vital reason for TSP to hold onto this part. This occupation of the top semicircle of Kashmir is crucial in milking both PRC and TSP. This is also perhaps the best position to place nukes to target the denser populations of the northern Gangetic plains, so both PRC and TSP will be keen to keep control over the area.

Thus these routes will only open up if USA and India come to an agreement to jointly or singly occupy this portion. I am inclined to persist in my perception that the Obama admin is keen on withdrawing but does not want to appear weaker than the Bush admin. So it is trying to buy off/ pay the "zazia" to TSP in the form of massive, mildly conditional, annual financial aid.

Will this aid work to the desires of the US? Unlikely.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 08:56

brihaspati wrote:the problem is that any route will cross territory in "Northern Kashmir" currently under TSP occupation and probably with PRC presence. So Any opening up of such routes still crosses TSP territory, and a vital reason for TSP to hold onto this part. This occupation of the top semicircle of Kashmir is crucial in milking both PRC and TSP. This is also perhaps the best position to place nukes to target the denser populations of the northern Gangetic plains, so both PRC and TSP will be keen to keep control over the area.

Thus these routes will only open up if USA and India come to an agreement to jointly or singly occupy this portion. I am inclined to persist in my perception that the Obama admin is keen on withdrawing but does not want to appear weaker than the Bush admin. So it is trying to buy off/ pay the "zazia" to TSP in the form of massive, mildly conditional, annual financial aid.

Will this aid work to the desires of the US? Unlikely.

You are absolutely right. Northern territories are held by Pak and PRC may have a presence there. They will try to hold on to it. But, there is only one other entity that has a claim on it.......which is India. So my pipe dream goes something like this.

Premise 1...........US and the West, but particularly US has a great desire to win in AFPAK, as they look upon this as the red line, which they wouldnt want the Islamist extremist to cross (ie., a risk of taking over of Pak by extremist). With Obama in office, this premise may not hold, as you correctly point out, he is looking for ways to extricate himself, rather than putting a stake on the ground for victory at just about any cost....

Premise 2.........US can develop no other leverage on PAK and Pak continues to play them for chumps

Premise 3...........US finally starts getting the fact that PAK is playing them for chumps.....

Premise 4......US starts looking for external and additional leverage on PAK

Premise 5.......India has decisive leadership that would actually purse Premise 6 and 7 below

Premise 6......India offers a transit corridor in POK in exchange for 1) US and Western recognition of India's claim of POK and 2) US Support for India to the extent possible, without upsetting other equations, in a limited offensive by India to take over at least the corridor through Northern Areas, if not all of POK and 3) Assistance from the US through diplomatic pressure and hacking into the Pak nuclear command and control, to disable their nuke capability at least for the duration of this limited offensive

Premise 7..... India prepares itself to pull off the limited offensive through a good military plan and then actually goes for it

Premise 8......China is forced to be neutral because of 1) US presence, 2) Indian Nuke capability and 3) Indian logistical superiority in that area

All of the above have to align properly, which is extremely difficult. But for India, at least in theory, there is now a limited window of opportunity, where if all the above happens, they can pull it off. This wasnt even an option until a couple of months ago........the reason the window is open now is because US has no other leverage left on Pak and it is not winning in AFPAK....

I can actually live with a lesser outcome, which if India plays its cards right, is far more feasible. That India offers to rake up its claim on POK. Washington think tanks (Heritage, Brookings etc) and some US press folks start writing white papers, making speeches, tv interviews, press articles, speculating on a shift in US policy on Kashmir in India's favor. No actual tilt takes place, but the chatter is enough to give sufficient leverage to Washington over Pak that Pak tells the Taliban to pack up and go home, giving US a victory and a peaceful western dominated Afghanistan in the long run. This in itself will be a great move forward for India, as the Taliban will be defeated. Even this scenario is premised on 1) a great will to win on the part of US government, which doesnt seem to be on the cards with Obama, 2) a great will to win on the part of Indians, which is even more illusive and 3) my assumption is correct that the fear of the West recognizing India's claim of POK will actually cause the Pak army to order Taliban to wind down and go home.

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 22 May 2009 09:12

Raji,

please look here: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 10#p649510
On that page, also look at Brihaspati's maps. These are the two "maps" as far as I can tell.

Here is Ayni: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farkhor_Air_Base

Hope this helps.

S

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 May 2009 09:23

Raji, There is a saying "Just because you are paranoid, doesnt mean there is nobody out to get you". This applies to individuals and nations. Vice Adm S.N. Kholi the hero of Western naval Operations in 1971 quotes this in his book "India and the Indian Ocean.

Chuck Brobst in his book "Olaf Caroe and the Great Game" writes that Baluchistan was the prize that propelled US support for TSP as USAF General Curtis LeMay thought that it offered direct route to the heartland of Soviet Union for planes based in there.

Thanks for reading.

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 22 May 2009 09:30

What solutions really are available to us to open things up?

As run up:

First, I want to ask if this government is keen on bypassing the American way, or does it think in India's best interests is to just let it all play out, fairly confident of the outcome in Afpak?

Second, what happened to India-Iran-Russian movements, they seemed to be getting up and have died a sudden death.

Third, what exactly is chinese presence in PoK.

Fourth, it now seems impossible to be part of an "american alliance" in situ, in Afghanistan.

Fifth, where's the pipeline diplomacy at now?

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 09:45

samuel wrote:What solutions really are available to us to open things up?

As run up:

First, I want to ask if this government is keen on bypassing the American way, or does it think in India's best interests is to just let it all play out, fairly confident of the outcome in Afpak?

By "fairly confident of the outcome in Afpak", I presume you mean that the present Indian government is fairly confident that if it sits out and just let the Americans play out the scenarious in Af, Taliban will be defeated.

If this is what you mean, how can anyone be "fairly confident" of Taliban defeat in today's scenario ? Isnt that irrational exhuberance that the present Indian government will have for US capabilities in AFPAK

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 22 May 2009 09:53

No, just the opposite. Americans will get into a mess and leave it in a state where India will be compelled to act in its self-interest. If taliban goes and pak stays, taliban stays. If taliban stays and pak goes, taliban stays. So taliban stays. The only way Taliban goes, is if Pakistan goes with it.

The cost of "taking out" both, i.e. all of Afpak, is too high for the US. It will never be threatened to the degree where it does that. If it starts to do that, it could also have an economic blowback from China and then it will be a fight alright with taiwan opening up right around then, if I can guess.

If you look at the possible "worst case" interactions or moves in this "game" as posted a little above, I think the US is mated in Afpak and the longer it "hangs on" without a clear mission, the more clearer it will be that a "graceful exit" will be the only way out.

There is a gap between its graceful exit and the chinese rush and that is what people may be waiting for. for this to work, we must work very hard on the US to get us in to the act, just before they take off or leave. They could do it now, but they are not that wise.

It is also possible that the US with another surge will get the help of Pakis and eliminate Taliban, find Osama dead or alive and return home victorious as ever lasting friends of the entire subcontinent. That sounds like a bad joke to me.

S

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 May 2009 10:33

raji wrote:
Well, at least in the States, if not all of Western Europe as well, there is less of a disconnect between governments and people, then cultures elsewhere, including a democracy such as India. It is not an absolute difference, only difference of degrees, and degrees matter.

States has black programs which are not known to general public and they look at any new information as a surprise. OBL role and being an agent of CIA is a surpise to many americans.

raji wrote:

Where, even remotely, do you find in my post the notion that people have stopped conspiring or just because we should not be conspiracy theorists, we should ignore true conspiracies. You are attempting to pick up a squabble, where there is absolutely no room for any.......a la argumentative Indian style....

Although, in today's day and age, conspiracies are rare, because conspiracies by defnition have to be secret and in today's world it is hard to keep much secret.....particularly issues relating to international relations, treaties, troop movements, diplomacy etc.

You need to tone down your posts.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 22 May 2009 11:13

Conspiracy theory -- because US doesnt know Blaochistan?

Please take one look at the US perfidy thread. All accidental?

Whats with this great love for the west -- it does what it needs to, to provide their way if life. This is real politic not CT. Only people who confuse real politic with conspiracy are Dharmic Indians who are into "Satyamev Jayate" mindset.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 18:41

samuel wrote:No, just the opposite. Americans will get into a mess and leave it in a state where India will be compelled to act in its self-interest. If taliban goes and pak stays, taliban stays. If taliban stays and pak goes, taliban stays. So taliban stays. The only way Taliban goes, is if Pakistan goes with it.

The cost of "taking out" both, i.e. all of Afpak, is too high for the US. It will never be threatened to the degree where it does that. If it starts to do that, it could also have an economic blowback from China and then it will be a fight alright with taiwan opening up right around then, if I can guess.

If you look at the possible "worst case" interactions or moves in this "game" as posted a little above, I think the US is mated in Afpak and the longer it "hangs on" without a clear mission, the more clearer it will be that a "graceful exit" will be the only way out.

There is a gap between its graceful exit and the chinese rush and that is what people may be waiting for. for this to work, we must work very hard on the US to get us in to the act, just before they take off or leave. They could do it now, but they are not that wise.

It is also possible that the US with another surge will get the help of Pakis and eliminate Taliban, find Osama dead or alive and return home victorious as ever lasting friends of the entire subcontinent. That sounds like a bad joke to me.

S

1) What exactly will be the strategic impact for India if US fails in AFPAK and/or declares victory and leaves with job half done ? (this is looking like the most likely scenario, at the moment)

2) You say, India will be compelled to act, if US withdraws. Exactly what options does India have to act ? Is there political will to exercise any of those options, if there are any ? (two separate questions)

3) My view, India could do nothing to prevent a Talibanized Af earlier, will be even tougher for India to act now, because conceivably, Pak will extract a "surrender Af to Pak" deal from US in exchange for allowing(enabling) it a graceful exit and declare victory

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 22 May 2009 19:26

Samuel wrote
First, I want to ask if this government is keen on bypassing the American way, or does it think in India's best interests is to just let it all play out, fairly confident of the outcome in Afpak? Second, what happened to India-Iran-Russian movements, they seemed to be getting up and have died a sudden death.

The political thinking behind GOI is probably tied down by dependencies on US policy making entities. This is one possible explanation for the sudden death syndrome for the Iran+Russia type thinking. Even if in economic policies, a neo-Keynesian approach may be attempted similar to what Obama admin is attempting, it does not necessarily indicate absence of policy and political linkages becuase GOI under MMS appears to be taking "leftist" measures. GOI probably has been told to wait for now, and not jeopardize US game-plan. But I can see that US will eventually withdraw, and if GOI fails to see this, we are in deep trouble in the short to medium term.

Third, what exactly is chinese presence in PoK.

Chinese presence in PoK can be inferred indirectly. Maybe more classified information exists. The Karakorum Highway for Pakistan represents an interest to have a territorial recourse near PLA. KKH is for China an additional means to be close to the operational area (after the completion of the Lhasa Kashgar road in 1957) and to connect the unstable provinces of Sing kiang, Tibet and Aksai Chin.

The Chinese today maintain that the borders initially set up at the time of the treaty of Drangtze (1842), were not legitimate and were set up only by aligning posts which were first traced on the ground. Further that they are not supposed to respect the treaty considering that the Peking government was not part of the draft (however one of the signatories, Tibetan of birth, of mandarin origin took part since Tibet was de-facto dissolved in 1962), so the treaty was declared invalid and void. PRC built the Lhassa road to Kashgar through Aksai Chin, after invading Tibet : this road is now essential to their political and strategic device to connect and control annexed Tibet and the autonomous Muslim province of XianYang.

Thus KKH forms part of the network with Tibet, Aksai Chin, and XianYang that has been built entirely with military movement in mind. This makes it convenient to place missiles and troops along the KKH, who can be quickly moved out or in.

Fourth, it now seems impossible to be part of an "american alliance" in situ, in Afghanistan.

At the time the possibility arose, Cong still did not feel strong enough to drop the Left completely. Now, the new Obama democrats will turn livid to see India expand at the cost of TSP. The Clinton continuity need not have been disrupted.

Fifth, where's the pipeline diplomacy at now?

Thrown down the drain.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 22 May 2009 19:31

Sanku wrote:Conspiracy theory -- because US doesnt know Blaochistan?

Please take one look at the US perfidy thread. All accidental?

Whats with this great love for the west -- it does what it needs to, to provide their way if life. This is real politic not CT. Only people who confuse real politic with conspiracy are Dharmic Indians who are into "Satyamev Jayate" mindset.

ON BRF, it has become difficult for members as well as moderators to differentiate a view from CT. Calling a view as CT has become a tool. Some are serious views and thoughts extrapolated from the poster's views and experiences/knowledge. Some are outright CTs like "Nehru is an American Muslim". The difficulty is to call something as a CT and it always is based on individual's opinion.

Simple logic of US being managing/maintaining Pakistan for over 60 years does not know "what pakistan is" or "how Pakistan is manipulating US" etc. does not make logical sense. How can it be that US has interests in Balochistan become CT? Is it not a simple deduction from the ways and means of US help to Pakistan and also from the reasons to keep Pakistan alive. There are many pointers but may be not a direct artcile or news item with un-named sources.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 22 May 2009 20:09

raji wrote
1) What exactly will be the strategic impact for India if US fails in AFPAK and/or declares victory and leaves with job half done ? (this is looking like the most likely scenario, at the moment)

US will not appear to fail in AFG, and it will retain some degree of presence in the north. However, the south will be lost. What will happen is an expansion of the Talebs based in the AFG-TSP border, in both directions - NW and SE, into southern AFG and northern TSP. This scenario was envisaged here a while back, and my reporesentation was that of the conversion/amalgamation of the Talebs and PA into a neo-Caliphate. The neo-Caliphate first expands into the Pakjab heartland, and then turns NE and SW. They already have a presence in Balochistan, where they probably use Pakjab repression on the dirt-poor Balochis as an alternative (alternative to what the ISI gives them) supply route and smuggling economy leading into AFG. In the NE, the neo-caliphate can use PRC paranoia to expand into POK and then thrust east into Kashmir. In the SW they can easily expand into Balochistan, if they can pretend that they are going to liberate Balochis from Pakjabi repression.

2) You say, India will be compelled to act, if US withdraws. Exactly what options does India have to act ? Is there political will to exercise any of those options, if there are any ? (two separate questions)

India in its current political direction will only take defensive measures, and that too only with the permission or consultation of US and other western powers. In a sense that is a wise step when independent foreign policy initiatives are not the forte of this type of leadership.

India has several options, if it realy wanted to take initiatives.

Intensive political campaigns. One of this is to draw out PRC in its flanks. In SE Asia, start campaigning for return to democracy in Myanmar, which will force PRC, which backs the junta, on its backfoot. Strengthen ties with all the countries flanking China, right up to Vietnam. Offer soft support to bypass the military-competition angle. Strengthen IO presence with increased navy, own carrier fleets, and ultimately push nuke capable ones including subs into the pacific in range for PRC cities.

Inland, start supporting the Uighurs of esrtwhile Turkestan. This will come in conflict with the Central Asian "anti-Muslim" alliance currently backed probably by all three of USA, Russia, and China. But it needs to be sold as attractive as a kind of holding pen, landlocked by a ring of containment. Bringing in Russia (which has recently turned pragmatic with the Chechens) and USA into it can force PRC hands. This can be a place where the extremes of Talebs can be herded into. Hijras(migrations) are not out of keeping with Islamic theocracy, and provides a non-genocidal solution.

Pushing Indian borders up to AFG borders, dissolution of TSP, and reoccupation of North Kashmir is the military part.

3) My view, India could do nothing to prevent a Talibanized Af earlier, will be even tougher for India to act now, because conceivably, Pak will extract a "surrender Af to Pak" deal from US in exchange for allowing(enabling) it a graceful exit and declare victory

Well, India has already lagged behind. It will be a great deal of effort to turn around and catch up. The new GOI will try to divert attention to economic welfare, and with the neo-Keynesian thrust on public spending, a lot of corruption and corruption generating entities will be spawned. The exorbitant hopes and the merry dance of dashing those hope will keep the public attention occupied for sufficiently long time to not put any pressure in the GOI to act immediately.

US is not conceding AFG entirely - because it weakens its next axis of defence around the Persian Gulf, and allows possibke linking up of Iran, PRC and Russia. It needs a presence in north-east AFG.

raji · Post by **raji** » 22 May 2009 20:50

brihaspati wrote:
raji wrote
1) What exactly will be the strategic impact for India if US fails in AFPAK and/or declares victory and leaves with job half done ? (this is looking like the most likely scenario, at the moment)
US will not appear to fail in AFG, and it will retain some degree of presence in the north. However, the south will be lost. What will happen is an expansion of the Talebs based in the AFG-TSP border, in both directions - NW and SE, into southern AFG and northern TSP. This scenario was envisaged here a while back, and my reporesentation was that of the conversion/amalgamation of the Talebs and PA into a neo-Caliphate. The neo-Caliphate first expands into the Pakjab heartland, and then turns NE and SW. They already have a presence in Balochistan, where they probably use Pakjab repression on the dirt-poor Balochis as an alternative (alternative to what the ISI gives them) supply route and smuggling economy leading into AFG. In the NE, the neo-caliphate can use PRC paranoia to expand into POK and then thrust east into Kashmir. In the SW they can easily expand into Balochistan, if they can pretend that they are going to liberate Balochis from Pakjabi repression.

2) You say, India will be compelled to act, if US withdraws. Exactly what options does India have to act ? Is there political will to exercise any of those options, if there are any ? (two separate questions)
India in its current political direction will only take defensive measures, and that too only with the permission or consultation of US and other western powers. In a sense that is a wise step when independent foreign policy initiatives are not the forte of this type of leadership.

India has several options, if it realy wanted to take initiatives.

Intensive political campaigns. One of this is to draw out PRC in its flanks. In SE Asia, start campaigning for return to democracy in Myanmar, which will force PRC, which backs the junta, on its backfoot. Strengthen ties with all the countries flanking China, right up to Vietnam. Offer soft support to bypass the military-competition angle. Strengthen IO presence with increased navy, own carrier fleets, and ultimately push nuke capable ones including subs into the pacific in range for PRC cities.

Inland, start supporting the Uighurs of esrtwhile Turkestan. This will come in conflict with the Central Asian "anti-Muslim" alliance currently backed probably by all three of USA, Russia, and China. But it needs to be sold as attractive as a kind of holding pen, landlocked by a ring of containment. Bringing in Russia (which has recently turned pragmatic with the Chechens) and USA into it can force PRC hands. This can be a place where the extremes of Talebs can be herded into. Hijras(migrations) are not out of keeping with Islamic theocracy, and provides a non-genocidal solution.

Pushing Indian borders up to AFG borders, dissolution of TSP, and reoccupation of North Kashmir is the military part.

3) My view, India could do nothing to prevent a Talibanized Af earlier, will be even tougher for India to act now, because conceivably, Pak will extract a "surrender Af to Pak" deal from US in exchange for allowing(enabling) it a graceful exit and declare victory
Well, India has already lagged behind. It will be a great deal of effort to turn around and catch up. The new GOI will try to divert attention to economic welfare, and with the neo-Keynesian thrust on public spending, a lot of corruption and corruption generating entities will be spawned. The exorbitant hopes and the merry dance of dashing those hope will keep the public attention occupied for sufficiently long time to not put any pressure in the GOI to act immediately.

US is not conceding AFG entirely - because it weakens its next axis of defence around the Persian Gulf, and allows possibke linking up of Iran, PRC and Russia. It needs a presence in north-east AFG.

Brahispati,

I agree with just about every word you have said. It is great analysis.

You seem to be saying that all of India's problems arise out of lack of will.......political, which really arises out of social will to think and act strategically (correct me if I am wrong). I am not trying to put words in your mouth, just paraphrasing so that I understand. So, all that you suggest should be done by India such as "drawing out PRC on its flanks", military action in POK etc (which by the way, I totally agree with), will not be possible without the collective will of our society to think strategic and act that way.

Now here is where you and I disagree. I find you a little reluctant to dig deeper into the causes of this lack of will within our society, which prevent us from being strategic. Again, correct me if I interpret your posts incorrectly, but I have read them carefully and my understanding of your position is that yeah, there is lack of will, but economic progress with some kind of self enlightenment within each Hindu coupled with some return to institutionalized retro Hindu practices and awareness of first and then rejection of our own Macaulyism will somehow manage to generate this will at some point in the future.

I just happen to think that the "will" doesnt exist because there is no social cohesion within India. How do I define social cohesion ? Either implied or explicit common set of goals set forward by a people, which a large majority of the people buy into instinctively. In addition, the means to accomplish these goals are also by and large bought into by a people. Then there is social cohesiveness. Currently, no consensus of a common set of goals exist within our society and clearly if there are no goals then there can be no agreement on the means to pursue them. A manifestation of the lack of common goals is the fact that only the educated and the so called ex forwards seem to have this strategic nationalistic agenda as their goal, no other dominent group in our society seems to embrace it.

Defining these goals in this day and age is a science.....and requires a social contract among all the dominent groups of people in the society. As part of developing and negotiations, the 15% or so educated Indians can push for inclusion of the strategic nationalistic agenda as part of the overall national goals package, but it will have to give in a lot, to other groups agendas.....such as reservations in the private sector etc. There is a sort of ad hoc give and take that is going on all the time in recent India, but no common and cohesive set of goals emerge......the horse trading always stops with narrow goals...the reason for that is that the 15% educated are not really a full participant in the national debate and national negotiations today.......they are almost ignored and really are marginalized in terms of their opinions......

The solution ? 1) For these 15% educated to organize themselves first into a cohesive unit wielding the power of 12-13% (there will always be some holdouts) and 2) Develop internally a cohesive agenda which includes national goals and means to achieve them which a) are potentially attractive to other groups as well (it is an inclusive agenda) and b) give us the moral authority to pursue stubbornly and ) then for the 15% to muscle into the national debate and force others to recognize us as true participants and grant us a place on the table, thereby being forced to discuss our agenda....

Please point out the flaws in my thinking........

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 May 2009 21:05

Raji, Education cant be the cohesive factor. And the education that is crammed is not the right kind due to its empahsis on alien precepts. So it has to be enlightenment and not just education. For an enlightened one might not be an educated one in the recognized manner.

The elders used to say "Uthistha Bharata!" ie arise/awake oh son of India!