Afghanistan News & Discussion

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 11 Mar 2010 00:02

Carl_T wrote:We should withdraw from Kashmir too now.

Thats what this "irreversible peace process" between TSP and MMS is all about. TSP/USA give MMS some face-saving political cover to surrender the Kashmir valley. It will be in slow motion and cleverly disguised along with US-inspired collateral incentives to India so MMS can spin it as a "victory".

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Mar 2010 00:33

People us Pavlov tricks or their frustrations to induce responses.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 11 Mar 2010 01:42

CRamS wrote:
Carl_T wrote:We should withdraw from Kashmir too now.
Thats what this "irreversible peace process" between TSP and MMS is all about. TSP/USA give MMS some face-saving political cover to surrender the Kashmir valley. It will be in slow motion and cleverly disguised along with US-inspired collateral incentives to India so MMS can spin it as a "victory".

We have four more years of MMS, after that I hope Prince is more capable.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 11 Mar 2010 01:54

India Abroad
Friday, February 19, 2010 Vol. XL No. 21

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/280/ ... wilson.jpg

Can somebody figure out if the views of Charlie wilson is a US offocial policy on afpak and also India in afpak

Patni · Post by **Patni** » 11 Mar 2010 06:14

India wary but won't scale down Afghanistan ops

TNN, Mar 11, 2010, 02.35am IST
NEW DELHI: India is not about to reduce its footprint in Afghanistan, but the home ministry says it will be issuing terror threat advisories to Indian citizens living and working in Afghanistan who are increasingly coming under attack from Pakistan-based terror groups.

Simultaneously, India, high level home ministry sources said, was stepping up security and moving more security personnel to Afghanistan to protect its facilities and people, primarily working in government projects. The foreign office, though, disagrees vehemently. Denying reports that India was scaling down its presence in Afghanistan, the MEA, in a statement, dismissed such reports as "being baseless and factually incorrect". "India's commitment to its development partnership with Afghanistan remains undiluted," it added.

Jayant Prasad, India's ambassador to Afghanistan, said, "Not a single project, not a single medical mission is being closed down." In fact, after the February 26 terror attack at guesthouses used only by Indians, senior officials were sent to interview all workers in medical missions in other parts of Afghanistan. "Everybody said they wanted to stay on," said an official. The Kabul medical mission has been temporarily shut after it was hit by Pakistani terrorists.

The threat to Indian citizens was not from Afghans but from Pakistani groups, officials said. To that extent, India was stepping up its security presence in Afghanistan to protect its facilities and its projects. At particular risk from Pakistan are Indian consulates in Jalalabad and Kandahar.

But it will be physically impossible to secure private projects that employ Indians, because many of them are overseas projects. And intelligence inputs say that Indian citizens will be targeted by Pakistani terror groups because Pakistan is making a determined push to get India out of Afghanistan.

In many ways, India is feeling the cost of keeping its presence in Afghanistan confined to its "soft power", because it gives Pakistan unbridled opportunity to hit India, put India on the defensive. And since India has not developed any offensive capacity, it is now going to constantly battle perceptions that it is running scared.

So as suspected some sort of gauging the wind direction exercise or maybe MHA preempting the MEA on afghan strategy!!IMHO a bit of ground work is being laid down for possible "hard power" projection option from India for unkils benefit.. Interesting time ahead for sure...

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 11 Mar 2010 18:44

India wary but won't scale down Afghanistan ops

Simultaneously, India, high level home ministry sources said, was stepping up security and moving more security personnel to Afghanistan to protect its facilities and people, primarily working in government projects. The foreign office, though, disagrees vehemently. Denying reports that India was scaling down its presence in Afghanistan, the MEA, in a statement, dismissed such reports as "being baseless and factually incorrect". "India's commitment to its development partnership with Afghanistan remains undiluted," it added.

That's more like it!

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 12 Mar 2010 00:18

Taliban Rape Tapes

http://bigjournalism.com/bthor/2010/02/ ... bu-ghraib/

Haven't seen the tapes.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 12 Mar 2010 01:51

We'll probably send in some APCs as well...

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 13 Mar 2010 10:03

India is sending more security personnel because there is a threat of kidnap of Indian consular staff

According to government sources, India has received "credible" intelligence inputs on a terrorist plot to abduct Indian diplomats.

Coming against the backdrop of a determined effort by ISI to terrorise India into withdrawing from Afghanistan, India has taken the threat seriously, rushing 40 ITBP personnel to ramp up security of its diplomatic corps in Afghanistan.

The diplomats, an eyesore for Pakistan since their effort to rebuild Afghanistan's infrastructure has enhanced India's appeal in the country Islamabad considers its backyard, have been asked to be vigilant.

While Indian officials have been under constant threat in Afghanistan, the recent spate of intelligence inputs comes in the wake of the February 25 attack on Indians in Kabul.

The fear is also because of the track record of Pakistan-backed terror groups. Several years ago, they had massacred members of Iran's mission in Afghanistan. {The ISI was directly involved in the murder of the Iranian Consul General in Lahore in 1990. Let's also not forget that our own diplomat Ravindra Mhatre was murdered in the UK in 1984}

An Indian diplomat in Afghanistan would be a huge prize for the Taliban and their Pakistani handlers, sources said.

Apart from everything else, it would create the kind of diplomatic crisis between India and Pakistan that would serve as a pretext for Pakistan to take its attention off the Taliban and the US campaign.

India sees the threat as coming principally from Pakistan's terror groups like the Haqqani network and the Lashkar-e-Taiba which are being used against India.

Patni · Post by **Patni** » 13 Mar 2010 11:23

Taliban Reconciliation: Obama Administration Must Be Clear And Firm

It is unclear why Pakistan is now cracking down on the Afghan Taliban. Most U.S. observers believe that Islamabad may be seeking to ensure that it will have a role in determining any potential settlement of the conflict in Afghanistan. Others say it is partly a response to mounting U.S. pressure. President Obama reportedly appealed directly to the Pakistanis to crack down on the Afghan Taliban through a letter hand-delivered by National Security Adviser General James Jones to Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari last fall.

The letter coincided with revelations of the arrest of David Coleman Headley, a Pakistani-American who worked with the Lashkar-e-Tayyiba in Pakistan to scout sites for the November 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India. Headley was arrested by U.S. authorities in early October, and a former major in the Pakistani army was named in the U.S. affidavit as serving as Headley's handler for the Mumbai attacks. Since then, the U.S. has repeatedly made the case to Pakistan that facilitating some terrorist groups while fighting others is counterproductive.

It is possible that this message is finally beginning to sink in. But given Pakistan's long track record of support for militant groups fighting in Afghanistan and India, it is too early to determine whether the most recent arrests signal a permanent reversal of past policies, or merely a tactical shift to demonstrate leverage in the region.

Avoiding Pakistani Leadership in Reconciliation Process

The U.S. must be clearheaded about Pakistani goals in the region and accept that Pakistani interests often run counter to U.S. efforts to protect the U.S. homeland from future 9/11-type terrorist acts. While the U.S. seeks to prevent Afghanistan from again serving as a safe haven for international terrorists, Pakistan's primary goal is to curb Indian influence in the country. Pakistani Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani recently restated in media interviews that India remains the primary threat to Pakistan and the focus of the Pakistani military.[4]

Pakistan's fixation on India should give pause to U.S. policymakers when considering Pakistan's expressed interest in brokering peace talks with the Taliban. According to U.S. media reports, Pakistani officials have offered to prevail on deadly groups like the Jalaluddin Haqqani network to break their ties to al-Qaeda.[5] Pakistani military strategists view the Haqqani network as its most effective tool for blunting Indian influence in Afghanistan. (Credible U.S. media reports indicate that the Haqqani network, in cooperation with Pakistani intelligence, was responsible for the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul in July 2008, killing more than 50 people, including two senior Indian officials.)

Recommended to be read in full as gives full overview of what unkil is trying to do in af-pak.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 13 Mar 2010 11:43

A titanic power struggle in Kabul
MKB summarises happenings in Afghanistan. Covers a lot of ground, looks at possible perspectives of many players - recommended read.
I cannot do justice to the scope of the piece by posting excerpts, so posting some information tidbits

Wardak as mentor for the "reintegration" plan is significant. He comes from an influential Pashtun family in Wardak province adjacent to Kabul and Parwan, which forms the gateway to Bamiyan. Wardak is a base of Deobandis and Hezb-i-Islami, and the Taliban have been strongly entrenched in the province.

Ahmedinejad was received on Wednesday at Kabul airport by the Northern Alliance leader Mohammed Fahim

On the other hand, the US and Britain can count on Afghanistan's former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah to raise the banner of revolt against Karzai in the loya jirga. They can also count on sundry disgruntled old war horses like Sibgatullah Mojaddidi and Burhanuddin Rabbani to criticize and isolate Karzai

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 13 Mar 2010 11:58

Its time to start flying bomb dropping drones in Afghanistan.

If nothing else, it will be good practice.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 13 Mar 2010 12:07

You would be flying them over the wrong country then.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 13 Mar 2010 12:09

Lisa Curtis' point in Patni's post is clear, but so far US indications are that they do not intend to follow that advice. It might be a bit of this and a bit of that, but not quite! pakistan has offered the tired, effette American leadership of a sort of victory without too much more of costs - and the leadership, tired and bumbling it is, seems to find the prospect tantalising!

(pakistan OTOH, makes the usual mistake of punching above its weight - it might put up unacceptably high prices that might eventually be its undoing - but then this thread is about Afghanistan!) India's options seem limited. Having taken a clear stance against placing military on the ground (for whatever reasons- good or bad), the role will be similar to that Japan - aid giver, hard worker but always reviled and derided behind the back, and with zero influence! However we may feel, a bit of retreat is inevitable. We can keep up the dialog with the players and seek to influence through them. But right now, on that count pakistan's cards are stronger. Any request from them will be have to be conceded by practically all the players.

The objectives of US / UK / NATO and that of Iran / Afghanistan (as in current leadership) do not coincide. pakistan seeks to join the side that will pay more. China and Central Asian states seem to be hedging by playing both sides. Without access to Russian articles I cannot help feeling it is sort of feeling lost and wants the problem to go away on its own. India is definitely isolated. In the long run though, we can recover. Good work done and the links established will eventually pay off. But short term retreat appears inevitable. Medium term chaos too appears quite likely. India currently has a leadership that has no stomach for these kinds of things - this is the problem with placing non political academics (MMS) and failed local politicians (SMK) in power. A successful politician would have fought many such fights in his/ her career, and will have his/her adrenalin pump at the situation. But I cannot see economists or local caste leaders doing that (hell, even Gurus like KS sing a new song!), but that is a different story!

Patni · Post by **Patni** » 13 Mar 2010 12:50

Malayappanji agree with all your analysis of situation on ground with Afghanistan and how its a set back to India, I think the policy view of current Indian leadership is towards keeping everyone happy including pakis! Of course its going to end up flat on its face with everyone trampling all over it and then some!

UK will always prefer having pakis as their favourite instrument of proxy to assert control & have capacity to cause harassment to India, have a toe hold in central asia. USA has no clear direction other then wanting to clip Iran's influence and going along with UK. Putin's visit and his clear and public statements about Indians not being realistic and pointing out the folly of Indians in getting sweet talked into stupification by US should cause a pause in GoI overall thinking towards US/PAK situation but that wont happen.

IMHO India has totaly spent all its good credit in last few years of visible tilt towards USA without anything much as yet to show for it in return. I expect more and more experts in the field to come out and start lamenting follies of Indian policy in next few months. To me its apparent that Indian leadership has failed in their bargain with USA for what ever it is that is offered to India in lieu even a Permanent seat in Security Council / Reining in of Paki terror sponsoring etc all is going to come to a big zero.

IMHO there are clear two camps even in current GoI and lot of tugging happening and I personally wish for MHA views to hold sway over MEA/NSA.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Mar 2010 13:33

This why the UIS and NATO will NEVER win the war in Afghanistan.Their ollateral damage is simply unacceptable and the cover-uo operations simply infuriate the locals.It is ironic and grossly hyporitical hat the US now attacke the Sri Lankan govt. for "war crimes" during the last days of the war against the terrorrit LTTE,while they happily massacre innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq without batting an eyelid or word of apology.Even the Times UK has called these acts and coer-up "wilfully false,an atrocity" etc.,Obama is the latest in a long line of US presidents to have his hands blooddied with that of the innocents.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 060395.ece
Nato ‘covered up’ botched night raid in Afghanistan that killed five.

Excerpt:

A night raid carried out by US and Afghan gunmen led to the deaths of two pregnant women, a teenage girl and two local officials in an atrocity which Nato then tried to cover up, survivors have told The Times.

The operation on Friday, February 12, was a botched pre-dawn assault on a policeman’s home a few miles outside Gardez, the capital of Paktia province, eastern Afghanistan. In a statement after the raid titled “Joint force operating in Gardez makes gruesome discovery”, Nato claimed that the force had found the women’s bodies “tied up, gagged and killed” in a room.

A Times investigation suggests that Nato’s claims are either wilfully false or, at best, misleading. More than a dozen survivors, officials, police chiefs and a religious leader interviewed at and around the scene of the attack maintain that the perpetrators were US and Afghan gunmen. The identity and status of the soldiers is unknown

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 13 Mar 2010 13:37

Malayappan wrote:Having taken a clear stance against placing military on the ground (for whatever reasons- good or bad)

I really hope there is a chance of this changing. I wonder if we can put this to effect when the US withdraws.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 13 Mar 2010 14:12

Karzai's Visit - Edit in DT
Excerpts

On the face of it, President Karzai’s talk of the two countries being ‘conjoined twins’ and that he would not allow the Afghan territory to be used against Pakistan gives an impression that all is well, but the fact of the matter is that a large majority of Afghans hold Pakistan responsible for their miseries because of Pakistan’s policy over the last four decades of treating Afghanistan as its backyard under the garb of strategic depth. Not surprisingly then, the Afghans did not respond warmly to Pakistan’s offer of training the Afghan security forces. From their perspective, it would be disastrous to open yet another door for Pakistan to try to manoeuvre circumstances in the war-ravaged country to Pakistan’s perceived benefit.

There are now positive signs that Pakistan has finally come to grips with the reality that without tackling all shades of militant elements, it cannot vanquish the hydra of militancy that has wreaked havoc on the lives of innocent citizens on both sides of the divide. Circumstances have compelled Pakistan to revise its perception of a difference between al Qaeda, the Pakistani Taliban and the Afghan Taliban.{But, there are no positive and irreversible indicators visible yet}

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 14 Mar 2010 02:57

Russia urged to refocus on Kabul

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e6701f1c-2e40 ... abdc0.html

Top Indian officials say India is "engaging deeply" with Russia over Afghanistan, and that shared concerns were discussed by the two leaders. The Nato alliance will be wary of deeper dialogue between Russia and India. The US and other western powers want India, which has a $1.3bn development programme in Afghanistan, to remain aligned with Nato policy. They fear any suggestion of steps towards reforming the former Northern Alliance, a military political coalition of Uzbekhs, Tajiks and Hazara, that fought the Taliban from the late 1990s with support from regional allies.

Earlier this week, an influential member of India's National Security Advisory Board told Russian diplomats that Moscow should "chart a hedging strategy" with India, Iran and central Asian states in response to "very disquieting" events in Afghanistan. Kanwal Sibal, a former foreign secretary and ambassador to Russia, said the US wanted to "cut its losses in Afghanistan as quickly as possible".

What is the Russian position on this? It appears that they are not very keen on getting involved in Afghanistan. Will they be interested in re-forming Northern Alliance as a part of hedging strategy.

India sees its interests affected in Afghanistan thanks to US and UK moves. Now India cannot even discuss a hedging strategy with Russia. Afghanistan is a test of India. If it sees itself as a rising power then it should be able to protect its interests there.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 14 Mar 2010 07:55

Explosions across Afghanistan's Kandahar kill 30
Another attempted prison break. NATO have announced that Kandahar is next. So Haqqani- pakistan group is digging in, making preparations, augmenting their forces.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 14 Mar 2010 08:02

Marjah push: Ups and downs are lessons for future
The positive ones we have heard from the US TV networks and BBC. Here are some others

In Brussels, the Russian ambassador to NATO said he was puzzled by allied claims that the offensive was a success. Dmitry Rogozin noted that a firefight this week between two rebel factions in northern Afghanistan had in fact resulted in more deaths among the insurgents than the entire Marjah operation.
"So the result (of the Marjah offensive) was that the mountain shook, but only a mouse was born," he said citing a Russian proverb.

If they lose their grip, American forces may have to reconquer the town street by street.
Insurgents are well aware of all this. The lessons learned from Marjah are likely also being learned by the Taliban as NATO generals prepare an even bigger offensive in the coming months, focused on neighboring Kandahar province.

sum · Post by **sum** » 14 Mar 2010 11:16

"So the result (of the Marjah offensive) was that the mountain shook, but only a mouse was born," he said citing a Russian proverb.

Love the Russkies and their blunt talk.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 14 Mar 2010 11:21

I have read that Marjah isn't actually a town, but just a few huts and a market.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 14 Mar 2010 12:20

As I have been saying for a while, the main reason for US-led (Oh no, white solidarility NATO-led) latest offensive is to show they are one up over Russians. Once some kind of "victory" is achieved, USA will run after maccho man Stanley boy and his boss Patreus get their 15-minute fame on Fox. Its all about H&D and access to cnetral asia black gold at the moment; "war on terror", my b$%^s.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 14 Mar 2010 14:19

Mullah Janan Andewahl captured in Oruzgan province

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 14 Mar 2010 15:56

I have read that Marjah isn't actually a town, but just a few huts and a market.

What is the strategy of the US in taking these towns.

Is the purpose to show they can take towns from the Taliban by force?

If not, what is the objective.

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 15 Mar 2010 01:59

Regarding Afghanistan there is only one truth about Afghanistan. And that truth is that Afghanistan is absolutely ungovernable. You may control Kabul but you cannot also control Kandahar. You may have Pansjir Valley but you cannot have the Herat. It is fragmented along ethnic lines and religious lines with multiple other invisible demarcation lines of intra ethnic and intra religious differences no less tribal differences too. The only possible way to control the whole country is by having a huge military presence and forced subjugation of the entire nation. Other than that it is a pointless endeavor. The American way of warfare of pinprick attacks to take out high value targets is a useless endeavor too. There need to be hundreds of thousands or boots on the ground.

The only nation that will have the stomach to control Afghanistan is Pakistan. Iran is a nation that is forged over centuries of nation building effort. India is a nation with history that goes back centuries of national history. It is also the story of Russia and China. The other X-stans, Y-stans and z-stans in Central Asia are not relevant for discussion partly because despite the oil wealth, they are light weights. In all these places, we will find that the leadership however corrupted or enlightened, will not be willing to send a huge military force to control Afghanistan. The reluctance to send their youth into the meat-grinder being the prime reason.

Remember I said there would be a need to have hundreds of thousands of boots on the ground?

Well, only Pakistan can do that. As Dr. Shiv well articulated in his postings on the Paki thread, there is an uncontrolled demographic boom in Pak-Is-Satan. It is not a nation but akin to a real-estate holding by a tiny minority of uber elites and their military cohorts. They have little care for their people. Infact, the RAPE care very little for the mango Abdul and don’t consider them as their people at all. History has shown that anytime a land goes through a population explosion, the next thing the leaders do is engage in warfare of conquest. The economy cannot be expanded to provide employment to millions of extra heads overnight. If the unemployed are kept inside the country, there will be a high chance of revolution. It would be best to send these youth to external military expedition.

Now, infiltrating a couple of dozen jihadis here and there into India is not going to reduce the pressure building inside the can. Hundreds of thousands or even many millions must be sent out. They can’t come crashing into India because they will be mowed down. But they can be sent into Afghanistan with little problems.

So, the second dream of Strategic Dept is on as of now.

But there is one problem. This problem existed in the first installment of this story but wholly overlooked. Hundreds of thousands of Punjabis were sent to die like flies in the Taliban wars. On paper the Taliban controlled most of Afghanistan but in reality, they were continuously fighting off resistances all over their domain and the Pakjabi cannon fodders were fighting in all these places.

It is one thing to be able to control the infiltration of Jihadis into India and exfiltration of Jihadis from India. But when it involves hundreds of thousands of jihadis, no one can control their movements from or into Pakistan. Pakistan is not an industrial power that can sustain such a gigantic effort. They would have to depend on local Afghan allies and also on the cultivation of heroin to finance it. Like I said Afghanistan is ungovernable. One can make allies but like the shifting sands in the desert, making alliance with an Afghan warlord is not something that is carved on stone. Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is a prime example. It will be a long struggle and more and more Pakis will be sent into this meat grinder. The easy availability of heroin will take its own dimension in this conflict. Many thousands of Abduls will return with their own tales of “Vietnam”. Each of this tale will mean the grave for the RAPE will be getting an inch deeper.

Moral of it all is that: Afghanistan is ungovernable. Even what India is doing there will come to an end and her construction effort will become useless once Nato presence comes to an end.
Avram

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 15 Mar 2010 06:23

Neshant wrote:
I have read that Marjah isn't actually a town, but just a few huts and a market.
What is the strategy of the US in taking these towns.

Is the purpose to show they can take towns from the Taliban by force?

If not, what is the objective.

IMO it is not too different from Alexander's victories in the same area. You go in and capture a few towns, tell the whole world you won, cut a deal and withdraw.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 15 Mar 2010 06:31

asprinzl wrote: Moral of it all is that: Afghanistan is ungovernable. Even what India is doing there will come to an end and her construction effort will become useless once Nato presence comes to an end.

Heh. John McCain knew this.

Maybe I am dreaming but if Afghanistan is really ungovernable in toto, maybe we should control a part of Afghanistan.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Mar 2010 07:42

US-Pakistan ties stalk Afghan peace - M.K.Bhadrakumar

An absolutely fine article.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 15 Mar 2010 09:53

SSridhar wrote:US-Pakistan ties stalk Afghan peace - M.K.Bhadrakumar

An absolutely fine article.

Looking at it from India's PoV, his predictions are dire. TSP gets a proxy govt in Afganisthan, it gets to keep LeT and India terror groups intact, it gets billions in economic aid and military India-pecific goodies; and who knows what else (remember, MMS is willing to walk the extra mile). WoW, it wouldn't be bad achievement despite its principal natioanl achievement being terrorism.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Mar 2010 13:00

ISI looks to use Hekmatyar to hit Indian interests in Afghanistan
There is one more point we need to remember. Hekmatyar and his Hizb-e-Islami were the favourites of the PA/ISI during the days of Afghan jihad. Hekmatyar's inability to come on top of the warring mujahideen factions after circa 1989 forced Pakistan to create a new entity, the Taliban. Pakistan is hedging its bets on both Taliban and Hekmatyar. If certain powerful sections of Taliban are 'unacceptable' to Holbrooke & Co., Pakistan has the means to create a hodgepodge combination of Hekmatyar and remnants of Taliban to share power in Kabul.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 15 Mar 2010 13:04

SSridhar wrote:ISI looks to use Hekmatyar to hit Indian interests in Afghanistan
There is one more point we need to remember. Hekmatyar and his Hizb-e-Islami were the favourites of the PA/ISI during the days of Afghan jihad. Hekmatyar's inability to come on top of the warring mujahideen factions after circa 1989 forced Pakistan to create a new entity, the Taliban. Pakistan is hedging its bets on both Taliban and Hekmatyar. If certain powerful sections of Taliban are 'unacceptable' to Holbrooke & Co., Pakistan has the means to create a hodgepodge combination of Hekmatyar and remnants of Taliban to share power in Kabul.

Looks like the paki jokers are running a jehadi supermarket or department store for the american benefactors!!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Mar 2010 01:54

Carl_T wrote:I have read that Marjah isn't actually a town, but just a few huts and a market.

The TV show Worldfocus had clips of Marjah and it is as you describe. The Afghan govt rep was a Popalzai.

The clip might be at their site worldfocus.org.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Mar 2010 01:57

CRamS wrote:
SSridhar wrote:US-Pakistan ties stalk Afghan peace - M.K.Bhadrakumar

An absolutely fine article.
Looking at it from India's PoV, his predictions are dire. TSP gets a proxy govt in Afganisthan, it gets to keep LeT and India terror groups intact, it gets billions in economic aid and military India-pecific goodies; and who knows what else (remember, MMS is willing to walk the extra mile). WoW, it wouldn't be bad achievement despite its principal natioanl achievement being terrorism.

While he is a fine diplomat, he becomes unhinged when describing India's options which in is view are none or negative. And he harks back to the glory days of FSU which is gone now. He has to deal with what is available now.

So I take his insights as data and his predictions as D&G whines.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 16 Mar 2010 03:02

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35880751/ns ... tral_asia/
Aide: Karzai ‘very angry’ at Taliban boss’ arrest
At the time, Afghan government was holding secret talks with group’s No. 2

The Afghan government was holding secret talks with the Taliban's No. 2 when he was captured in Pakistan, and the arrest infuriated President Hamid Karzai, according to one of Karzai's advisers.

The detention of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar — second in the Taliban only to one-eyed Mullah Mohammed Omar — has raised new questions about whether the U.S. is willing to back peace discussions with leaders who harbored the terrorists behind the Sept. 11 attacks.

Karzai "was very angry" when he heard that the Pakistanis had picked up Baradar with an assist from U.S. intelligence, the adviser said. Besides the ongoing talks, he said Baradar had "given a green light" to participating in a three-day peace jirga that Karzai is hosting next month.

The capture was part of a U.S.-backed crackdown in which the Pakistanis also arrested several other Afghan Taliban figures along the porous border between the two countries, after years of being accused by Washington of doing little to stop them.

Far from expressing gratitude, members of Karzai's administration were quick to accuse Pakistan of picking up Baradar either to sabotage or gain control of talks with the Taliban leaders.

Whatever the reason, the delicate dance among Karzai, his neighbors and international partners put the debate over reconciliation on fast forward.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Mar 2010 03:19

It looks like the US and TPS are interested in ensuring Karazai wont make separate peace with good Taliban. In other words they want to decided who is good Taliban or its 1996 redux.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 16 Mar 2010 05:41

Suicide Bombings Rock Kandahar

Suicide bombers attacked Kandahar City on Saturday evening, setting off four separate explosions at locations including the police station and the main prison, where some Taliban fighters are being held. The blasts left at least 30 dead and 46 wounded; those numbers are expected to rise.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 16 Mar 2010 09:55

India has no intention of scaling down Afghan operations: Nirupama Rao

Noting that recent attacks on Indians in Afghanistan were aimed at forcing India out of that country, foreign secretary Nirupama Rao on Tuesday ruled out scaling down New Delhi's operations in the war-torn nation.

"We are not scaling down our operations in Afghanistan, we are taking all necessary security measures to safeguard Indian lives there," she said in response to a question at the Woodrow Wilson Centre.

Terming it a "barbaric attack against Indians engaged in humanitarian and development work in Afghanistan" she said, February 26 attack was by those who do not wish any other future for Afghanistan except one that suits their sinister ambitions.

"International community {US & European} should understand that such attempts, if unchecked, would only embolden the same forces that held sway in Afghanistan in the 1990s and caused the tragedy of 9/11," she said.

Arguing that there could not be a distinction between a good Taliban and a bad Taliban, she said that would be disastrous for Afghanistan.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 16 Mar 2010 10:34

Sad that India has to plead its case be it on LeT or Afganisthan; when in fact it sould slam dunk.