Afghanistan News & Discussion

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 16 Mar 2010 10:38

Once we get that Anti ballistic missile system operational, what is Pakistan going to do if we decide to deploy troops in Afgh?

....it is probably a good thing I'm not the MoD.

sum · Post by **sum** » 16 Mar 2010 21:38

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

What stops India from launching a unilateral attack on few select Paki scum ( even if they are more for show) and then demand that if India should stop ( so that US AF-Pak plans dont go awry), US must ensure xyz are handed over to India elase US and its plans can go to hell?

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 18 Mar 2010 07:25

Taking Tea with the Taliban
February piece, Havent seen this posted in this thread (just did a quick check - apologies if I missed!). Apart from the story of US 'enagagement' of Taliban, provides many insights into ways of working of State Department. With mods' permission shall cross post some of these in the US thread. The article itself is worth the full read!
Bumbling Fools who tell us (on the overall we had got that right in the 90s) what to do! And the joke is some in our establishment want to listen to them!

As this account demonstrates, Obama’s statement that the United States ignored Afghanistan until 9/11 is incorrect. In point of fact, the Clinton administration pursued the Taliban with fervor. Over the course of its five-year engagement, however, the Clinton State Department gained nothing. The Taliban had, like many rogue regimes, acted in bad faith. They engaged not to compromise but to buy time. They made many promises but did not keep a single one

They exploited American naiveté and sincerity at the ultimate cost of several thousand lives. The report by the 9/11 Commission details how Bin Laden and his deputy, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, hatched the 9/11 plot at a meeting in Tora Bora at a time when U.S. engagement with the Taliban was in full swing

In the case of the Taliban engagement, the State Department fell prey to clientitis, the great occupational hazard of diplomacy—the condition that befalls diplomats who confuse their own attempts to achieve a smooth relationship with their host governments for their actual purpose, which is to secure and advance the interests of the United States. It was fantasy to believe that on issues of radical Islam and Afghanistan’s governance, U.S. and Pakistani interests could have converged

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 19 Mar 2010 07:23

http://m.indiatoday.in/itwapsite/story? ... &secid=134

Analysts believe that with India beginning a dialogue with Pakistan without any tangible returns, the terrorists are getting emboldened.
"Having refused to use economic and diplomatic levers, India is already undermining its position by talking to Pakistan. There is a connection what these attacks in Kabul and Pune demonstrate that far from autonomous, the military establishment in Pakistan is able to use terror groups at will against India," feels strategic analyst Brahma Chellaney.

we use diplomacy all the time with dossiers getting increasingly heavy.

But refusing economic levers--- WTF is that . Does India have any at all.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Mar 2010 17:15

Why the War in Afghanistan is being lost, and that the US & Co. will slink out of the country yet again in true Vietnam fashion! That is unless they hand over the country to the Paki-Taliban nexus and pretend that they've won!

Afghanistan: 'We are fighting ghost soldiers'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... diers.html

Will the the US surge in Afghanistan help the British army get the resources it has been hoping for?

Excerpt:

History might record that the summer of 2009 was the pivotal moment for the British mission in Helmand. It has been a bloody few weeks with 15 dead in a 10-day period, including the most senior Army officer in three decades. These deaths, and another yesterday, and the eight coffins, witnessed by a few hundred of us in Camp Bastion and later by thousands in Wootton Bassett on Wednesday, has, after three years of evasion, produced the necessary debate about what we are trying to achieve in Afghanistan.

The resolve of politicians and military commanders is being tested as never before – as indeed is public support for the mission. But the harsh reality is that we must be prepared for more deaths if we are to succeed in Operation Panther's Claw, which began four weeks ago to clear a Taliban stronghold in central Helmand, and in the longer campaign in general.

Related Articles
Bodies of four soldiers killed in Afghanistan brought home
Eight British soldiers killed in Afghanistan: thousands pay respects in Wootton Bassett
Bodies of soldiers in Afghanistan returned to Britain
Hundreds pay respect as soldiers' bodies return from Afghanistan

Daughters mourn as Afghanistan dead repatriatedPanther's Claw is closer to that of the Somme than a modern battle. Soldiers find themselves up to their chests in irrigation ditches, or exchanging fire with insurgents a few yards away, before trying to cross the next heavily mined 100-yard stretch of field or road to fight their way into a building. It's compound by compound fighting," one infantryman told me. "We are fighting for every inch of ground."

To a man and a woman (there are female dog handlers, medics and others on the front line) the word "dangerous" is usually preceded by an expletive or other heartfelt adjective to describe the fighting. One company from 2nd Bn The Mercian Regiment was reported to have lost 47 out of 110 men, one dead and the remainder incapacitated by injury or heat exhaustion (although many returned to action after treatment). So can anything break the deadlock of the minefields and ditches as the operation gathers for a "tactical pause" before resuming the offensive?

"The Taliban's fieldcraft skills are second to none," a soldier told me this week. "I know it's a cliché but they are literally ghost soldiers. One moment they will be firing at you from a well-chosen position and then by the time you have fought through the position or called in air support, they are gone."

Ghost soldiers and an enemy that never seems to be beaten despite big losses is reminiscent of another war that went awry. Journalists who have been here since before the Helmand operation of 2006 have a sense of foreboding that was present during the latter stages of the Vietnam war. There was a substantial surge in troops before the Americans withdrew from South Vietnam, leaving behind a corrupt government and army that collapsed at their first test.

The Kabul hacks struggle to be persuaded by commanding officers who fly in for six-month tours talking about a "winnable war" and keeping the terrorists off the streets of Britain. There is also growing cynicism over the politicians – Gordon Brown included – trotting out the line that we are there to prevent another September 11 or July 7. Even some officers are beginning to ask if "we are creating more terrorists than we are killing".

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 20 Mar 2010 06:34

Filling the post-US vacuum Jyoti Malhotra providing some tidbits in Business Standard. She puts out that Holebrooke and Hilary may have different views. Could be a good cop bad cop game or alternatively Hilary's LT plans...? Also an assessment that Holebrooke bats right through for pakistan. Worth a read. This site normally restricts access to articles after some time.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 20 Mar 2010 10:57

Malayappan wrote:Filling the post-US vacuum Jyoti Malhotra providing some tidbits in Business Standard. She puts out that Holebrooke and Hilary may have different views. Could be a good cop bad cop game or alternatively Hilary's LT plans...? Also an assessment that Holebrooke bats right through for pakistan. Worth a read. This site normally restricts access to articles after some time.

Not a bad analysis from a dorkette who once said India & TSP must make love and leave the "extremists on boh sides to fight it out at the LOC". And the same dorkette who was floored by Uneven Cohen when he declared that India must give in to TSP because "no Indian leader will want a few Indian cities going up in smoke". Even Hafeez Saeed couldn't have been more eloquent.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 20 Mar 2010 18:25

Looks like even the dorkettes have a limit, and the Kabul attack, where army doctors were murdered, crossed it. That Manipuri army doctor's sacrifice should get special recognition. Incidentally, what is Bhadrakumar saying about this latest incident? One hopes it is not some nonsense like "India's hands are not totally clean in Afghanistan" or "Indian policies are short sighted". For crying out loud...

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 20 Mar 2010 19:07

Debka says Ahmadinejad warned Karzai that no US attack should take place from Afghan soil. It was supposedly read in Delhi and Islamabad as a warning to them too.

sum · Post by **sum** » 20 Mar 2010 21:51

Varoon Shekhar wrote:Looks like even the dorkettes have a limit, and the Kabul attack, where army doctors were murdered, crossed it. That Manipuri army doctor's sacrifice should get special recognition. Incidentally, what is Bhadrakumar saying about this latest incident? One hopes it is not some nonsense like "India's hands are not totally clean in Afghanistan" or "Indian policies are short sighted". For crying out loud...

MKB's latest article is more on the Headley saga:

Chasing Headley

It must be the mother of all political ironies that the week that the government almost tabled in the parliament an extraordinary legislation safeguarding the business interests of American nuclear industry, should end with the burnt-out case of David Headley.

A whole lot of themes of faith and disbelief on the political —diplomatic front sail into view —what can only be called the spiritual aridity of India’s foreign policy. The time has come to examine the possibility of redemption.

Cooperation in the fight against terrorism lies within the first circle of US-India strategic cooperation. The Mumbai attacks led to unprecedented counter-terrorism cooperation between India and the US — “breaking down walls and bureaucratic obstacles between the two countries’ intelligence and investigating agencies,” as the prominent American security expert Lisa Curtis underscored.

There is no doubt that David Headley’s arrest last October has been a breakthrough in throwing light on the operations and activities of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) in India. To quote Curtis, “Most troubling about the Headley case is what it has revealed about the proximity of the Pakistani military to the LeT.” Trouble began brewing from this point.

The stark reality is that the US government viewed LeT largely through the prism of India-Pakistan adversarial ties. This is despite all evidence of the LeT’s significant role since 2006 as a facilitator of the Taliban’s operations in Afghanistan by providing a constant stream of fighters — recruiting, training and infiltrating insurgents across the border from the Pakistani tribal areas.

The US’ policy prioritised the securing of Islamabad’s cooperation on what directly affected American interests and it made distinction between the ‘good’ Taliban and the ‘bad’ Taliban. This political chicanery lies at the epicentre of the unfolding drama over Headley.

Without doubt, Headley has been a double agent of the CIA and the ISI and it is a moot point whether the US knew this or at what point the US officials began suspecting it. The crux of the matter today is that Headley may spill the beans if Indian interrogators get hold of him and the trail can lead in no time to LeT. Where will that leave the US?

Obviously, Washington is in no position to ‘pressure’ the Pakistani military. Its obsession is to end the fighting in Afghanistan, which would enable President Barack Obama to drawdown the combat troops and declare victory in the war in the nick of time before the US presidential election campaign in 2012 unfolded.

Reality

No matter what the American lobby in our midst might say, the Indian foreign policy and security establishment should have no illusions that the Obama administration is stringing Delhi along on the Headley case. The US cannot afford to acknowledge the reality that the LeT enjoys the support of the Pakistani military. For, that would complicate its strategic cooperation with the Pakistani military and in turn call into question its reconciliation policy toward Taliban.

Therefore, the US will do its utmost to ensure India is not handed down a shred of hard evidence by Headley linking LeT with the Pakistani military. Where does that leave our government?

Clearly, the assumptions underlying India’s foreign policy ever since the UPA government came to power in 2004 are unravelling. These included first-rate bloomers like the idea of a US-led quadripartite alliance against China, India being an Asian ‘balancer’ against China, the ‘Tibet card,’ etc. They included naïve estimations that a strategic partnership with the US could substitute for an independent foreign policy, that the contacts with Pakistan were best conducted under US watch, that Delhi must synchronise its policies with the US’ global strategies.

The plain truth is that India today is saddled with a nuclear deal that is becoming difficult to ‘operationalise’ except on American terms; India’s ties with Iran are in tatters; the high level of understanding forged with both Iran and China by the previous NDA government in 2003 stands dissipated.

Worst of all, Headley’s case highlights that the government proved incapable of assessing the geopolitical dimensions of the US-led war in Afghanistan. The government failed to comprehend that the ground realities of the war were pushing geopolitical alignments inexorably toward the formation of a US-Pakistan strategic axis. Pakistan has shrewdly exploited the fallacies in India’s foreign policy orientation to navigate itself to an unprecedented geopolitical positioning.

This isn’t paranoia or pessimism. The US-Pakistan strategic dialogue is scheduled to be held in Washington next Wednesday with the Pakistani military leadership making an undisguised pitch for a pivotal partnership between the two countries commensurate with what it regards as Pakistan’s legitimate claim to be a regional power. India, on the other hand, looks around confusedly, unsure of its ability to connect Headley’s clemency plea with the big picture, and like the burnt-out case in the Graham Greene classic, badly in need of a self-cure.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 20 Mar 2010 22:02

Apparently in MKB's eyes, India can do nothing right. Now it is looking around confusedly, in the thrall of America, subsumed by internal intrigues, and rape ready, so to speak. It is almost as if he wishes this comes to pass, so he can be shown to have been right.

Of course, much of it is rhetorical nonsense, "spiritual aridity of Indian foreign policy" indeed. Please boss, we know you have to churn out the stuff weekly, but spare a thought for people who actually read some of your tripe.

Meanwhille, get to work on "examining the possibility of redemption" yourself - so far beyond the pale of responsible reportage have you gone.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Mar 2010 22:21

'Shaming' her in-laws costs 19 year old her nose, ears

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 22 Mar 2010 09:52

JEM,
You know better!
My own take: In reading MKB's writings, we can conveniently discount significantly his assessments about US' policy towards India, on Indian Establishment, and on China's successes. What is usually useful is his insights into matters on Afghanistan, Iran and Central Asia plus of course the need for a contrarian view. I cannot find anything of these in the linked article which pretty much makes it useless! Of late I begin thinking that he cannot stand KS and seeks to criticise him without actually naming him!

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 22 Mar 2010 13:21

Malayappan,

Actually I don't know better. It is just my opinion. But MKB, while he does have some useful nuggets sometimes, has undermined his own analysis with political colouring which is getting thicker as the articles go by. And look at the rhetoric. Utter rubbish.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 22 Mar 2010 15:58

India's diplomacy through the last two coalitions has been pretty much consistent.

As has been America's. there is nothing very different between what the Dems and Reps are doing on Iran et al.

Obama bowed to the chinese only to announce arms sales to Taiwan.

Bush/Powell said "very sorry" for the EP-3 incident and announced arms transfers to Taiwan will continue.

Coming back to India- the IPI was always a non starter. it was more of a diplomatic tool in dealings with the Yamrikis than anything else.

The only thing that can be seriously considered is the much more expensive offshore pipeline option. But Iran is not bending on that one yet.

jagga · Post by **jagga** » 22 Mar 2010 16:13

Indians nervous after Kabul attacks
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8575745.stm

The doctors treated some 250 patients every day at the out patient department, many of them suffering from terminal diseases.

"Angry patients ask us why the Indian doctors have left," says Dr Noorulhaq Yousafzai, chief of the hospital.

"Their treatment and medicines were free of cost as they were funded by the Indian government - the same medicines are either unavailable or very expensive here," he says.

"There are no plans on reducing or downsizing our staff strength or our assistance programmes," an embassy official said.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Mar 2010 22:59

MKB is indulging in "Shalya Sarathyam!" ie charioteer Shalya in Mahabharat who keeps praising the enemy to demoralize the Karna. I am now tending to ignore most of his whines.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 24 Mar 2010 08:07

Two versions of Pakistan's Policy Coup in Afghanistan against India

Policy Coup ? The Pakistani penchant for word-play !

One version of the policy coup against India tells us that Pakistan has shown the US that it has all the cards to set the future policy in Afghanistan by establishing its writ in Swat, Malakand and South Waziristan and by arresting key Taliban and al Qaeda leaders. It is highly probable that arrests of key Taliban leaders were meant to scuttle a deal being negotiated between Kabul and the insurgents without Pakistan’s involvement. Therefore, Pakistan has established the fact that no deal in Afghanistan can be negotiated without its involvement.

The US may have no better choice but to go along with Islamabad, despite knowing fully well that Pakistan may have nabbed the Taliban and al Qaeda leaders from safe houses. India’s conspicuous exclusion from London talks and the Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao’s cold reception in Washington this month shows that, for now, Washington has decided to accept Pakistan’s position and ask India to remain low key in Afghanistan.

The second version is rather intriguing, which goes like this: Pakistan’s ISI has won over the Northern Alliance leaders — usually preferring India over Pakistan — and convinced the grandson of king Zahir Shah, Mustafa Zahir Shah, to come together to form the government in Kabul. Proponents of this version claim that Pakistan has made a significant shift from its Pukhtun-Taliban-centric approach to include other nationalities as well.

Whichever version is true, Pakistan seems to be enjoying its newfound power to negotiate with the US.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 24 Mar 2010 08:35

^^^^^^
Notice something?

The second version is rather intriguing, which goes like this: Pakistan’s ISI has won over the Northern Alliance leaders — usually preferring India over Pakistan — and convinced the grandson of king Zahir Shah, Mustafa Zahir Shah, to come together to form the government in Kabul. Proponents of this version claim that Pakistan has made a significant shift from its Pukhtun-Taliban-centric approach to include other nationalities as well.

Whichever version is true, Pakistan seems to be enjoying its newfound power to negotiate with the US.

The second version is not unfavorable to India in the long run. Pakistan forgets that alliances are temporary, interests are more long-lived. The only hope Pakistan really has is to ally with forces that cannot ally with India under any circumstances.

PS: I really hope it is the second version. Any non-Taliban Afghan govt, supposedly aligned with Pakistan, will squeeze Paki's unmentionables; it will constantly threaten to play an India card to get more concessions from Pakistan.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 24 Mar 2010 09:46

Keep Guantanamo away from Afghanistan

http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20 ... fghanistan

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 24 Mar 2010 19:00

[quote=""]Two versions of Pakistan's Policy Coup in Afghanistan against India

A different angle.

It is interesting to see how Afg. ends up being a battleground for totally different countries. Unkil and Roosies fought in Afg. during the cold war. In their fight, Afg. as country got totally raped. Now, it looks like India and TSP is fighting their cold war. Is this really what unkil wants to see happen? Why not? Looks like a good strategy. Make two bitter countries fight in some third country (Afg.), see them bleed, and sit back and enjoy. Everytime India and TSP (thru Talooban) do something against each other in Afg., millitary planners in Pantoogan, gets the last laugh. What do you guys think?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Mar 2010 20:39

>>Now, it looks like India and TSP is fighting their cold war.

I hope you do not mean in Afghanistan. This is a canard which we must do our utmost to discourage. India is not fighting any war, cold or hot, in Afghanistan. Our interest, an abiding one, is stability and peace within Afghanistan, ruled by any locally acceptable Afghan dispensation - without any party trying to impose their will on the other through force of violence. With this in mind we have been doing extensive development work, and that has had the added benefit of improving the image of India within the country as recent research has shown.

Pakistan is fighting its own ghosts in Afghanistan, not India. Pakistan is fighting what it wishes it was. It wishes it was Afghanistan, it wishes it had that history, it wishes it had that grand and virile identity. Instead, what it has to show after, what, 60 years of "independence" as a rented state is that it is "not India". The real problem is that these issues are particular and peculiar to the Pakistani Punjabi community, which for all intents and purposes rules the country through the military/bureaucratic nexus - with some vested interests from the other provinces slapped on. The Balochs have their own identity. The people of NWFP have their own identity, and the Sindhis have theirs too...

But what of the Punjabis? Can they claim to be Punjabi in the face of the Sikhs and others of Indian Punjab and not be laughed out of town? They will always be second-rate pretenders to the Punjabi identity too... and will be subsumed by Indian Punjab, let alone India - and they know it. So they stick to the only formulation that can give them any relevance, and that is Pakistan. And so they create and perpetrate every sort of evil in order to hang on. But the thread is fraying. Their latest play to show to the Afghans that they will forever be under the Pakjabi thumb by arresting Barader and others is not going to increase the love from across the border, or even from those within. The Pakjabis are in for a bloody reckoning.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 24 Mar 2010 20:53

IOL: The U.S. contingent in Afghanistan is preparing its next offensive against the Taliban in the North Eastern province of Badakhshan, as part of its regional strategy.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 25 Mar 2010 07:27

Karzai for more Chinese support

http://www.hindu.com/2010/03/25/stories ... 642000.htm

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 25 Mar 2010 08:27

Spain in Afghanistan

Dilbar Jan Arman Shinwari, governor of Badghis province, is in Spain to ask for aid in reconstruction activities in Afghanistan in the face of the threat from the Taliban and Al Qaeda. “After a very intense war of 30 years that has destroyed everything, to begin the reconstruction we’re counting on the support of the international community, in particular Spain,” said Arman.

In the last five years, Spain has financed the construction of nine schools in Badghis, has provided the provincial hospital with a maternity/neonatal ward and a unit for malnourished children and has built seven rural clinics to give health care coverage to more than 100,000 people. “The people of Badghis are very happy with the Spaniards (troops). I have received no complaints,” Arman said.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 26 Mar 2010 07:02

Profiling the replacement of Mullah Berader - NYT article
After Arrests, Taliban Promote a Fighter

The new deputy, Mullah Abdul Qayyum Zakir, a former detainee at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, who is believed to be in his mid-30s, has a reputation as a tough fighter with few political skills. He was most recently the Taliban’s commander in southern Afghanistan, but he was pulled back into Pakistan, the Taliban’s rear base, earlier this year out of fear that he would be killed or detained, a senior NATO officer said

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 26 Mar 2010 20:59

Okay from above we have -
Two versions of Pakistan's ..

The second version is rather intriguing, which goes like this: Pakistan’s ISI has won over the Northern Alliance leaders — usually preferring India over Pakistan — and convinced the grandson of king Zahir Shah, Mustafa Zahir Shah, to come together to form the government in Kabul. Proponents of this version claim that Pakistan has made a significant shift from its Pukhtun-Taliban-centric approach to include other nationalities as well.

and now we have

Taliban says it can reconcile with India

Hmm . I wonder ...

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 26 Mar 2010 21:39

Taliban say they can reconcile with India

The outfit say they don't want India to be out of Afghanistan.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Mar 2010 21:44

What is the credibility of Zaibuillah Mujahid? He is sending some messages to India about a Taliban supported govt in Afghanistan.

sum · Post by **sum** » 26 Mar 2010 21:47

Hari Seldon wrote:Taliban say they can reconcile with India
The outfit say they don't want India to be out of Afghanistan.

Truely weird interview!!!

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 26 Mar 2010 21:49

Hari Seldon wrote:Taliban say they can reconcile with India
The outfit say they don't want India to be out of Afghanistan.

We should give them their wish. I don't remember, but were Taliban ever particularly anti-India to begin with?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 26 Mar 2010 21:56

Carl_T wrote: We should give them their wish. I don't remember, but were Taliban ever particularly anti-India to begin with?

These guys are just looking for a free ride on Indian money. No one else is investing so much for so little gain as India does.

Why would they want us out?

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 26 Mar 2010 21:58

If they're propped up by TSP, wouldn't they want us out to begin with?

Akshut · Post by **Akshut** » 26 Mar 2010 22:26

Maybe Pakis are setting them to say this, so that India does not think of an alternative strategy for Afghanistan. Once the NATO is out, ISI's protectorates can be back in business as usual, and snubbing India quite hardly(if India falls for this).

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 26 Mar 2010 22:28

Its not actually that strange.

The Pakistan Army plays the US and jihadis against each other. The most recent example is the arrest of Barader and other senior Taliban figures.

There are people in the Taliban who would like to send the message to the PA that they can play the same game too.

i.e. the Taliban's defence of Pakistani strategic interests does not come for free - it is a quid pro quo for the security and support of the Taliban, particularly in Pakistan.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 26 Mar 2010 22:50

Maybe Pakis are setting them to say this, so that India does not think of an alternative strategy for Afghanistan. Once the NATO is out, ISI's protectorates can be back in business

True that. Its a case of good cop, bad cop.

I believe the US wants to put the best spin on things as it cuts & runs from Afg. Hence the idea of a "good" Taliban is being pushed.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 28 Mar 2010 09:52

Just watched BBC World Debate - Afghanistan: A Winnable War? will post link when it becomes available. But it was interesting to hear Dr. Christine Fair describing the Pakistani arrest of Mullah Biradhar (Sp??) as an impediment to the reconciliation process. As he was negotiating with Karzai. Also described herself as someone who was deeply frustrated with the whole Pakistani game. Nearly tore them a new musharaff.

Another good opinion was from the Hans-Ulrich Klose (Vice Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, German Parliament and Coordinator, German-American Cooperation) who emphasised the need for Strategic Patience the nation building in a state that has had 30 years of civil war will take time and 10-15 years is too small a time to expect result.

However, all the members of the debate emphasised that the talk of an exit strategy was counterproductive to the prospect of re-integration and reconciliation.

Fawzia Koofi, Member, Afghanistan Parliament was mostly wishi-washi and not very articulate. It seems to me that she was present only as the moderator wanted to have an Afghan female who would look good on the stage.

All in all a good watch. which expressed the hopes and fears of the participants WRT to Afganistan.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Mar 2010 11:00

I agree with Johann that the Taliban are indeed sending a message to Pakistan/PA/ISI, but my reason is different.

I believe that Pakistan is beginning to favour Gulbuddin Hekmatyar once again. Hekmatyar has switched sides many times before and is seen as a malleable opponent. If the small Younus Khallis group of Hizb-e-Islami (which split from Hekmatyar) can also be brought on board, there is a good possibility of Pakistan having a considerable say in the power-shared new government whenever one such is formed. The arrest of Baradar is to cripple the Taliban's communication lines so that the Hekmatyar group can flourish. Recently, the ANA came to the rescue of the Hekmatyar fighters after their fight with the Taliban. The Hekmatyar delegation has been holding talks with Karzai in Kabul that includes Hekmatyar's son-in-law.

The Taliban are feeling short-changed by the Pakistanis and are sending a message that they can also square up with Pakistan's enemy.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Mar 2010 11:28

SSridhar:

Is it time for India also to be a chameleon like TSP, and instead of its steadfast opposition to Taliban, open up lines of communication with Taliban? Among all the scenarios I can think of, ironically, I feel the only group that will align itself openly with India taking on TSP are the Pashtoons who will surely take on the Pakijabis provided they are assured of whole-hearted support by a state power like India. Boy what a day that would be if Pashtoons attack TSPA with support & cover from India. Of course, TSP will expand the theater of conflict, but is something likr this plausible? Short of state support, I doubt Pashtoons will make a move on Pakijabis and instead reluctantly go along with them.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 28 Mar 2010 12:33

- CRamS
I don't think it's a great idea to try to pit the Pakhtuns against the Pakjabis. While many resent Pakjabi domination of TSP, there are also many Pakhtuns who support and are an integral part of Pakistan. Are we not overstating the ethnic tensions within that country? Thinking about Pakistan as a temporary entity is fashionable on BRF, IMO it is strategic daydreaming.

Even if we do align with the Pakhtuns who have grievances, I don't see how formenting unrest on its western border really furthers our strategic aims in the reason, unless of course our strategic aim is just to irritate the neighbour.

As for attacking TSP, I feel if we have an objective to accomplish, we should go and do it ourselves, risk our own men and equipment, and do the job fully instead of leaving it to tribal warlords.