Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
anmol
BRFite
Posts: 1922
Joined: 05 May 2009 17:39

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by anmol »

Afghan police: suicide bomber strikes Kabul hotel

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — Afghan police say at least one suicide bomber has blown himself up inside a Western-style hotel in the Afghan capital.

There was no immediate word on casualties, and streets leading to the Intercontinental hotel are blocked.

Azizullah, an Afghan police officer who uses only one name, told The Associated Press at the scene that at least one bomber entered the hotel Tuesday night and detonated a vest of explosives.

Jawid, a guest at the hotel, says the attack occurred as many people were having dinner in the hotel restaurant. He says he heard gunfire throughout the several story building.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack in telephone call to the AP.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — A senior leader of an al-Qaida-linked terror group has been captured in northern Afghanistan dressed up like a woman — the latest in a recent series of cases involving male militants disguised as females, the U.S.-led military coalition said Tuesday.

A joint Afghan and coalition force apprehended a senior figure from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and two of his associates during a nighttime operation Monday in Kunduz city, NATO said.

It said the militant, who also supported the Taliban network, had planned attacks against the Afghan National Police, as well as various suicide bombings and assaults against other Afghan security forces.

NATO did not release the names of the three suspects caught in Kunduz.

"The leader attempted to disguise himself as a female by wearing a burqa, which is an all-enveloping cloak worn by some Muslim women," the coalition said in a statement. "In the last two months there have been several instances of targeted males wearing burqas in attempts to disguise themselves in order not to be caught by Afghan-led forces."

The coalition said there also have been a handful of recent reports of female combatants in burqas.

Kunduz and the surrounding provinces are known hide-outs for the Taliban, al-Qaida and fighters from militant factions that include the Haqqani network, Hizb-i-Islami and the IMU, which aims to create an Islamic state across Central Asia.

The IMU was formed in 1991, originally aiming to set up an Islamic state in Uzbekistan, which neighbors Afghanistan, but later expanded its goal to seeking one across Central Asia. Aligning itself with al-Qaida, it has been most active in the north where violence has been on the rise.

Earlier this month, a suicide bomber blew himself up outside a mosque in Kunduz where a remembrance ceremony was being held for a slain Afghan police commander. The blast killed four police officers. This spring, a suicide bomber killed 35 people at an Afghan army recruitment center and at least 30 others died when another suicide bomber blew himself up at a government office where Afghans were waiting in line for identification cards.

In October, a bomb killed Kunduz Gov. Mohammad Omar and 19 others in a crowded mosque in neighboring Takhar province. Omar was killed just days after he warned of escalating threats from Taliban and foreign fighters in the north.

Elsewhere in Afghanistan, a roadside bomb killed two women and injured a child who were walking in Panjwai district of Kandahar province in the south, said district police chief Mohammad Azeem.

Separately, the coalition said three NATO service members had been killed in the south. A roadside bomb killed one Monday and insurgent attacks killed two more Tuesday. No other details were released.

The deaths bring to at least 56 the number of NATO service members killed in June in Afghanistan, including at least 34 Americans.
From twitter :-
1 suicide attackers detonated his vest on the 2nd floor. Everyone is running away,a guest inside the hotel tells BBC
10 killed in Kabul Hotel shootout by terrorists according to local TOLO News Agency.
AP: The Taliban claim responsibility for the attack at the Intercontinental Hotel in telephone call to the AP.
AFP: Three to four suicide bombers enter Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul, reports of several gunmen shooting #afghanistan
Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul under attack, abt 6 member suide squard inside
Kabul quotes Interior Ministry official as saying the attack at the Kabul InterContinental appears over. Building search underway.
Large congregation of Afghan officials, governors at Intercontinental Hotel,
Last edited by anmol on 29 Jun 2011 00:25, edited 4 times in total.
AdityaM
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2062
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by AdityaM »

mumbai style attack in kabul intercontinental
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60240
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ramana »

I dont understand the obligatory ref to past incidents which obscure the current one. No need fro context when its not there.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Philip »

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

More details with a video clip .

Taliban commandos stage siege at Kabul Intercontinental hotel
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Agnimitra »

Kabul Bank Scandal and what MKB sees as the "US-Afghan rift"
Afghanistan's central bank governor Abdul Qadir Fitrat, a former official in the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and an adviser to the World Bank, fled Kabul in panic even as the Afghan government was about to question him in connection with the scandal.

Fitrat, who enjoys permanent residency status in the US, announced his resignation while ensconced in the Virginia hotel and within two hours he was on air, interviewed by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty flashing his side of the story across the Hindu Kush mountain tops and valleys. His story, essentially, is that he is a whistle blower on the bank scandal rather than a fraudster and that he fears for his life because of testimony he gave to the Afghan parliament some two months ago in which he implicated by name certain influential people in the Kabul power structure.
The heart of the matter is that this is not a mere bank scam. The accused include powerful figures in the Afghan power structure. The US's principal targets are without doubt Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Vice President Mohammed Fahim, whose brother and nephew respectively are alleged to be involved in the scam.

The US has been gunning for Fahim for some time on the estimation that as long as the strongman from Panjshir continues to back Karzai the attempts to unseat the Afghan president, or to arrest his growing defiance of American diktat, will not work.

Besides, Washington has been propping up two other "Panjshiris" - Abdullah Abdullah, former foreign minister, and Amrullah Saleh, former intelligence chief, both of whom Karzai sacked - but Fahim calls the shots ultimately as he inherited the Tajik militia that used to be led by Ahmad Shah Massoud (whose brother Wali Massoud also happens to be linked to the Kabul Bank scandal).

One solid achievement the US has made in the bargain is to splinter the Panjshiri camp, which previously had close links with Iran and Russia.
The bank scam as such is not essentially dissimilar to practices common to many countries in the world, including such semi-developed countries as Turkey, the United Arab Emirates or Brazil, with shareholders of private banks misappropriating the banks' capital for business purposes. Why the US is making such a song and dance about the issue is the big question.
[...]
There is nothing extraordinary here in terms of the political economies of most developing countries. However, a peculiarity of the Afghan scam is that the Kabul Bank holds the deposits of thousands of Afghan soldiers and policemen and the bank's collapse could lead to great disaffection within the security apparatus and common people, which could turn to be awkward for Karzai politically.

Second, Kabul Bank handles almost 80% of the Afghan government's salary disbursement to state employees and the IMF promptly stepped in last year even as the scandal broke, to dictate that further aid for Afghanistan would be put on hold until the matter was sorted out to its satisfaction, which, in turn, is threatening Karzai's government with a "cash crunch" at a very sensitive time politically.

The US simultaneously aimed to get the Afghan parliament look into the Kabul Bank scam so as to get the MPs to train the guns on Karzai. This parallel template merits some explanation. The point is, thanks to the irregularities in last year's parliamentary elections and the unstable conditions in the southern regions, a disproportionately higher number of non-Pashtuns got elected to the present parliament and Abdullah (who enjoys US backing) controls a big faction. That is to say, Karzai virtually faces an "unfriendly" parliament, which happens to be heavily under the influence of the American Embassy in Kabul.
As an ethnic Afghan - a Tajik from the remote Badakshan province - Fitrat certainly would know he was punching far above his weight when he took on the powers that be in Kabul.

Now, with the tribunal verdict on the unseating of the Afghan MPs and the prospect of a radical change in the alchemy of the Afghan parliament looming large - most likely, resulting in a "swing" in Karzai's favor - the American game is almost certainly up. And the US Embassy in Kabul did the right thing to instruct Fitrat to return to the pavilion in Washington. He has become what Graham Greene would call a "burnt-out case".

What do all these shenanigans by the US add up to? One, it underscores that the US is not getting anywhere near to good results by arm-twisting Karzai to concede favorable terms of a strategic partnership agreement on the establishment of American military bases in Afghanistan.
..."trying to mould favorable opinion" in northern Afghanistan is very significant. This is where Fahim and the Panjshiris come in. Fahim is proving to be a stumbling block for the Americans in two respects. First, his open support for Karzai frustrates the US attempt to destabilize the Afghan president and make him politically vulnerable. Karzai has brilliantly forged an alliance with the two most important Tajik figures in the north - Fahim and Burhanuddin Rabbani (former president who heads the Afghan High Council for Peace and an important interlocutor with Pakistan).

The Karzai-Fahim-Rabbani axis virtually closes the gateway for the US to the northern region. The US game plan is to somehow strike a deal with the Taliban on the basis of the southern Afghanistan regions being "ceded" to them and as quid pro quo to the Taliban accepting the long-term US military presence in Afghanistan.

It is a different matter that such a de facto partition of Afghanistan is the one development that Pakistan dreads most as it stokes the fires of Pashtun nationalism and will strike at the very heart of Pakistan's national unity. (Which explains the US strategy to keep Pakistan out of the loop and instead preferring direct talks with the Taliban leadership.)

Equally, Karzai and his allies also oppose any de facto division of Afghanistan. The US factors in that Karzai has rapidly diversified his external relations and takes an active interest in regional affairs, which has enabled him over time to secure support from Russia, China and Iran - and from Islamabad (to an extent), the complexities of Afghan-Pakistan relations notwithstanding. Karzai is able to tap into the profound disquiet in these regional countries over the prospect of long-term US military presence in the region.

What makes the Kabul Bank affair a matter of utmost importance to the US is that it sees the scam as a handle to weaken Fahim, who, incidentally, was a top leader of the erstwhile Northern Alliance, which was supported by Russia, Iran, India and Tajikistan.

The cat-and-mouse game between Karzai and the US has finally burst into the open with Fitrat's escape to Washington. Karzai has already alleged that the core issue in the Kabul Bank scam is that Afghanistan lacked the necessary banking experience to oversee the institution and allowed itself to be guided by "foreign advisers". Clearly, Fitrat, having been the central bank governor, had a good view of what was going on in the Kabul Bank until the scam sailed into view, piloted by the US Embassy in Kabul.
Finally, if the IMF-US game plan is to somehow get Karzai removed from power and to have him replaced by a surrogate ruler with some previous World Bank experience, that is not going to work - even if he is an ethnic Pashtun. The paradox is that there is yet another party today who is involved in the question of who rules Afghanistan beyond 2014 - the Taliban.

The IMF and the US should see the writing on the wall when half a dozen suicide bombers walk into the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul and NATO aircraft and troops have to be brought in to counter their invasion.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60240
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ramana »

I think the long view is that from 1970s Afghanistan turmoil is seeing the primacy of Pahstuns in Afghanistan eroding. The old Durrani comapct is unravlling as Afghanistan enters the modern age skipping a century form 19th to 21st in a matter of three decades. The Daud coup, the FSU takeover and Taliban intergennum are all akin to the impact of French revolution on the Afghan soceity. The meaning of all this is old ideology of ensuring Pasthun dominance to control Afghanistan is doomed.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by CRamS »

shyamd wrote:CRamS ji, what do you propose we do wrt 26/11 and TSP?
Not the thread to discuss this, but short answer is definetly no what MMSJi and SoniaJi are doing: sucking up to TSP at US behest US. This invites 26/11s, may not be now, but in the future. Also, MMSJi & SoniaJi & ruling elite should show just a fraction, just a tiny fraction of the bravado and honesty they displayed againt Baba Ramdev towards TSP.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60240
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ramana »

CRS, You didnt have the benefit of going to desi college where you see student politics first hand. I know it looks like an apology of inaction but if its inaction by choice instead of due to helplessness, then its a policy move.
I submit the GOI not resorting to force has set the US and TSP fighting each other. The Abortabad raid would never have happened in earlier times. TSP's perfidy is so obvious that the US was forced to conduct the raid for their own interests.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by brihaspati »

ramana wrote:I dont understand the obligatory ref to past incidents which obscure the current one. No need fro context when its not there.
To give an equal equal. Many good things can be obtained from it.
(1) point to GOI - how it quietly digested the kick. The Kabul gov should do so too and not bee too harsh on Talebs.
(2) Backdoor negotiations are going on to the extract the good Taleban. Hey Kabul gov take this as a warning not to derail the process.
(3) The Talebs are simply throwing a bargaining indicator. Should be taken in that spirit.
pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4172
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by pgbhat »

ramana wrote:I submit the GOI not resorting to force has set the US and TSP fighting each other.
One way of looking at things is: Unkil is unable to use India as a stick up Pacqui musharraf to further its goals in af-pak.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by brihaspati »

ramana ji,
that desi college politics should also show the details of the criteria for inaction. Lets say two competing student orgs are fighting, and one groups students have ambushed another groups students - and in the process non-activists in the class got hit too. College authorities will only take steps against that particular group which does not have the favour of the ruling regime, subject to following further criteria

(a) if the ruling regime itself wants that action be taken against its own student group to eliminate someone from the local level of its own party
(b) if the ruling regime want no action taken against any group - because it eyes some of the heroes from the other group for recruitment into its own - if the heroes have proved their utility as good bulldogs.

I think you can now apply this to the AF situation.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by shyamd »

CRS ji, just to add to what Ramana said. Keep in mind how split paki's are. Its imploding slowly while we continue on our march. Why unite them? They are literally butchering themselves.
There are foreign powers there who have got in position to split Pak if it continues and are doing our dirty work. We are just playing good boy and its working as more in the US are now questioning Pak.

War is easy to start, but when you want out, the other side has to agree and it may not be on your terms. Saddam found out the hard way and a few years after the war with iran he was telling King Fahd he wished he listen to his advice.
Of course Iran unified and the iranian leadership grew even more powerful as everyone united against Iraq.

We will do the necessary to Pak when the time is right, that gap doesn't open up very often, but when it does we'll probably take it.

Although, I do feel we should have reacted covertly.
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by rajanb »

Shyamd ji,

The more we koochie kootchie with paks the following can be the outcome: (Please note that in the recently concluded FS and Siachen meetings nothing concrete was established except to meet again. Love these chai biscoot sessions!)

a) That one TFTA = 10 SRDE. Happened during the 65 and 71 wars, a good psychological advantage.
b) With PA under tremendous pressure that they cannot deliver, adds masala to that view.

Konfuscious konfounded is the name of the game. Wheels within wheels! But yes, at an opportune moment we should have the political will to ruthlessly take advantage of the situation. Push them into a faster downhill skiing is the best policy.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by brihaspati »

Yes, of course we took care of Pakistanis earlier too - for what they did in he lead up to their "nation" in 1946-47, and again in 51, and again in 53, and again in 58, 63, 66, 67, 70-71, 72, 75, ..... Before 47, they were doing it on people from communities not worthy of having human rights in British India, and after 47 they were doing it on those very same communities still not worthy of having human rights. The Hindus of Bengal and the Sikhs of Punjab, and the Hindus of Kashmir. In Mumbai, some people died, of course. Tragic. Unfortunate. But have to look at the context. Isnt this the city that allowed the Shiv Sena to rise? Isnt this the city that targeted a saccha Mussalman - who was merely doing honest business towards prosperity - having come from a deprived minority community background - and succeeded by the dint of his merit to become an international - nay multinational enterprise now most likely controlled from the Gulf? That enterprise which has on a sideline, given such an edge to India's soft-power projection through cinema? That Gulf which we need so desperately as otherwise we would drop down to "***** rate of growth again"? And to make it impossible for such a kind gentleman not to leave the shores of India? That city has done many a crime! Surely this legitimate biting back or reprisal should not be avenged! That is not the "h****" ethos which crawls into the base of our national foundation onlee when reprisals are being talked about!

We should promise that we will take revenge - in the indefinite future! Time is the ultimate destroyer of things - only in this the "Hindu" concepts are good! Wait for time to do its job!
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60240
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ramana »

Shyamd,
Also go back to Mahabharata. The Pandavas future progeny got murdered. So did they win the war or the battle?

Bji, There are three groups: TSP, US-PRC and India. And in this case there are no bystanders.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by brihaspati »

ramana ji,
ruling regime == USA
college authority == GOI
one org of students == Indian janta not sympathetic to (Pak==Islamism==Gulf)
another org of students == Indian "junta" sympathetic/admiring/seeing biz prospects in (Pak==Islamism==Gulf)

PRC == not yet in regime power but a dreamer and waiting in the sidelines, also fishing for appropriate bulldogs.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by CRamS »

ramana wrote:CRS, You didnt have the benefit of going to desi college where you see student politics first hand. I know it looks like an apology of inaction but if its inaction by choice instead of due to helplessness, then its a policy move.
I submit the GOI not resorting to force has set the US and TSP fighting each other. The Abortabad raid would never have happened in earlier times. TSP's perfidy is so obvious that the US was forced to conduct the raid for their own interests.
No doubt about it. But US & TSP are conducting their operations in an optimal manner, i.e., solving a constrained optimization/minimization problem. In US case it is to maximize its benefits killing as many "bad guys" targeting whites. In TSP's case, it is minimizing material losses as it gubos to US demands. But in both case the key constrain is not to let TSP's relative strenght visa vi India be depleted so much that TSP can't be a pain in India's arse. Thats what AfPak is all about.
Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Klaus »

NATO says Haqqani commander killed in AFG

Link
The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) identified Ismail Jan as deputy to the senior Haqqani commander inside Afghanistan and said he was killed in the eastern province of Paktiya on Wednesday.

Security forces tracked his location based on intelligence reports from Afghan government officials, citizens and "disenfranchised insurgents" before calling in the air strike, ISAF said in a statement.

Nato said Jan and "several" other Haqqani fighters were killed the following day in Paktiya, which borders Pakistan's tribal belt where the Haqqani leadership is based in the semi-autonomous district of North Waziristan. (AFP)
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60240
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ramana »

Nightwatch synopsis:

Nightwatch June 30th, 2011
Pakistan: Policy vignettes.


Indian Relations: Pakistan's counterterrorism efforts do not satisfy India, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said 29 June. Singh said groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed are linked to the Islamic State of Iraq. He said he would visit Pakistan if there were a solid goal for the visit.


Afghanistan Relations: Pakistani Defense Minister Mukhtar said 29 June that he does not know where Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Omar is hiding. Senior US military commanders told the US Congress this week that Pakistanis were ignoring U.S. requests to find Omar, but that they knew he was in Pakistan.


US Relations: Pakistani Defense Minister Mukhtar also said that Pakistan did not face any threat from its eastern border and that Pakistan has asked U.S. forces to leave Shamsi air base. Mukhtar said that payments from the coalition support fund had stalled and that the time had come to re-evaluate the policy in the war.


Iran-Afghanistan Relations: Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said June 29 that the Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan summit would be held in Islamabad in December, IRNA reported.


Comment: Shamsi, located in Baluchistan, had been used to support drone operations for about five years according to media reports. Before that, starting in 2001, it was used as a support base for US military operations in Afghanistan. The US evacuated it in April 2011 after Pakistan ordered operations to cease, according to the Pakistan Military Review. Mukhtar's display of ordering the US out of Shamsi appears to be political theater.

Nevertheless, US-Pakistani relations are in the process of change and will not be close for a generation or longer because the US and its armed forces humiliated the Pakistan Army. Mukhtar confirmed that Pakistan's foreign policy is undergoing review in light of the 2 May attack that killed bin Laden. The shift is manifest in building closer ties to Iran as well as strengthening ties to China. The Afghanistan connection almost certainly signifies a revived Afghan policy that ensures Pakistan will be involved in the post-US reconstruction of Afghanistan.


After the US military departs Afghanistan, it will remain either as a strategic threat or asset for Pakistan. Three years is not too soon to begin rebuilding the long term Pakistan investment in Afghanistan.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by shyamd »

How the Taliban and America met in Munich
By Ahmed Rashid

The daring night-time raid on one of one Kabul’s best-known hotels by Afghan militants on Tuesday underlines once again how much depends on the secret talks with the Taliban. Following Barack Obama’s plan for a limited withdrawal of troops, hopes of a settlement that would allow a full and safe western troop withdrawal by 2014 depend on these negotiations.

However, the recent leaks by government officials in Washington, Kabul and London are extremely dangerous and could scuttle the talks just as they enter a critical phase. I have followed in detail the many attempts at Afghan dialogue since 2005, hoping they would bring peace to a country that has known only war since 1978. These talks have largely been between president Hamid Karzai and the Taliban and only recently included Americans.

At stake is not just peace for Afghanistan but the region, including a deeply precarious Pakistan. The talks are premised on the realisation that neither a successful western withdrawal nor a transition to Afghan forces can occur without an end to the civil war and a settlement between the government and the Taliban, but also Pakistan, the US and the region.

In an attempt to avoid further speculation, I am laying out the bare facts of the talks as western officials have described them to me. The first face-to-face meeting between Taliban leaders and US government officials took place in a village outside Munich on November 28 2010. It was chaired by a German diplomat. There were also Qatari officials whom the Taliban had asked to be involved. The talks lasted 11 hours.

The second round took place in Doha, the Qatari capital, on February 15. Three days later Hillary Clinton, US secretary of state, made the most far-reaching US public statement to date, saying: “We are launching a diplomatic surge to move this conflict toward a political outcome that shatters the alliance between the Taliban and al-Qaeda, ends the insurgency and helps to produce not only a more stable Afghanistan but a more stable region.’’

The third meeting took place again in Germany on May 7 and 8. All the same participants have taken part in the three rounds which have largely involved trying to develop confidence-building measures between the Taliban and the Americans, such as lifting sanctions from the Taliban, the freeing of Taliban prisoners and the opening of a Taliban representative office.

On June 17, in a big step forward, the UN Security Council accepted a US request to treat al-Qaeda and the Taliban separately on a 13-year-old UN list of global terrorists. There will now be two separate lists and UN sanctions on al-Qaeda members will not necessarily apply to the Taliban, making it easier to take them off the list – a significant boost to the dialogue.


Mr Karzai has been fully briefed after each round and has unstintingly supported the Taliban’s desire to hold separate talks with the Americans, even as his government continues its talks with the Taliban. Pakistani leaders have also been briefed about the talks, but have expressed reservations about them.

One US-German target is to mark the 10th anniversary of the 2001 Bonn meeting that set up the Afghan interim government with another meeting in Bonn, in which the Taliban will participate. This would formalise the process, but there is still a long way to go before the Taliban agree to this demand – all the more reason that the identities of interlocutors are kept secret. Even so, some believe that the Americans are going about the talks too slowly.

The process began when German officials, at the request of the Taliban, held their first meeting in September 2009 in Dubai. Germany has always been admired by the Afghans because it has stayed neutral – never taking sides in Afghan conflicts and even tried to mediate to end the 1990s civil war between the Taliban and opponents.

The Germans made sure the interlocutors represented the Taliban Shura (its governing council), which is headed by Mullah Mohammed Omar. (The Americans have also taken pains to verify the authenticity of the Taliban.) The Germans held eight further meetings with the Taliban to build trust, before bringing in the Americans. The Germans have never doubted their role as facilitators – while the actual negotiations must take place between the US and the Taliban.

Qatar has played a role because the Taliban wanted a Muslim country at the table and considered Qatar neutral. Qatar has never backed any of the regional countries who have taken sides in past Afghan conflicts, such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, India, Turkey or Iran. The next big steps would hopefully involve how both sides could reduce violence on the battlefield. At some stage the Taliban would have to admit talks are taking place, which they strongly deny at present.

A former Taliban leader told me recently: “The fundamental problem is between the US and the Taliban and we consider the Afghan government as the secondary problem.’’ He added: “The talks we want must involve the international community and end with international guarantees.’’ If that is the case and the Taliban would like to see an orderly western exit, the media and governments must allow these talks to succeed. The only way to do that is to respect the participants’ need for secrecy.

Particularly dangerous has been the speculative naming by journalists of participants, endangering their lives at the hands of groups such as al-Qaeda, who want to sabotage the talks. Afghan efforts have always been undermined by governments in the region or extremists. These talks are clearly no longer secret but their contents must stay private if the talks are to have any chance.


The writer is author of Descent into Chaos and The Taliban
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60240
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ramana »

They always meet in Germany. Recall before 9/11 they also met in there in Munich and after the talks failed and it led to Masood killing and then 9/11.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by shyamd »

In July, 2005, Germany's BND flew two Taliban commanders to a secret meeting in Zurich, Switzerland but it came to nothing as far as I am aware. So its clear this has been an ongoing process for quite some time. The Qatari's too, they were the ones who helped nab Ramzi.

-----------------------------
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=10735590
NZ SAS were involved in the intercontinental operation along with ANASF.
Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Airavat »

How to get Pakistan to break with Islamic militants: Zalmay Khalilzad
Even with Osama bin Laden dead, the nexus between the Pakistani state and a syndicate of Islamic extremists remains a threat. Pakistan’s military continues to support the Taliban, the Haqqani network and Hizb-e-Islami against coalition and Afghan forces.

When the city of Herat fell to the Taliban in 1996, the Pakistani former intelligence official Sultan Amir Tarrar — better known as Col. Imam — was helping Taliban forces. He reportedly messaged headquarters: “Today Herat, tomorrow Tashkent.”

Washington has considerable leverage that it has not used to optimal effect. Pakistan relies on the United States and international organizations to remain solvent; its economy would be on the ropes but for a two-year $7.6 billion International Monetary Fund loan package. Coalition support funds from the United States alone are equal to about 25 percent of Pakistan’s defense budget.

Should Pakistani intransigence persist, the United States will need a long-term strategy that manages the threat from Pakistan and embraces a broad multilateral effort to assist those Pakistanis who seek to transform their country. This would, in part, require the United States to maintain a military presence in Afghanistan to counter the terror threat and assist in preventing the victory of Pakistani proxies in Afghanistan.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Agnimitra »

Ramana ji,
X-posting from "Handling Pakistan's Failure" thread.
------------------------------------------------

TSP racial identity issues are neurotic. I just googled racist attitudes in TSP and found this on a Paki forum no less:

"Effect of Pathan racism on Pakistan"
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/culture-lite ... acism.html

Some nuggets :mrgreen:
Typical a-hole called "Afghan Prince" writes:
Before 1947 pashtuns were considered noble people becauz of their noble qualities,. They ruled india 3 times {huh?} and were as ruling and warrior people. As they were dominant on Indian races therefore this brought them to consider thereselves superior to locals. At their peak of power in India they used to pray in separate mosques instead with locals. In their initial colonization of India, the half pathans were not considered as equal as pure pathans. Pathans raised mutiny against sikndar lodhi, the ruler of India, just because his mother was Indian.
Pathans of N.w.F.P were more strict and turned against syed ahmad shaheed bcozhe demande pashtun wives for himself and his Indian mujahideens from locals.
That’s why there are so many khans in India bcoz low caste hindus after converting to islam used khan surname and called theseves pathans bcoz pathans were superior people and were feared by locals.

But today being pakistnai they are now in defensive mood. They are selling their daughters to punjabies. Many modern and educated pathan families are hiding their pathan idenititu bcoz they have become symbol of backwardness.
Sensible guy called safar777 educates the rest:
Pathans have a habit of over glorifying themselves and interpreting history to suit their overblown egos. A lot written by 'Afghan Prince' is based on his ethnic racism and pride and the hurt to his ego because some Pathans are marrying with Punjabis (and Balochis, Sindhis, Muhajirs).

If you look at History Pathans never ruled India 3 times. 10 years of self styled Sher Khan does not constitute a Dynasty. :lol:

If you go to original sources of history not to fairy tales you will see what happened and what is still happening. Pathans have won and have been defeated like all other communities however Pathans have made their defeats into fairy tales. Case in point when Babur pillaged and crushed the Pathans in the present tribal areas he demaded the daughter of Shah Mansur Yusufzai as submission from the tribe. However the Pathans have made that defeat into a fairy tale of Babur dressing up as a qalandar and wooing Bibi Mubaraka :rotfl: which no historian agrees to. Even the modern Pathans don't agree with this.

If you start with Ghaznavi, they were 100% Turk tribes. In fact they fought against Hindu/Buddhist/Atheist/Animast Pashtun tribes to control these areas. The founder of the dynasty was Sebüktigin (ruled 977–997), a former Turkish slave who was recognized by the Samanids (a Persian Muslim dynasty) as governor of Ghazna. As the Samanid dynasty weakened, Sebüktigin consolidated his position and expanded his domains as far as the Indian border.

Muslim historians Ibn Haukal, Utbi and Alberuni are ALL unanimous that uptill the time of Mahmud Ghaznavi i.e. almost four hundred years after the death of the Prophet, most of the Afghans were still non-Muslims. Mahmud Ghaznavi 'had to fight against the infidel Afghans in the Sulaiman mountains.' Even 200 years later in the encounter between Mohammad Ghori and Prithviraj in 1192 A.D., according to Farishta, Hindu/Buddhist/Animist/Pagan/Shamanist/Zoroastrian Afghans were fighting on the side of the Rajput Chief. The cavalry flank of Prithvi Raj Chauhan was made up of Afghans.

After that Mongols invaded these lands and ravaged and pillaged Herat, Balkh and most of Afghanistan. After that the Timurid dynasty rose who was a Tatar/Mongol with strong backing of Uzbek Turks. Again nothing to do with Pashtuns. Prior to arrival of Mughals even Kandahar was ruled by Arghun who are Mongol (ILKHanate) tribe.

Afterwards you had Babur the Mughal invading. He was a Chughtai Turk and even documented the pillars of Afghan heads he created in his own book "Tuzk-e-Babri". In his own book Babur writes:

"...Marching out of Kohat, we took the Hangu-road for Bangash. Between Kohat and Hangu that road runs through a valley shut in on either hand by the mountains. When we entered this valley, the Afghans of Kohat and thereabouts who were gathered on both hill-skirts, raised their war-cry with great clamour. Our then guide, Malik Bu-sa'id Kamarl was well-acquainted with the Afghan locations ; he represented that further on there was a detached hill on our right, where, if the Afghans came down to it from the hill-skirt, we might surround and take them. God brought it right! The Afghans, on reaching the place, did come down. We ordered one party of braves to seize the neck of land between that hill and the mountains, others to move along its sides, so mat under attack made from all sides at once, the Afghans might be made to reach their doom. Against the all around assault, they could not even fight; a hundred or two were taken, some were brought in alive but of most, the heads only were brought. We had been told that when Afghans are powerless to resist, they go before their foe with grass between their teeth, this being as much as to say, " I am your cow." Here we saw this custom ; Afghans unable to make resistance, came before us with grass between their teeth. Those our men had brought in as prisoners were ordered to be beheaded and a pillar of their heads was set up in our camp..."

You can read his biography where he writes about his war on the Yusufzais, quite different from the Pashtun fairly tale of Babur dressing up as a Qalandar. :lol:

Moving on, when Babur invaded India and fought an epic battle with the Rajput Chief 'Rana Sanka' (considered a battle betweeen Muslims and Hindus) , the Rajputs had with them Mahmud Lodhi, out to avenge his father's defeat with 10,000 Afghans. Most of the Afghan perished along with the Rajputs defeat against Babur's army.

When Akbar was the emperor of the Mughal empire and this included Kabul and Kandahar there were two rebellions both were crushed by Rajput armies of the Mughals. Even in the twilight of the Mughal empire, Emperor Aurangzeb sent in Rajput chief (Raja Jaswant Singh) to punishing the Afghans for their rebellion.

Finally the favourite of Pashtuns, Ahmed abdali came on the heels of Nadir Shah Afshar Qazilbash (the Persian King). However right after the death of Ahmed Abdali the ares East of Khyber were quickly lost to the Ranjit Singh's army.

When the Sikh were fighting their 3rd and final battle against the British the Afghan king even sent a 5000 strong cavalry (hoping this alliance would help them take Peshawar), however as soon as the Sikhs were defeated the Afghan cavalry ran back to Khyber non-stop!

Later on the British even helped supported the Afghan kings in their war against Persia (First Ango-Persian war which took Herat from Persia for Afghans) and even gave money and arms to the ruling Afghan dynasty as part of their great game strategy against Tsarist Russia and Iran. Until 1910 the foreign policy of so called Afghanistan was controlled by British empire and the so called Afghan king was given a Stipend by the British every year. :lol:

However if you talk with Pakistani Pashtoons or Afghan Pashtuns they seem to claim to rule the moon and sun. Similar to Bibi Mubaraka-Babur fairy tales. :mrgreen:
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by shravan »

Afghan general resigns over Pakistan shelling
KABUL: A barrage of 40 rockets was fired into eastern Afghanistan from Pakistan on Friday, a senior official said, as the top border police commander for the region offered his resignation over the government’s response to weeks of attacks.

General Aminullah Amarkhil, head of the border police in the eastern region, said he was not able to return fire and could not stand by as people were killed by the shells.

“I have submitted my resignation to the Interior Ministry because I can’t see my people being killed by shells fired from Pakistan,” Amarkhil told Reuters. “I have promised my people here that the shelling would be stopped, but people are still dying because we have no order from the central government to respond,” he added. The Afghan Foreign Ministry said in late June that four children were killed in eastern Kunar province by Pakistani artillery shells, and Afghan President Hamid Karzai said that Pakistan had fired 470 rockets over the border that month.
...
g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by g.sarkar »

It will be messy:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 050D03.DTL
Afghan war's deadly toll on US forces hasn't eased
By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press
Saturday, July 2, 2011
07-02) 14:03 PDT KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) --
"Despite U.S. reports of progress on the battlefield, American troops were killed in the first half of this year at the same pace as in 2010 — an indication that the war's toll on U.S. forces has not eased as the Obama administration moves to shift the burden to the Afghans.
While the overall international death toll dropped by 14 percent in the first half of the year, the number of Americans who died remained virtually unchanged, 197 this year compared with 195 in the first six months of last year, according to a tally by The Associated Press.
Americans have been involved in some of the fiercest fighting as the U.S. administration sent more than 30,000 extra troops in a bid to pacify areas in the Taliban's southern heartland and other dangerous areas. U.S. military officials have predicted more tough fighting through the summer as the Taliban try to regain territory they have lost.
President Barack Obama has begun to reverse the surge of American forces, ordering a reduction of 10,000 by the end of the year and another 23,000 by September 2012. But the U.S. military has not announced which troops are being sent home, or whether they will be withdrawn from any of the most violent areas in the south and east.
Rear Adm. Vic Beck, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition in Kabul, said he couldn't comment specifically on the U.S. death count, but noted that the casualties were unchanged despite the surge in forces. He attributed the overall decline in the international toll to coalition progress on the battlefield, including the discovery of a rising number of militant weapons caches. He also said Afghan security forces are increasingly taking the lead, although recent violence has raised concerns about their readiness to secure their own country........."
Gautam
Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Klaus »

ramana wrote:They always meet in Germany. Recall before 9/11 they also met in there in Munich and after the talks failed and it led to Masood killing and then 9/11.
The yanks probably had the von Stauffenberg option handy for these liaisons. Well, we could hope that GoI has some inside knowledge on the proceedings. However I dont see such secret meets as being anything other than a plan to continue shafting the regional players.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Prem »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html
U.S. turns to other routes to supply Afghan war as relations with Pakistan fray
The U.S. military is rapidly expanding its aerial and Central Asian supply routes to the war in Afghanistan, fearing that Pakistan could cut off the main means of providing American and NATO forces with fuel, food and equipment.A senior U.S. defense official said the military wants to keep using Pakistan, which offers the most direct and the cheapest routes to Afghanistan. But the Pentagon also wants the ability to bypass the country if necessary.It’s either Central Asia or Pakistan — those are the two choices. We’d like to have both,” the defense official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to avoid alienating Pakistan. “We’d like to have a balance between them, and not be dependent on either one, but always have the possibility of switching.”
ranjbe
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 21:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ranjbe »

Haqquani network buys Paki suicide bombers from Hakimullah Mehsud of TTP (Paki Taliban) for $70,000 - $93,000 for use in Afghanistan (Reuters).
http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/03/insurgen ... gency.html
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by shyamd »

Core group talks: No let-up in shelling militants, says Pakistan
By Qaiser Butt
Published: June 29, 2011

ISLAMABAD:

Islamabad has made it clear to Washington and Kabul that shelling on the Afghanistan-based militants from Pakistan would continue in the future, as it was necessary to counter terrorists who have been consistently attacking Pakistan’s security forces over the past weeks, Ambassador Mohammad Sadiq told The Express Tribune.

Pakistan took this position at a Core Group Meeting with US special envoy Marc Grossman and Afghan Deputy Foreign Minister Javed Ludin in Kabul on Tuesday.

Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir explained during the meeting that the bombardment was not directed at Afghan civilians.

A similar meeting between the US, Afghan and Pakistan security officials also took place at the Army Headquarters in Peshawar the same day, highly placed sources told The Express Tribune.

The officials were to discuss cross border strikes by Afghan militants and Pakistan’s retaliation operations.

Shelling by Pakistan on Afghan militants during the week has so far claimed several civilian lives besides a large number of miscreants who crossed over to Pakistan to attack its security forces.


Ambassador Sadiq was summoned by the Afghan ministry of foreign affairs last week to receive a demarche over the shelling which, according to the Afghan media, led to the deaths of several civilians, forcing others to flee their houses in Kunar and adjoining areas.

The recent shelling on Afghan villages by Pakistan’s security forces was not an intentional act on the part of its forces, Sadiq told the Afghan foreign minister.

“Several hundred civilians and security personnel were killed by Afghan militants who crossed over into Dir and Bajaur during the last few weeks, Sadiq said, adding “the armed lashkars from across the border targeted Pakistan’s security forces six times during the last three months”.

US-Taliban contacts

Ambassador Sadiq confirmed that Washington was in contact with the Taliban for reconciliation. However, he said that at present there was no discussion between the US and Afghan Taliban on reconciliation and transition.

“Washington was in contact with former Taliban spokesman Syed Agha,” he said, adding that they had held three meetings in the past in Qatar, Kandahar and Germany.

Contact with Syed Agha was arranged by Germany which is pleading for a negotiated settlement of the Afghan crisis. “We have learnt that both sides have exchanged terms and conditions for the talks,” Sadiq explained.

Regarding reports of talks between the UK and the Afghan Taliban, Sadiq said there were no such negotiations between the two parties.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 29th, 2011.
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by rajanb »

ranjbe wrote:Haqquani network buys Paki suicide bombers from Hakimullah Mehsud of TTP (Paki Taliban) for $70,000 - $93,000 for use in Afghanistan (Reuters).
http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/03/insurgen ... gency.html
I don't mean to be insensitive but a question:

How much does it work out to be per kilo? Poor brainwashed sods. The reality of today.

Being born into a family, a religion, a country is fate. But a person is defined by the choices he makes from those that are presented to him/her.
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by shravan »

^

It was $20,000 three years back. Pakis are very good at IT. :(

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/wor ... 34585.html
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by rajanb »

shravan wrote:^

It was $20,000 three years back. Pakis are very good at IT. :(

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/wor ... 34585.html
Just pure economics. Since the market has shrunk for the increasing numbers available. Pakistan is out of bounds for suicide bombers now.
ranjbe
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 21:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ranjbe »

Just to reaffirm the basic tenets of the various Taliban factions in Afghanistan and Pakistan - in fact, this should include the TSP army and the ISI: Al-Taqiyya when negotiating, Jihad and Sharia as ways of life. Article on Taliban negotiating with the US by Dr Walid Phares in Asia Times.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/M06Df01.html
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Agnimitra »

BBC Persian: Interview with Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman (JUI):

هشدار نسبت به خروج فوری نیروهای خارجی از افغانستان
"A warning regarging a hasty exit from Afghanistan"
A quick exit of US troops from Afghanistan will once again create the conditions for civil war in that country.

Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman, leader of the JUI, a large political-religious party in Pakistan and supporter of rebel militant groups in Afghanistan, says that before the US leaves, it needs to smooth out and prepare the bed of peace talks in A'stan.

The Govt of Afghanistan is hopeful that this Pakistani political-religious leader-guide can play the part of a mediator in such peace talks.

Our reporter, Haroun Najafizadeh, first asked the Maulana what his response was to the demands of the Govt of Afghanistan from his party.

"What we are able to do for resolving the problem of Afghanistan, it is not possible to say at this moment. The way and modalities of our involvement is yet to be determined. The Peace Shura of Afghanistan has only just begun its work, and does not yet have a plan for further initiatives."

Do you think talks are truly probable?

"From the first day I have been in favour of talks. One should not resort to force to accomplish one's purpose. The conditions for political understanding should be facilitated by dialogue. Without a doubt, after all these clashes, misperceptions and anger has increased. The task of returning conditions to normalcy, bring together the opposite parties and having them sit and look at one another's faces is a task beset with difficulties."

One of the preconditions set by the Taliban for talks was the exit of US forces from Afghanistan. Now that the US has announced a drawdown, do you think it is a positive step?

"It is to be seen whether the US drawdown is due to good intentions as a well-wished to solve Afghanistan's problems, or whether they are leaving under compulsion of defeat."

You have said that if the US exits, then Afghanistan will enter into further rounds of civil war. On what basis? Doesn't the Afghan National Army have the ability to enforce order and control on the country?

"Troop drawdown is not a sufficient condition for solving the problem, and until other necessary steps are taken - such as regional players being allowed on the stage and being part of any initiative - nothing can happen.

"The drawdown should only be seen in this context. If America says on one hand that it is leaving the country, in the same way it cna be viewed from two sides: they are leaving to create space for talks, or they are being forced to leave as a defeated force."

Public opinion in Afghanistan is that if Pakistan stops supporting the Taliban and if it stops nourishing the seminaries that produce these Talibs, then in that scenario the conditions will improve.

"This public opinion is only inside Afghanistan. But in Pakistan the public opinion is that if the Pakistani Army was not an obstacle to the Taliban, we would have occupied Afghanistan by now."


Your party had said a prayer for Osama and recited the Fatiha. Aren't you sorry you did that?

"Some of our members read the Fatiha for him, but this was not a formally planned party program. But in any case, Osama bin Laden was a Mossalman, shouldn't he have the funeral prayer? So if America kills someone, and that too a Moslem, and he shouldn't even have a funeral prayer?"

Upto 300 people from among the religious Ulema of North Waziristan held a conference, and announced that suicide attacks are haraam, and that one should not call someone a monafeq or kaafer. Has this initiative had any effect on the recruitment of inidividuals for suicide attacks?

"You can see cases of suicide attacks here and there. But what you cannot see is the effect of the initiative of these Reverend Ulema on the youth and adolescents. The impact is that large numbers do not attach themselves to suicide groups."

If you are opposed to suicide attacks, is this haraam only in Pakistan, or in Afghanistan as well?

"Regarding Afghanistan the Ulema of Afghanistan should give their opinion. The world is different in Afghanistan from a geographical standpoint. I give moral support to the Afghan war, but the methods and techniques of the war are decided by Afghans themselves."

Howmuch respect does the Afghan Taliban have for you, such that if you were to tell them to desist from war and come to the peace talk table, what response would you elicit?

"This shall be known after the Afghan Taliban is first removed from the blacklist. Their names should be erased from the sanctions list of the UN. Then they can come out from underground and establish links with us. Then it will be possible to say howmuch importance the Taliban gives to our views."
Samudragupta
BRFite
Posts: 625
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 23:49
Location: Some place in the sphere

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Samudragupta »

Cross Posting....
Pashtuns in Pakistan, regardless of their spread, are still a visibly unassimilated ethnic group who proudly retain their culture. If Pashtun officers get nukes and point them at Islamabad, that'd be for Islamabad to deal with, but I'd suspect that Islamabad would do the same thing it did in 1971, by stripping Bengali officers of duty (remember, Bengalis were 55% of Pakistan's entire population, but that didn't keep Islamabad from cleansing them out of the army)

As far as northern Afghanistan is concerned, the current political divide means that nobody even has to formally declare independence, because as long as the Pashtuns and nonPashtuns of Afghanistan continue to live in separate worlds and political dispensations, it means that the Pashtuns will naturally gravitate towards each other. The Afghan conflict of the 1990s offers ample evidence.

You saw what happened when Pakistan tried to get their longtime pre-Taliban Pashtun stooge Gulbuddin Hekmatyar to accept the Durand Line - even a stooge like him refused. This is one of the reasons Pakistan yanked support from Hekmatyar and created Taliban. No Pashtun will accept the Durand Line which artificially splits them. That's why a desperate Pakistan is hoping to swallow the whole of Afghanistan, because it knows it can't pry the Pashtuns on either side of the non-existent Durand Line apart from each others. Stealing the sovereignty of Afghanistan and subordinating it to Pakistan's will isn't going to solve the problems of the region. Kashmir is only a downstream symptom of the Pashtun problem, as I've already established, and as such it can't remove the Pashtun problem which is the ultimate root cause of Pakistan's behaviour. Constantly squawking about Kashmir is merely Pakistan's way of diverting everyone's attention away from the real root problem, which is why I feel it necessary to draw attention right back to that root problem that Pakistan doesn't want us all to talk about.Pretending that Kashmir is the real problem is just escapism and unwillingness to face the root cause. I can see why Pakistan wants to escape and hide from the real problem, because it's not something they can easily deal with. However, trying to shift blame for the underlying Pashtun problem onto India by claiming that it's really Kashmir as the problem, simply isn't going accomplish anything.

The Pashtun problem is the preceding problem - it's the root cause of all of Pakistan's external conflicts: conflict with Afghanistan, conflict with India, conflict with the Soviets, conflict with the USA.

By ducking the real problem, Pakistan is only going to make its conflicts worse, until external adversity completely overwhelms it. Currently, Pakistan is counting on China to save its butt, however Pakistan's pursuit of increasing Islamist jihadism as a solution will only eventually set all of Central Asia on fire, including Xinjiang. Eventually China will turn against Pakistan, just as Islamabad's previous patron the USA likewise has begun to turn against it. Pakistan will of course refuse to accept blame even then, and will finally even blame China, which it currently calls its "all-weather friend". The "all-weather friend" won't stay so friendly after Pakistan has set Xinjiang on fire.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60240
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by ramana »

Slowly Indian Op-Ed writers are coming to grips with US draw-down/exit from Af-Pak.

Made in US disaster
Made in US disaster
July 05, 2011 11:18:33 PM

Ashok K Mehta

As the Americans flounder for an exit from the Afghan mess, India must be prepared for a precipitate and irresponsible US withdrawal.

The multiple suicide attack last week against Hotel Intercontinental perched on a hillock on the western edge of Kabul when Provincial Governors were meeting to chart out Afghanisation’s security reflects holes in capability of the Afghan National Security Forces. Not a single battalion of the Army can operate independently.

I stayed at the Intercontinental last year for a conference and wondered how the Taliban might storm the hotel. Of the three security checks along the road two were lightly held with armed guards. The third with X-ray machines was virtually in the hotel. But the rest of the area seemed uncovered, especially the slopes to the hill top. That’s where they came from and not along the road. The Taliban are both great improvisers and innovators, routinely springing new tricks and not afraid to die.

This setback will not derail the phased withdrawal beginning this month of the 33,000 US surge troops who will be out in 15 months. The remaining 70,000 troops are to deinduct by 2014. The politically choreographed drawdown is premised on preservation of gains of the surge. America’s Nato partners, except the UK, have earlier exit schedules which are to be finalised at the Chicago Nato summit next year.

US President Barack Obama’s 13-minute speech outlining the withdrawal marks the end of phase one of the war, a shift from counter-insurgency to counter-terrorism and from combat to combat support of the ANSF. The new US counter-terrorism strategy document released last week lays emphasis on raids and drone strikes.

The illusion of success has been buoyed by the dramatic elimination of Osama bin Laden and the annihilation of the Al Qaeda leadership, whereas opposition to foreign forces is from Al Qaeda’s affiliates, the Taliban. They too, have been degraded, some 2000 killed (700 middle-level commanders) and 4,000 captured, but nearly 80 per cent were civilians. Mr Obama characterised these ephemeral gains as “tide of war receding and drawdown from a position of strength”.

The core of Mr Obama’s assessment was embedded in two stark admissions: “We will not try to make Afghanistan a perfect place” and “nation-building has to be done at home facing rising debt and hard economic times”. The war cost of $12 billion annually and 30 to 40 body bags (in June there were 44) with nearly twice that number wounded monthly is politically unsustainable.

So how does Mr Obama hope to reduce American footprint, withdraw responsibly and leave behind a minimally stable Afghanistan? The key to transition — two small provinces and five urban centres, including Kabul, are to be handed over starting this month — is a capable and motivated ANSF. By October 2011, the Army will be 170,000-strong, to reach 240,000 by next year, optimally equipped with Nato class of weapons. Currently 70,000, the police force will increase to 130,000 but is terribly under-resourced. Too many countries are involved in their training and confusion obtains on whether it is to be CIS or policing. Interestingly, Pakistan’s hopes of a weak and sterile ANSF may turn out to be real.

A political settlement entailing power-sharing with the Taliban requires reintegration and reconciliation. Reintegration has proved more successful than reconciliation with nearly 2,000 rank and file Taliban reportedly brought overground. Response to reconciliation has been tardy despite claims of conversations with Mullah Omar’s aides, including some Taliban imposters. Here, too, many countries are involved: Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the US, the UK and Germany which is coordinating the talks.
{No Pakistan!}

Mullah Omar has posted in mosques in southern Afghanistan warnings of death to anyone who talks to the Government. And why will Pakistan, which wants to be part of the solution and not the problem, be left out of reconciliation, as it has been so far? In February 2010, Quetta Shura’s number two, Mullah Biradar, was arrested in Karachi by the ISI and Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha has ensured Mullah Omar’s relocation after the Osama bin Laden plucking. Both former US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have said the Taliban will not engage in serious and fruitful talks. The Afghans feel that for serious reconciliation the surge has to continue — otherwise even if an agreement is reached its implementation is unlikely.

Against this background the recently established Pakistan-Afghanistan Joint Commission on Reconciliation and Joint Task Force on Infiltration are as good as the India-Pakistan Joint Anti-Terror Mechanism: Good only for the joint statement. Similarly, at the counter-terrorism summit in Tehran last week, the Presidents of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan resolved to collectively fight militancy and oppose foreign interference — both aspirational goals.

The third element of the US exit strategy is turning the focus of operations from Afghanistan to Pakistan, reversing AfPak to PakAf, to neutralise Taliban sanctuaries inside Pakistan. In 2001, Pakistan was the base for the American war in Afghanistan; now it could be the opposite.

Cajoling and coercing Pakistan to act against its strategic assets will be the trickiest bit. Already the reverse is happening. Pakistan has asked the US to withdraw its trainers, close down drone bases, recall CIA operatives and the whole works. General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani is very angry the Army’s nose has been rubbed on the ground after the Osama bin Laden episode. He’s under extreme pressure from the conclave of Corps Commanders, political opposition and the public to punish the Americans.

As Pakistan is unlikely to cooperate easily, the frequency of drone attacks from Afghanistan will increase, prompting Islamabad to take up the legality of cross-border aerial attacks with Kabul and, who knows, the UN too. With US-Pakistan relations plummeting, training and capability of the ANSF under a cloud and good governance and a political settlement out of sight, Mr Obama’s exit strategy is as unworkable as Mr Henry Kissinger’s latest prescription in The International Herald Tribune: A ceasefire, withdrawal, coalition Government and an enforcing mechanism.

Already voices in the US suggest accelerated transition and division of Afghanistan if necessary. While the Americans are barking up the wrong tree, India must be prepared for a precipitate and irresponsible US withdrawal. Afghans want India to punch up to its weight without being inhibited by American and Pakistani sensitivities to a more proactive role. India must engage the Taliban and offer to equip and train the ANSF. But Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee said last week in Washington, DC that India will not get involved in a security role. A rethink is required as was done on reintegration and reconciliation.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by brihaspati »

The time for stepping into the mine field of AFG in favour of one faction of Afghans against another is now well gone. The time was just after 26/11. Nothing much could have been said by anyone except the usual growls by China and the Paki Occupation Government. It is three years too late now.

Geography is an obstacle, needing Iranian as well as CAR cooperation to do anything substantial. Mere training will not do - as is obvious. The Talebs are practically working on a Maoist principle of warfare. To counter them another insurgent movement is necessary - or tightening up the noose by "sanitization" of areas in the only way the Afghans were ever sanitized. A foreign army getting involved in the process - if not an Islamic army - will be promptly called up at the international court of justice [or be an Islamist like Q who becomes a personal thorn in western sides] for atrocities along crimes against humanity. Ever wonder, why none of the Talebs are being charged at the so-called-international-court-for war-crimes? But if Indians get involved in countermeasures they will be liable to be charged.

Tackling Talebs cannot be done through "humanitarian" ways - because Talebs - by their ideology and practice are no longer humans, and therefore enjoy freedom of action that regular forces do not.

AFPak is a joint problem, and mere training of Afghan national army of some sort, will no longer suffice. India can only think of destruction of Pak which is inseparably linked to securing the Afghan frontier and put up a semblance of a modernizing state on the rump southern AFG-FATA areas.
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by shravan »

Pakistani Taliban attack kills 38 Afghans
ASADABAD: Up to 33 police and five civilians were killed in fighting after Taliban crossed over from Pakistan and attacked a remote region in eastern Afghanistan, an official said on Wednesday. Nuristan provincial governor Jamaluddin Badr said about 40 rebels also died in the two days of clashes that followed weeks of tit-for-tat allegations of cross-border attacks that have fanned diplomatic tensions. But, Afghanistan’s Interior Ministry contradicted the toll, saying 12 policemen had died and another five were wounded. Dozens of rebels who began crossing the border from Pakistan on Tuesday triggered the fight, Badr told AFP, attacking police posts in the Kamdesh district of Nuristan. “The report we have now from the area is that 33 border police and five civilians, two of them women, have been killed,” he said. He said most of the dead rebels were Pakistan Taliban. The Interior Ministry said that “dozens” of rebels were killed in a clearance operation that lasted several hours, 12 of them Pakistanis. “The situation in the border areas of Kamdesh district has returned to normal,” it said. The escalating conflict in the rugged border zone between Afghanistan and Pakistan has forced more than 200 Afghan families to flee so far. afp
Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

Post by Klaus »

Australian commander opines that intensive spec-ops had a dramatic effect in disrupting insurgent activities across Oruzgan province.
In a rare briefing to reporters on the activities of the usually secretive SOTG, Lt Col Grant (first name only for security reasons) said operations remained focused on Oruzgan provinces but more were being conducted in adjoining Helmand, Kandahar, Zabul and Daykundi provinces.

"We go where the intelligence tells us that the insurgents are working, or where they have moved to or where a potential safe haven is," he said.

"Before the spring offensive this year we were very conscious about making sure we developed our understanding of the intelligence picture as much as we could before we launched a very active campaign in early March to target as many of the leaders who were returning to the province after having a bit of a hiatus over winter."

Winter has traditionally been a time when Afghan insurgent forces rest up in preparation for the spring and summer fighting seasons. But over the last winter, they received little respite.
Post Reply