Af-Pak -> Pak-Af Watch

[sum]

In Regional Command East, just east of FOB Chapman back in summer of '07, we got into a firefight with Taliban forces. And they were picked up by flagged Pakistani helicopters.

Wonder if these were helos funded and given free to MuNNa by US army itself...Put to good use indeed.

Even so called meek SDRE soldiers posted at the LoC have extracted their revenge when Pakistaniyat became too much by targeting known Paki bunkers/raids etc....No TFTA Amir-khan commander at Af-Pak border has lost his cool and given it back to the Pakis till now?

[Kanson]

ShyamD, Try to game what the corps(e) commandus are planning to offer to the US.

Also, watch for what they will ask. No Indian involvement in Afghanistan, or they pull out their troops from the west and and FATA.

Are they really in a position to bargain?

[Kanson]

TOM: Yes, and rules of engagement stated we were not allowed to attack Pakistani forces if we were to come upon them, even if they were helping out AQ or Taliban, and nor could we follow them into Pakistani territory.

What made Americans to agree such rules of engagement? From Kunduz evil airlift in 2001 to 2007? I guess this was the case till the Obama regime came overhauling their special relationship? Doesn't look like RoE of one and only Superpower, does it?

[ramana]

Shyamd, One thing to note is Hackany's is not hacking of their own free will. They are hacking only those that they are assigned by ISI. And the ones being designated are the Pashtuns/Afghans who are willing to neogtiate with Karzai. Then there is the gratitous tartgetting of US forces in Afghanistan.

[ramana]

In the 90s there used to be regular news stories about mines in Afghanistan left behind by retreating Soviets and the infighting between the mujahdeen. Suddenly we don't hear any more of those atrocius stories. Whats the deal?

Is Afghanistan now clean or the early stories based on fiction?

[shyamd]

Shyamd, One thing to note is Hackany's is not hacking of their own free will. They are hacking only those that they are assigned by ISI. And the ones being designated are the Pashtuns/Afghans who are willing to neogtiate with Karzai. Then there is the gratitous tartgetting of US forces in Afghanistan.

True. So that basically means that Haqqani's have to ceasefire and ISI will have to give up some AQ guys at the minimum.

[Rudradev]

In the 90s there used to be regular news stories about mines in Afghanistan left behind by retreating Soviets and the infighting between the mujahdeen. Suddenly we don't hear any more of those atrocius stories. Whats the deal?

Is Afghanistan now clean or the early stories based on fiction?

http://www.theworld.org/2011/09/afghani ... ne-museum/

Ramana, the stories are still there; it's the mainstream US media that doesn't play them up anymore as during the Soviet invasion, because much of the ordinance doing the damage is now NATO. The suffering of mango Afghans from mines has been immense, and one Afghan has begun a museum to document the experience.

[Prem]

KABUL—The U.S.-led military coalition is considering shifting more forces to eastern Afghanistan to better protect the capital, Kabul, from Pakistan-based insurgents, even as overall troop numbers decrease in coming months, said the coalition's new commander.
"My sense is that there will be additional combat forces sent into the east, some number of battalions," U.S. Marine Gen. John Allen said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, his first with a U.S. newspaper since taking over from Gen. David Petraeus in July. A U.S. infantry battalion-size task force usually numbers roughly 1,000 service members.

U.S. Considers Troop Shift to Guard Kabul
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 43486.html

[Cosmo_R]

>>Do not go overboard and overjoyed. This is just an intermission.

Absolutely correct. Eye must remain firmly on the ball.

Sure it's not intromission? In which case you would add a second 's'

[shyamd]

Rebuilding: US asked to address concerns in Afghanistan

By Kamran Yousaf
Published: October 14, 2011

Indian influence, attempts to undermine Islamabad’s role in Afghanistan given top priority in talks. PHOTO: REUTERS
Indian influence, attempts to undermine Islamabad’s role in Afghanistan given top priority in talks. PHOTO: REUTERS Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar with US special representative Marc Grossman at the foreign ministry in Islamabad. PHOTO: REUTERS
ISLAMABAD:

With ties between Islamabad and Washington slowly getting back on track, Pakistan’s top leadership held separate meetings with visiting US special envoy Marc Grossman to convey to the United States that it could only enter meaningful dialogue on the Afghan reconciliation process and effectively deal with the Haqqani network once its ‘legitimate concerns’ were addressed.

In meetings with US special representative grossman, the country’s top civil and military leadership voiced a host of concerns, which included growing Indian influence in Afghanistan and deliberate attempts by certain international and regional players to undermine Pakistan’s role in the reconciliation process, said a Pakistani official familiar with the development.

(Read: Pakistan welcomes US initiative for peace in Afghanistan)

This was Grossman’s first visit to Islamabad since Washington accused the country of backing the Afghan Taliban allied insurgent group, the Haqqani network. He began his day-long trip by meeting with Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani at the General Headquarters in Rawalpindi.

A statement issued by the Inter-Service Public Relations (ISPR) said the two discussed measures for a “Pak-US cooperative framework for peace in the region.”

Grossman also met President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani and held talks with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar to discuss a host of issues, including the row over the Haqqani network and the upcoming international conference on Afghanistan in Istanbul next month and in the German city of Bonn in December.

Official sources say Pakistan’s top leadership told the US envoy that the wide-ranging strategic pact signed between Afghanistan and India should not be allowed to have negative implications for the region. “Unless these legitimate concerns are taken care of, it will be very difficult for Pakistan to play the kind of role the US would want it to,” said an official source.

(Read: A warning to Afghanistan)

However, even as the countries attempted to narrow their differences over the ‘deadliest’ Afghan insurgent group, they failed to show any signs of progress on the issue of the Haqqani network in their official announcements.

“The positive public statements you saw today are the reflection of a truce the two countries have achieved privately,” said an American diplomat without giving more details.

Later, at a joint press conference with Foreign Minister Khar, Grossman sought to play down the hype over the strain in ties by claiming that the US is committed to a long-term and enduring partnership with Pakistan. “We tried to think about the future and a way to keep our strategic dialogue going,” Grossman told the joint press conference.

“We also talked about how we can continue in a systematic way to identify the interests that we share with Pakistan, and there are many, and then find ways to act on them jointly,” he added.

Meanwhile, President Asif Ali Zardari, in his meeting with Grossman, expressed Pakistan’s displeasure over what he dubbed ‘verbal assaults’ by senior US officials questioning Islamabad’s commitment in the fight against terrorism.

(Read: Pak-US ties to be based on mutual interest, respect: Zardari)

“This approach only helped the cause of terrorists and undermined bilateral ties,” the president was quoted as telling Grossman by presidential spokesperson Farhatullah Babar.

Separately, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani told Grossman that Pak-US relations must go beyond the security cooperation.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 14th, 2011.

Pakistan welcomes US initiative for peace in Afghanistan

By AFP / Express / Kamran Yousaf
Published: October 13, 2011

Hina Rabbani Khar says that Pakistan's relationship with the United States is going to be a "continuous process". PHOTO: PID/FILE
Pakistan's Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar (L) gestures to US special representative Marc Grossman after a photo opportunity at the foreign ministry in Islamabad October 13. PHOTO: REUTERS Hina Rabbani Khar says that Pakistan's relationship with the United States is going to be a "continuous process". PHOTO: PID/FILE International conference on Afghanistan to be discussed as well. International conference on Afghanistan to be discussed as well. International conference on Afghanistan to be discussed as well.
ISLAMABAD:

US Special Representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan Marc Grossman on Thursday said that Pakistan and the US have a “meeting of the minds” on securing a stable Afghanistan.

In a joint press conference with Grossman, Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said that Pakistan’s relationship with the United States is going to be a “continuous process”.

“We should be able to share notes and understand each other’s perspectives,” she added.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani welcomed America’s initiatives for peace in Afghanistan.

During the meeting, the prime minister said the world should recognise Pakistan’s efforts in the war against terror.

He said intelligence agencies were reviewing the evidence provided by the Afghan government regarding the killing of Burhanuddin Rabbani.

Gilani also voiced support for the reconciliation efforts in Afghanistan but stressed that issues cannot be solved without involving Pakistan.

He also reiterated Pakistan’s stance on drone strikes in the tribal areas.

Grossman also met Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and Army Chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani.

Marc Grossman said that victory in the war against terror in Afghanistan is not possible without Pakistan’s input.

We tried to think about the future and way to keep our strategic dialogue going,” Grossman told a joint press conference with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar.

“We also talked about how can we continue in a systematic way to identify the interests that we share with Pakistan, and there are many, and then find ways to act on them jointly,” he added.

Grossman said that besides discussing bilateral relations with the foreign minister, the peace conferences of Istanbul and Bonn were also discussed so that Pakistan should be included in the peace process and it is an important country to play due role for the peace and security in the region.

He said success of these two conferences would be helpful in ensuring peace and security, not only in Afghanistan but would also promote peace in the region and the world.

Grossman said he also visited Central Asian States, Kabul,China and India before coming to Pakistan and brought a message of hope and support from the regional countries for peace and security in the region.

On Tuesday, acknowledging for the first time that the US is waging a war in Pakistan, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta described Washington’s relationship with Islamabad as “complicated”.

“And admittedly, there are a lot of reasons for that. We are fighting a war in their country,” Panetta said.

He said the two countries sharply disagreed over “relations they maintain with some of the militant groups in that country,” a reference to Washington’s demand that Islamabad crack down on the Haqqani network.

Updated from print edition (below)

Haqqanis to be high on US envoy’s agenda in key meetings

Pakistan and the United States will seek to narrow down their differences on the Haqqani network when a senior US diplomat meets the country’s civil and military leadership today (Thursday) in Islamabad.

US Special Representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan Marc Grossman is arriving on a day-long trip to meet President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani as well as other senior officials.

Following last month’s daring assault on the US Embassy in Kabul, Washington has stepped up pressure on Pakistan to eliminate the group’s ‘safe havens’ from North Waziristan tribal region.

Pakistan has resisted the US demand, but expressed its readiness to address its concerns on the Haqqani network. It is widely believed that Pakistan’s reluctance to go after the group is attributed to the fact that the Haqqanis have a pivotal role in the future political dispensation of Afghanistan.

“There are regional complexities which we are aware of and are trying to address,” said Foreign Office spokesperson Tehmina Janjua at her last news briefing when asked about tensions between Pakistan and the US on the Haqqanis.

Grossman, who is arriving from New Delhi, will also discuss the forthcoming international conference on Afghanistan in Istanbul on November 2 and in Bonn on December 5.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 13th, 2011.

[Agnimitra]

This one from Iran's PressTV mouthpiece:
Pakistan warns US on drone attacks

Pakistan has warned the US about ongoing non-UN-sanctioned air strikes in its tribal regions, insisting that there are no agreements between Washington and Islamabad over drone attacks, Press TV reports.


"Any aggression against Pakistan would be dealt with full force”, Pakistan's Defense Minister Ahmed Mukhtar told reporters in eastern Lahore on Sunday.

The minister also made it clear that Islamabad has not signed any agreements with Washington concerning the right to carry out drone attacks in Pakistan's tribal regions.

He reiterated that US drone attacks are "unacceptable,” adding that his country is determined to resolve the issue soon.

Despite repeated condemnation from the highest levels of the Pakistani government, there has been no let up in US drone attacks on the restive tribal regions of Pakistan.

Civilians have been the major victims of US drone attacks, carried out regularly against Pakistan's North and South Waziristan tribal regions under the pretext of targeting anti-American and pro-Taliban militants.

The aerial attacks by the pilotless, remote-control aircraft have killed hundreds of people in the volatile regions over the past years.

[ShauryaT]

Also, watch for what they will ask. No Indian involvement in Afghanistan, or they pull out their troops from the west and and FATA.

Are they really in a position to bargain?

Most certainly, IMO. Look at it from a US perspective, it is an easy give for the ask, if in turn the US gets or perceives it is getting, what it wants - for now.

[shyamd]

Reports that pak deployed 9 - 10k troops in north wazir border with afghanistan. US amassed on the otherside with gunships and tanks, artillery. Source: xinhua

[Agnimitra]

Reports that pak deployed 9 - 10k troops in north wazir border with afghanistan. US amassed on the otherside with gunships and tanks, artillery. Source: xinhua

Is it a joint operation to bracket and broadside someone inbetween? Or is it a confrontation?

This from Iran's PressTV mouthpiece: Pakistan warns US on drone attacks

Pakistan has warned the US about ongoing non-UN-sanctioned air strikes in its tribal regions, insisting that there are no agreements between Washington and Islamabad over drone attacks, Press TV reports.

"Any aggression against Pakistan would be dealt with full force”, Pakistan's Defense Minister Ahmed Mukhtar told reporters in eastern Lahore on Sunday.

The minister also made it clear that Islamabad has not signed any agreements with Washington concerning the right to carry out drone attacks in Pakistan's tribal regions.

[Rudradev]

Reports that pak deployed 9 - 10k troops in north wazir border with afghanistan. US amassed on the otherside with gunships and tanks, artillery. Source: xinhua

Is it a joint operation to bracket and broadside someone inbetween? Or is it a confrontation?

This from Iran's PressTV mouthpiece: Pakistan warns US on drone attacks

Pakistan has warned the US about ongoing non-UN-sanctioned air strikes in its tribal regions, insisting that there are no agreements between Washington and Islamabad over drone attacks, Press TV reports.

"Any aggression against Pakistan would be dealt with full force”, Pakistan's Defense Minister Ahmed Mukhtar told reporters in eastern Lahore on Sunday.

The minister also made it clear that Islamabad has not signed any agreements with Washington concerning the right to carry out drone attacks in Pakistan's tribal regions.

Will this be Obama Raya's Talikota?

[ShauryaT]

Reports that pak deployed 9 - 10k troops in north wazir border with afghanistan. US amassed on the otherside with gunships and tanks, artillery. Source: xinhua

Is it a joint operation to bracket and broadside someone inbetween? Or is it a confrontation?

The latter is not even an option for both sides!

[Prem]

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/ ... d-of-time/
U.S. Afghanistan Commander: ‘The United States Is Going To Be Here For Some Period Of Time’

Scott Pelley asked Gen. Allen what his plan for Afghanistan was:
ALLEN: Well the plan is to – is to win. The plan is to be successful and the United States is gonna be here for some period of time.
PELLEY: …You’re talking about U.S. forces being here after 2014?
ALLEN: Yes, there will be.
PELLY: …Are we talking about fighting forces?
ALLEN: We’re talking about forces that will provide an advisory capacity. And we may even have some form of counter-terrorism force here to continue the process of developing the Afghan’s counter-terrorism capabilities. But, if necessary, respond ourselves.PELLEY: But what you’re saying is that the United States isn’t leaving Afghanistan in the foreseeable future?
ALLEN: Well that’s an important message

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG7ip2PI ... r_embedded

[Altair]

Lebanese terrorist killed in drone strike in Pakistan

Lebanese citizen Mohammad Ali Hamadeh has been killed in Saturday's US drone attack on al Qaeda hideout in Pakistan's North Waziristan, the German news agency DPA reported.

Citing intelligence sources in Pakistan, DPA said Hamadeh, a Hezbollah member, was killed along with a group of followers.

DPA has it that Hamadeh returned to Lebanon in December 2005 after being secretly released in Germany, where he was serving a life sentence for the 1985 hijacking of a TWA jetliner and killing of a US navy diver.

It had said Hamadeh had been released from a German prison in 2005 on bail after spending nearly 19 years in prison.

DPA, citing intelligence information, said Hamadeh fought along Hezbollah before moving to North Waziristan where he joined "Islamic Jihad" which has links to al Qaeda.

The report is interesting as it indicates that Hamadeh had indeed joined the Islamic Jihad Group, which was targeted in the June 19 attack. Among the 16 terrorists reported to have been killed in the attack were an al Qaeda leader named Abu Ahmed and 12 members of the Islamic Jihad Group.

This wouldn't be the first case of a terrorist from a Middle Eastern group that had been involved in a hijacking and murder spree in the 1980s being killed in Pakistan's tribal areas. On January 9, 2010, Jamal Saeed Abdul Rahim, an Abu Nidal Organization operative who participated in killing 22 hostages during the 1986 hijacking of Pan Am flight 73, was killed in a strike in North Waziristan.

[ramana]

One of the turning moments in Af-Pak was the 1998 Tomahawk strike by Clinton on terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. The slide started when instead of AlQ, Kashmiri terrorists were killed.

[RamaY]

^ who knows

Like Kashmiri militants getting killed in an AQ camp, one day it could be a Brahmos landing in the guise of Tomahak on ISI head quarters. Can the pakis tell the difference?

[ramana]

Reports that pak deployed 9 - 10k troops in north wazir border with afghanistan. US amassed on the otherside with gunships and tanks, artillery. Source: xinhua

Nightwatch confirms:

http://www.kforcegov.com/Services/IS/Ni ... 00208.aspx

Pakistan-US: The Pakistan armed forces spokesman, Major General Abbas, charged that US and Afghan forces failed to hunt down Pakistani Taliban militant Maulana Fazlullah after he and his militants killed Pakistani security forces in several cross-border raids, despite repeated requests from Islamabad.


Abbas said on 17 October that Fazlullah and his militants are based in Afghanistan's Konar and Nuristan Provinces and are trying to re-enter Pakistan's Swat Valley through the town of Dir.


Comment: The significance of Abbas' charges are that Pakistan has specific cases for which it judges US and Afghan forces have been derelict in supporting Pakistani security. Konar and Nuristan are haunts of Fazlullah, according to various press sources.

The underlying Pakistani allegation is that the US wants Pakistani support but does not reciprocate. The alleged failures to respond to Pakistani requests to hunt down Fazlullah pale in significance to Pakistan's provision of aid and comfort to bin Laden and Mullah Omar and his acolytes for the past 10 years.


Afghanistan: The United States shifted hundreds of its troops to the eastern Afghan area bordering Pakistan's North Waziristan on Sunday along with heavy arms and gunship helicopters and sealed the Pak-Afghan border for all types of movement.

Tribesmen living in the border areas said Afghan and US forces had clamped a curfew in the Gurbaz area of Afghanistan's Khost Province and started house-to-house searches. The abrupt deployment of US forces near the border area with Pakistan has escalated tension in North Waziristan tribal region because US forces immediately sealed the main Ghulam Khan-Khost highway for traffic. This stranded more than 900 loaded trucks, including those carrying NATO consignments, and passenger vehicles the whole day.


Comment: The highway is a main delivery route for supplies destined for the Taliban from Pakistan. Some tactical genius deserves a promotion. Closing this border crossing even for a day is tonight's good news.

So its a different objective.Seal the border to cut-off Taliban supplies from TSP before winter starts?

Pak thought they are going to be attacked?

[vijayk]

May be Obama wants to defeat and surrender the Pakis before his election to show how strong commander in chief he is...

[Dilbu]

Afghan, NATO troops targeting Haqqani network

The United States, as part of an effort to bolster, train, and equip the Afghan Army, has provided billions of dollars in equipment but has balked at supplying sophisticated technology like fighter planes, arguing that Afghanistan doesn’t need such armaments and does not yet have the capacity to maintain them.

Wardak said about $10 billion has already been allocated by the United States to equip and train the country’s army and police. He said another package totaling about $10 billion is being discussed, but must still be approved by US lawmakers.

According to the NATO coalition, $2.7 billion in equipment has arrived or will arrive between August 2011 and March 2012. This includes about 22,700 vehicles, 39,500 weapons, 52,200 pieces of communication equipment, and 38 aircraft.

Training the Afghan security forces is a top priority for the US-led international coalition that has been battling the Taliban and affiliated insurgents for the past decade. NATO wants to withdraw its combat forces by the end of 2014 and needs its Afghan counterparts to be ready to assume full security responsibilities by then

[RajeshA]

Published on Oct 18, 2011
More than Half of Afghans See NATO as Occupiers: Der Spiegel

According to a survey published on Tuesday by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 56 percent of Afghans now see the foreign troop contingent as an occupying force. Furthermore, only 39 percent of those surveyed said they saw ISAF as a guarantee for security, well down from the 45 percent result found in the same survey in 2010. Fully 60 percent think that the country will descend into civil war once NATO forces withdraw.

Babak Khalatbari, head of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation's Afghanistan office, said on Tuesday that the results were "a matter of concern."

Details

[abhishek_sharma]

Killing Rabbani

[sum]

Sheela Bhatt seems to have caught onto a lot of senior MEA folks dealing with Afg. Lots of Tit-bits:
ANALYSIS: Why Indo-Afghan deal makes Pakistan nervous

"It is not worth it if you don't have any strategic agreement in country where you are spending $2 billion (about Rs 9,800 crore)," said a senior officer in government dealing with Afghanistan and Pakistan when asked about which factors necessitated the Indo-Afghan Strategic Partnership agreement. He said, "Look around India. Has India invested so much and so well in any other country? In which other country is India is spending so much money?"

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President Hamid Karzai signed an agreement that was in making since the last one year on October 4, says the officer in the Prime Minister's Office.

Dr Singh himself had said on eve of signing the agreement, "based on intensive consultations and deliberations, we have finalised an agreement on a strategic partnership."

The Indian officer added, "It was not done in hurry. We were working on it. There was nothing secret about it because what we wanted to say we said it in the May, 2011 joint declaration in Kabul." He insisted that the strategic partnership agreement is just collection of all that India and Afghanistan are doing together.

India is also giving Karzai some support when he is getting weaker and weaker. Also, the strategic agreement is a natural progression for India, who has pumped whopping $2 billion in the region without any substantial strategic gain, so far. Within India, few analysts were arguing since long that India is not doing enough to consolidate its soft power in Afghanistan.

The officer gave the argument that, "Some people said India is doing nothing in Afghanistan. Also, there is a school of thought in India who said India should pack up from Kabul and return. We can't give away space to Pakistan, since terrorism will grow. We shall not allow that to happen."{ luckily, no MKB logic here}

The agreement is also seen as India's gamble in the region where the 'anti-India' Taliban controls a substantial area. If the aims of strategic partnership fails, India will continue remaining under threat of insecurity as it is today, thinks the Indian establishment.

However, strong adverse reactions from Western commentators and Pakistani experts has not deterred the Indian side. Informed sources claim that when Dr Singh went to Kabul in May, everything was ready to embark upon a 'strategic partnership'.

When the agreement was conceived, Karzai was reluctant, initially.

But, as more details of American and Pakistan's links with the Taliban came out, the agreement made sense, claims the Indian side. The assassination of former Afghan president Burhanuddin Rabbani prompted Karzai to arrive at a decision to go in for an agreement. However, sources are denying firmly that it has anything to do with Rabbani's assassination.

"You should read carefully the May 12 joint declaration when Dr Singh visited Kabul. Not a word is added to it in October. Then, the strategic partnership was formed, but, wasn't signed," says the Indian diplomat involved in the process.

Some Indian critics are saying that by signing the agreement with Karzai, India is alienating the Pashtuns who are averse to his leadership. Dilip Hiro, distinguished writer on international affairs, in his article Slippery Road Ahead (external link), said that, "For India to see the Taliban precluded from power-sharing in the post-NATO Afghanistan is tantamount to excluding Hindi speakers from the government in New Delhi. The Pashtuns, forming 42 to 46 per cent of Afghanistan's population, support the Taliban by a wide margin. The 13 Pashtun-majority provinces, out of 34, account for 55 percent of the country's 30 million people."

n response, an Indian officer told rediff.com, "These critics are not well-informed. They seem to be considering all the Pashtuns as the Taliban. The Taliban is significant force. But not all Pashtuns are Taliban." After a pause, he added, "As it is the Taliban is not going to change their view of India with or without this agreement."

The senior officer, while continuing to talk off the record, further said, "People like Hiro who are talking about India's relations with Pashtuns do not know the changing ground realities. Do they know what's happening on the ground? In the last couple of years India's new aid is going only to Pashtun-dominated areas in Afghanistan. All our SDPs (small development programmes) are running in Pashtun majority areas. In fact, people from the northern area are complaining. Our import of fruits and dry fruits under the South Asian Free Trade Agreement is growing."

In fact, Kandahar, city dominated by Pashtuns, exports more than $50 million (about Rs 245 crore) worth of fruits and dry fruits every year of which India is the largest importer. The growers and the truck owners who transport the products are mainly Pashtun.

These Pashtuns truck-owners of Afghanistan and Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province have developed the vested interest in the business, says the officer. He says, "Fruits and dry fruits from Kandahar comes through Wagah border even today. They gain through the peaceful relationship amongst the three countries. India is the fifth largest trading partner of Afghanistan."

However, within the Indian establishment there is no hype. An intelligence officer in a security establishment dealing with Pakistan-Afghanistan said, "The strategic agreement is on paper. There is a long way to go. The entire event will become significant if only Karzai requests, I repeat, if only he sends a request to India to train its soldiers or requests us to equip their regiments. That demand is unlikely to come. Karzai knows he can't push Pakistan beyond a point. We are training some of their senior army officers in India but that's not unknown."

He, repeatedly, emphasised that, "The strategic agreement will be implemented by mutual consultation only."

A diplomat, who was part of the team that dealt with Karzai's team, said, "We have strategic agreements with many other countries. So this agreement is one more addition."

But, when counter-argued that in case of India's relations with Afghanistan, Pakistan is the elephant in the room, the diplomat responded, "Let it remain in the room. Do you succumb to it? We have a function to perform in Afghanistan. We are fulfilling our role."

[Lilo]

X-post

A few more thoughts ...

Because of the Pakthoon lands under its control , Pakistan has strategic depth with respect to Afghanistan.

In the future, if Afghanistan transforms itself into a viable nation state in other aspects, the Pakjabi army will still relentlessly stoke fire on its border. In return the ANA even if well trained and well equipped conventionally , will be unable to retaliate with full force against the Pakthoon lands under Paki control. All the while Pakjabis can resort to small arm fire, rockets, artillery shelling and subversive activities with impunity into Afghan lands.

With this in mind, the training by Indian Army should emphasize on improving the capabilities of ANA and especially RAMA(Research and Analysis Milli Afghan) to develop resources for covert Ops in Pakthoon lands with support from ethnic Pakthoons of KhyberPakthoonwa and Baluchistan. These should be aimed to generally increase attrition rates of Pakjabi army in Pakthoon lands , restrict its maneuvering capabilities and in effect make it to be cooped inside static strongholds.

Most importantly both "Frontier Corps" and "Good Taliban" should be exposed for what they are and be thoroughly delegitimized as a gandoo*("Kwas Lakey") force of Pakjabis in the Pakthoon mind space.

For all the above to happen, the present skewed representation of Pakthoons in ANA must be corrected immediately, either by raising new Pakthoon regiments on ethnic lines or reorganizing existing regiments on ethnic lines. Accomplishing such a reorganization of ANA and its accompanied legitimization in Pakthoon minds (coinciding with the draw down of Americans) will be the trickiest part .

[Lalmohan]

revive the cult of the frontier gandhi...

[ramana]

Lilo, Again the Pashtuns under TSP boot are Ghilzais and the ones in Afghanistan are Durranis. Pashtuns are not monolith borgs. The Durranis displaced the Ghilzais and founded Afghanistan. They traded them for the Durand line.
In return the Ghilzais participation in war against FSU was to hope to retake lost glory. However rest of non Pashtun Afghanistan acknowledges only the Durranis as the ruling elite.

The TSP pusihing Taliban is a way to rule by the sword.
Might have worked in pre-modern times.

[Lilo]

Ramana garu , i was aware of such tribal rivalries within Pakthoons, but those being related to origin of the Durand line is something new to me. Does that mean the Durand line is a marker delineating Ghilzai and Durrani spheres of influence ?
Moreover rationally i would imagine such rivalries to diminish when it dawns on the ghilzais the extent of pakjabi perfidy in using them all these decades (or it may have already dawned on them ?) . The Durranis may be even more ready for such a rapprochement since they are composed of a more urbanized and liberal stock.
"Rationally" - being the operating word - the tremendous bloodletting in Pakthoon lands for the past four decades should have diminished the thirst for exclusive power in both Durranis and Ghilzais .
If such rivalries indeed are insurmountable then what is the point in Afghan Durrani elite claiming the Durand line to be invalid ?
Hopefully you can explain further on this Durand line history.

While dwelling more on the Tribal basis ...

I found an article by Joshua Foust (?) - challenging such a tribal view to the conflict.

Quickly summarizing my understanding:
Pre-Soviet War Pakthoon Society
King/Central Leadership <-- (Ethinc) Tribal Jirgas <-- Khans <-- Rural Peasantry
Control Process 1: Money and Coercive power through militia of Khans| Khans-> Rural Peasantry
Control Process 2: FCR and exploitation of Inter-tribal rivalries by King| King->Tribal Jirgas

Detribalised Pakthoon Society in the age of the Neo-Taliban (symbolizing Islamist Pakthoon "Nationalism" against "occupying" forces)
Emir of the Taliban<-- Islamist Shura <-- Tanzeem headed by a Warrior Mullah<-- Rural Peasantry now predominantly growing Poppy
Control process 1: Aid from Saudi/Paki and Drug trade| Tanzeem-> Rural Peasantry
Control Process 2: Coercive power through the Qawm| Tanzeem-> Rural Peasantry

Result: Little power to Tribal Jirgas and Khans(or Maliks ?). Power shifted to detribalized Islamist Shuras and Tanzeems controlling numerous Qawm.

Also in this pdf showing tribal distribution of Afghanistan ,the fact that taliban is strong in southern afghanistan even though it is dominated by durranis weakens the tribal power struggle argument.

[ramana]

Lilo, Thanks for the map and the links. So Taliban is like the Committe during the French Revolution which was removing the old order. And ISI is like Madame Defrage selecting who is to be killed.

[Agnimitra]

Asia Times has a two-article feature on Motorham Clinton's visit to the (Is)loo and Maulavi Fazlullah:

US puts the squeeze on Pakistan ...

The unprecedented visit to Islamabad by United States big hitters led by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton underscores the brinkmanship underway as the US puts maximum pressure on strained ties. With talk of a military conflict brewing on the Afghan-Pakistani border, the unthinkable seems to be happening. Washington is playing a dangerous game as it seeks a raison d'etre for bases for its armed forces in Afghanistan.
- M K Bhadrakumar

... and Islamabad strikes back

Repeatedly under American pressure to stem cross-border raids from Pakistan-based Taliban militants, the Pakistan army has hit back with claims that United States-led forces in Afghanistan are doing nothing to prevent raids on Pakistan soil. Islamabad has fiery cleric Maulvi Fazlullah in mind. Beyond the tit-for-tat, it is undeniable that the mullah's fighters have regrouped after defeat in the Swat Valley - and are as dangerous as they ever were.
- Amir Mir

[ramana]

So TSP is claiming TTP is a US pasand organization!

Very convoluted thinking.

Mullah Fazallullah was a ISI created mullah for the badlands who turned against TSPA after the GOAT came into the badlands of FATA/WANA. Now TSPA is claiming that Mulllah FM is a US supported bakra.

[ramana]

Nightwatch 20 October 2011

Pakistan: A gaggle of US senior leaders led by Hillary Clinton with a supporting cast of Chairman, JCS, General Dempsey and CIA Director Petraeus reportedly conveyed a strong message to Pakistani leaders that they must crack down on insurgent strongholds used to assist in attacks on Afghanistan.

A clear, firm message must be sent to the Pakistani people and government that they are part of the solution, Clinton said. They must rid their country of insurgents who kill their own people and others in Afghanistan. Pakistan must lead this fight because there is no other place to go, and there will be strict consequences if this is allowed to continue, she said.

Special comment: Secretary Clinton's public statement is posturing. Clinton almost certainly did not talk that way to the Pakistani government leadership because the Obama administration needs Pakistani military flank support a lot more than Pakistan needs the US, thanks to the Chinese.

The more likely main topic of business was managing the US and NATO withdrawal by arranging some Pakistani flank support in return for US intelligence. The idea apparently would be that the US would provide intelligence support and drone support to help Pakistan restrain the Taliban and other anti-Afghan government groups from attacking the withdrawing Westerners as they withdraw. The US also probably offered to provide intelligence assistance to help protect the Pakistan Army and government.

Recall I said in future drone strikes will be unannounced to protect TSPA H&D from the jihadis.

So it will be walk silently, strike silently and don't announce the kills.

[Lalmohan]

what flank support? the equipment will be shipped out from the north and the people fly out of bagram...

[ramana]

Pardon? Please give context, thanks, ramana

[Lalmohan]

Pardon? Please give context, thanks, ramana

from the nightwatch article

The more likely main topic of business was managing the US and NATO withdrawal by arranging some Pakistani flank support in return for US intelligence

[ramana]

Even that is bogus.

[ramana]

I just had a thought. So far we are thinking that either Afghanistan or Pakistan will emerge as the survivor after US leaves.

Now both are articial states stitched together in the colonial and post colonial period and survived as entitites due to Cold War circumustances.

Afghanistan is a grouping of Pashtuns with the Northern Areas peoples. Similarly TSP is Pakjab grouped with Sindh, NWFP and Balochistan. These areas do not have anything in common except the Westphalian construct of post World War II and the UN system.

India has supported the legitimate faction that came to power in Kabul as a matter of course and this was to hedge against TSP.

The Cold War ended in 1988 and with it superpower support for both states. The end of Cold War ended the FSu too by 1992. The war on terror has brought out the contradictions in the two states of holding/stitching together different people.

What if the end result of the end of War on terror is the collapse of both states? I mean what is Afghanistan and Pakistan both get re-organised like Yugoslavia or CIS or what not. Maybe the ultimate result of the end of Cold war is the collapse of the state systems among the pre-modern people of Af-Pak due to the collapse or irrelevance of the Great Game itself.

Are we ready for it?

[svinayak]

I just had a thought. So far we are thinking that either Afghanistan or Pakistan will emerge as the survivor after US leaves.

What if the end result of the end of War on terror is the collapse of both states?
I mean what is Afghanistan and Pakistan both get re-organised like Yugoslavia or CIS or what not. Maybe the ultimate result of the end of Cold war is the collapse of the state systems among the pre-modern people of Af-Pak due to the collapse or irrelevance of the Great Game itself.

Are we ready for it?

What if they are covertly thinking of collapse of Indian state itself