Bharat Rakshak

UK backs Pakistan offensive

Defence secretary insists Britain has to back American plans to hunt down al-Qaida leaders across the Afghan border

Mr. Obama took a giant step beyond the Bush administration's "Afghanistan policy" when he named the issue "AfPak" -- Afghanistan, Pakistan and their shared, Pashtun-populated border. But this is inverted. We suggest renaming the policy "PakAf," to emphasize that, from the perspective of U.S. interests and regional stability, the heart of the problem lies in Pakistan.

A key US senator said on Thursday that the United States and Iran might begin their cooperation for stabilising Afghanistan after a meeting between officials of the two countries in The Hague next week.

Russia and other SCO members have long argued that Afghanistan’s neighbours should have a stronger role in dealing with the grave security threats emanating from that country. . . . Russia’s anti-drug chief Viktor Ivanov last week called the coalition anti-drug policy a fiasco, noting that opium production in Afghanistan had soared 44 times since the deployment of U.S. and NATO troops in the country. . . . Interestingly, India’s envoy, in his address, directly appealed for granting SCO membership to Afghanistan. . . The idea of Afghanistan joining the SCO would be anathema to the U.S., and President Barack Obama’s proposal to create a NATO-dominated contact group with Afghanistan as part of his new strategy for the region is seen as an attempt to dilute the influence of the SCO, even as he has invited its members to the new group. However, at the Moscow conference the U.S. envoy joined the other delegates in vowing support for the SCO-Afghanistan Action Plan. Analysts linked the dramatic shift in Washington’s position, in favour of sharing its responsibility for Afghanistan’s security with the SCO, to the failure of the U.S.-led military operation. Alexander Lukin, a leading Russian expert on the region, says cooperation with the SCO offers the U.S. and NATO an acceptable format to somehow bring Iran into the dialogue.

The documents adopted at the conference declared support for the efforts of the Karzai government, which has recently fallen out of favour with the U.S. and NATO. Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Alexei Borodavkin warned against creating a power vacuum in Afghanistan in the run-up to the presidential elections later this year. Russia also came out against appeasing the Taliban.

Commendable efforts to achieve national reconciliation must not be supplanted with attempts to strike a deal with the terrorist leaders, the Russian diplomat said.

The Moscow conference call for adopting a comprehensive approach to Afghanistan was consonant with Mr. Obama’s new emphasis on diplomacy, economic assistance, the building of a strong Afghan army and security forces and on shutting down the Pakistani safe haven for extremists. If anything, the Moscow Declaration came harder on Pakistan demanding that it find effective means to combat terrorism, including denying sanctuaries and dismantling the extremist and terrorist network and ideological centres.

. . . the Afghanistan conference reiterated the SCO’s position that while it is opposed to the expansion of U.S. military interests in Central Asia, it is willing to expand cooperation with the U.S. and NATO in Afghanistan . . The conference reinforced the SCO as the leading regional security force. It will also strengthen the voice of Afghanistan’s neighbours, including India and Iran, at The Hague meet.

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India said on Monday it was ready to play a role in a new U.S. war strategy for Afghanistan, welcoming what it said was a comprehensive plan to stamp out extremism that had roots in Pakistan.

"We welcome the very clear expression of will to carry through this struggle against extremism in Afghanistan and its roots in Pakistan, which is contained in the new comprehensive U.S. strategy," Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon said.

"India has a direct interest in the success of this international effort and India is ready to play a constructive role as a responsible power in defeating extremism of all kinds."

Menon said the new U.S. strategy would come up for discussion between Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh when the two meet on the sidelines of a G20 meeting in London this week.

"I think the situation in the region including what happens in Afghanistan, what's happening in Pakistan, will certainly come up during discussions," he said.

Obama wants to regionally contain rather than defeat terrorism, as if the monster of terrorism can be deftly confined to the Afpak belt — a blinkered approach that promises to bring Indian security under added pressure. His aides contend that by refocusing US power to contain and deter, America can diplomatically encircle the terrorist threats from Pakistan and the Taliban. Distant America may be able to afford this, but next-door India will bear the consequences.

given that al-Qaeda already is badly splintered and weakened and in no position to openly challenge US interests, Obama can declare ‘mission accomplished’ any time he wants.

Obama's new strategic broth, to which many cooks have contributed, has shown a clear understanding of the problems confronting him in Afghanistan-Pakistan. Bush and his advisers were not as articulate but they too had come to a similar conclusion though not in as smart a language...

Having lost the war in Afghanistan, he has come hard on Pakistan to take-up the cudgels, whereas, Pakistan army itself has lost nerves in Swat, Dir-Bajaur and Waziristan, taking cover behind the political government, to strike accord with the tribals. Keeping the American nation in the dark is no statesmanship. The war in Afghanistan is lost and that truth must be told to the people, i.e. 'the exit strategy and the plan to implement it'. Obama has not shown the magnanimity to rise above what ordinary mortals tend to do, when they encounter the painful reality.

Despite the best efforts made by the army, it could not achieve success in its operations within the Pakistani territory, in Waziristan, Bajaur and Swat. They rightly felt that the best option was to engage into a dialogue and come to a truce. . .If Pakistan breaks the peace treaty, it would result into a debacle and humiliation for the army, simply stated: Pakistan cannot deliver.

The Islamic Resistance emerged from the Pak-Afghan border region and is relentlessly struggling for freedom for the last thirty years, first to defeat the Soviet Union, a very formidable power, and now the USA and their allies, who are encountering the same fate in Afghanistan. The Islamic Resistance is the 'Divine Intervention' and a reality. Denying its existence has proved self-defeating.

samuel wrote:
Is anyone interested in writing a computational model for the Afpak scenario involving AFPAK, IR, US, UK, RUS, CHN, IND? If necessary, we could increase the state size to all nations in CAR and even the far east. This is a direct offshoot of questions in the future strat thread.

We could develop a model by
a) articulating strategic objectives for individual nations.
b) developing modes of interaction between nations with consequences, in points.
c) a fitness measure on points that becomes probability of attaining goals.
d) strategy for increasing (relative) fitness.

We can use model to ask some questions:
For example, if India were able to hold China by dangling "Aksai Chin for Tawang," hold the north in Afg, have back ups through to RU and IR, can it pincer PoK successfully?

What games can India win?

Anyone want to have a go. It will take a few weeks of work, I think.
S

Afghanistan: Yesterday multiple suicide bombers detonated near a government complex in Kandahar in an apparent attempt to kill President Karzai’s brother who is the Provincial governor. The daylight attack killed 14 civilians and injuring 17 others. Three bombers disguised as police officers broke into the complex after a fourth detonated a truck outside the gates during a meeting of tribal leaders.

The UK newspaper The Independent reported today that the Taliban have agreed to soften some of the restrictions on personal behavior as part of negotiations with the Afghan government. Taliban representatives said they are willing to commit to refraining from measuring the length of men's beards, stopping girls education, banning music and making burqas mandatory for women (a representative said they would be "strongly recommend" in public). The Taliban demand in return the withdrawal of foreign forces within six months, rule in part by religious scholars, and guarantees of safety for their delegation.

The Independent is the first news outlet to report these tentative concessions. {UK link in Af Pak cauldron?}Others, such as the Hindustan Times, are repeating the report. Thus, far Mullah Omar’s Quetta Shura has denied that such talks are taking place, much less any inclination to relax the Taliban’s fundamentalist application of Sharia. However, the Washington Post and other news services report the Karzai government is holding talks with Taliban faction leaders. All major Taliban factions reject talks with the US.

The extent of Taliban dominance of districts in Pashtun provinces of the south compels a search for a power sharing mechanism with some Taliban just to reduce the violence, casualties and the strain on the government’s resources. The contradictory press reports about talks and violence are characteristic of convergence, the phenomenon of groping for a power sharing formula. The reporting suggests that the many parties to this group grope have considerable concessions to make before power sharing that makes a difference in the violence is achieved.

Convergence is one of the two most dangerous and deadly periods in an instability problem. The other is divergence, when one or other party in a power sharing arrangement attempts a break out to grab total control. The period of power sharing itself is relatively calm.

Uzbekistan agreed Friday to allow the United States to use it as a transit point for the shipment of "non-lethal" supplies to Afghanistan.

As the Obama administration steps up assistance to Pakistan, a leading lawmaker has introduced a legislation that would authorise a tripling of economic aid but expects Islamabad to stop supporting terror groups targeting India.

Howard Berman, who heads the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said his Pakistan Enduring Assistance and Cooperation Enhancement Act (PEACE), would establish a new framework for US-Pakistan relations.

The top US general in Afghanistan, Gen David McKiernan, is reaching out to influential Afghan tribesmen in regions where US troops will soon deploy, apologising for past mistakes and saying he is now studying the holy Quran. McKiernan met villagers in Helmand and Kandahar - two of Afghanistan’s most violent provinces - in an attempt to foster good will ahead of the US troop surge that will send 21,000 more forces here this summer to stem an increasingly violent Taliban insurgency. He said he wanted to explain to the tribal elders some of the mistakes US forces have made in the past.

At dinner, Admiral Mullen repeated the long-held view that the Taliban leadership is hiding in the province of Baluchistan. In turn, Pakistan is deeply suspicious of America’s plans for India to play a central role in the region. Far-fetched rumours that 150,000 Indian troops are to be deployed in Afghanistan are rife in Islamabad. More plausibly, Pakistani intelligence officials accuse India of fanning a burgeoning nationalist insurgency in Baluchistan.

Charlie Rose - Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger April 6, 2009 - 56:01 - Apr 7, 2009

Pakistan - Iran - US Foreign Policy - Obama Administration

VinodTK wrote:From Deccan Chronicle:
Russia: N-threat from Pak

From NDTV:
Pak principle nuclear threat: Russia