Bypassing Pakistan via Northern Distribution Network (NDN)

Discussion in 'Subcontinent & Central Asia' started by ganesh177, Sep 30, 2011.

  1. ganesh177

    ganesh177 Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    295
    Location:
    Pune, Incredible India
    Obama, Uzbek leader discuss Afghan supply route

    [h=1]Obama, Uzbek leader discuss Afghan supply route[/h]
    Reuters) - President Barack Obama and Uzbekistan's President Islam Karimov discussed expanding U.S. use of the central Asian country as a route to supply troops in Afghanistan, a U.S. official said on Thursday, amid growing concern about the viability of Pakistan as a transit route.
    On a day when overtures to Uzbekistan seemed to stretch right across Washington, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met her Uzbek counterpart and said both sides want to deepen ties.
    And in Congress, changes in U.S. law were pending that would allow more military aid to Uzbekistan, despite its poor human rights record.
    Capitol Hill aides said the change was done partly at the urging of the Obama administration, which is shifting more military supply lines to the Central Asian country.
    The White House said Obama called Karimov on Wednesday to congratulate the former Soviet republic on its 20th anniversary of independence and that the leaders talked about shared interests in a "secure and prosperous" Afghanistan.
    Obama's outreach to Karimov, whose has faced U.S. criticism over his human rights record, came as the United States and Pakistan are locked in a diplomatic crisis over U.S. accusations linking Pakistan's chief intelligence agency to militant attacks on Americans in Afghanistan.
    Rising tension between Washington and Islamabad, at times awkward partners in the fight against Islamic militancy, have raised questions about Pakistan's role as a major U.S. supply route for American forces fighting in Afghanistan.
    That has prompted U.S. officials to look harder at expanding alternatives to lessen reliance on Pakistan.
    CLINTON TALKS TO UZBEK; LAWMAKERS MAKE CHANGES
    "We value our relationship with Uzbekistan. They have been very helpful to us with respect to the Northern Distribution Network," Clinton said, referring to the supply route that goes through the Central Asian country to Afghanistan.
    She spoke after meeting Uzbek Foreign Minister Elyor Ganiyev. Their dialogue raised "our concerns about human rights and political freedoms," Clinton said, but added that there were "some signs" of progress on that front.
    The Senate Appropriations Committee last week approved a bill that would allow the United States to waive restrictions on aid to Uzbekistan if Clinton certifies this is needed to obtain access to and from Afghanistan.
    U.S. military aid to Uzbekistan has been restricted since 2004 because of its human rights record. House appropriators have dropped the restrictions from their bill funding foreign aid next year, an aide said, making it likely some version of the change will pass.
    An aide to Senator Patrick Leahy said the Obama administration had pushed for easing the restrictions on military aid to Uzbekistan due to concerns about potential limits to continuing cooperation from Pakistan with the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan.
    But rather than drop the longstanding restrictions, Leahy, who chairs the panel that funds foreign aid, added the waiver that requires the administration to assess Uzbekistan's progress on human rights, and a report on any diversion of U.S. aid for "corrupt" purposes, the aide said.
    Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told Reuters he had visited Uzbekistan and seen Karimov recently. "I expect a major breakthrough between us and the Uzbeks in terms of ground and air access," Graham said.
    "We're going to probably replace 50 percent of what we ship into Afghanistan from Pakistan, will go through the northern route, Uzbekistan," Graham, a member of the appropriations committee, said.
    One reason U.S. officials want to expand the Northern Distribution Network is to enable more movement on the network in both directions, a U.S. military spokeswoman said.
    She said the network had been seen primarily as a way of getting supplies into Afghanistan, but with the planned drawdown over the coming years, the United States wants agreements letting it haul materiel from Afghanistan as well.
    The United States also has been looking to expand overflight options throughout the region, she said.
    Human rights groups have urged the United States not to lift restrictions on military aid to Uzbekistan. "The human rights situation in Uzbekistan continues to be among the worst in the world," said Jeff Goldstein, a senior policy analyst at Open Society Foundations in Washington.
    (Additional reporting by John O'Callaghan, David Alexander and Andy Quinn; Editing by Will Dunham and Cynthia Osterman)


    Obama, Uzbek leader discuss Afghan supply route | Reuters
     
  2.  
  3. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    It will go through since Uzbekistan is equally concerned about the AQ and Taliban spilling over to cause instability.

    Obama's overture indicates that Pakistan is soon to be abandoned and things will get hot.

    The only interest of the ISAF is the logistic supply through Pakistan, which as it is, is very 'iffy'.

    It will also then allow the US to seriously cause internal disturbance in Kyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan.
     
    A.V. likes this.
  4. A.V.

    A.V. New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    6,503
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    Moscow, russia
    If at all US abandons pakistan and goes out on an offensive against the pakistani militants and support bases , what would the stand of saudis be and where will iran stand ?
     
  5. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    Saudi - what will a puppet/US stooge do ?

    Iran - thats complex....depends on whats in the mind of the khomeini.
     
  6. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Iran would be in two minds.

    It will be pleased that Pakistan is being put on the backfoot and hence hard put to lash out at the Pakistani Shias (Iran is the spiritual base of the Shias)of Pakistan as also would be glad since it would negatively affect the Pakistan support of the Jundallahs (Soldiers of God) who foray into the Balochi area of Eastern Iran.

    However, it would also be very chary since the US is also said to be supporting the Jundallah men as it allows the US to pressurise Iran from both flanks (Iraq in the West and Pakistan in the East).

    Saudis will tango to the US' tune, with the occasional 'misstep' to show 'solidarity' with the Muslim brothers of Pakistan!
     
  7. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    Analysis: The US-Pakistan relationship and the critical factor of supply

    Analysis: The US-Pakistan relationship and the critical factor of supply - The Long War Journal

    The United States and Pakistan have had strained relations ever since the US first entered Afghanistan in the aftermath of 9/11. But over the past year, the relationship has further deteriorated in the wake of the US raid that killed Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad in May, the Raymond Davis incident in the winter of 2011, Pakistan's support for the Taliban and the Haqqani Network, the controversial drone strikes against terror groups based in Pakistan's tribal areas, and a number of cross-border incidents that resulted in the deaths of Pakistani troops.

    On Nov. 25, there was another cross-border incident, in which US forces killed 24 Pakistani troops in Pakistan's tribal agency of Mohmand. Pakistan holds the US responsible and in retaliation has cut off the US supply routes to Afghanistan that run through Pakistan.

    Why did Pakistan choose this action? What are the consequences for US policy?

    US supply route to Afghanistan is dependent on Pakistan

    Fundamental to the US-Pakistan relationship is the hard fact that a major US military supply route to Afghanistan runs through Pakistan. No army cannot operate in the field without supplies, and the US has 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. The supply route starts at the Pakistani port of Karachi, where ships dock and offload their supplies onto trucks. The trucks then drive through Pakistan and enter Afghanistan through either the Khyber Pass near Peshawar or through the Chaman crossing near Quetta.

    Dependence on this supply route creates a fundamental vulnerability for the US in its relations with Pakistan. At any time, Pakistan can choose to cut off supplies to US troops. This provides Pakistan with a major lever over US policy. And Pakistan has used this leverage many times. After previous incidents, Pakistan temporarily halted supply trucks from transiting to Afghanistan or allowed trucks to be destroyed. Consequently, US policy has been constrained by the level of Pakistani tolerance.

    Consider the latest incident. Pakistan does not tolerate US incursions or attacks into its territory. At the same time, insurgents use Pakistani territory as a safe haven, moving back and forth across the border with Afghanistan at will. As a result, the US' ability to interdict insurgents as they cross the border is severely limited.

    How will this latest incident play out? There is reason to believe that the aftermath of this incident, and future ones, may be different from previous similar incidents.

    Alternative supply routes: the Northern Distribution Network (NDN)

    The US has been working to address its supply vulnerability for some time. US TRANSCOM (US Transportation Command), the department responsible for delivering supplies, has been developing alternative supply routes that avoid Pakistan. Given the geography of the region, all of the supply routes into landlocked Afghanistan are difficult. A hostile Iran borders the west. The former Soviet Central Asian republics to the north have an underdeveloped infrastructure, are politically unstable, and are strongly influenced by Russia. Despite all this, US has developed the Northern Distribution Network (NDN).

    The NDN's goal is to bring in supplies, not from the south through Pakistan [indicated on map by light blue paths], but from the north through Central Asia, Russia, and the Caucasus region [dark blue paths].

    Since late 2008, the US has struck a series of deals with countries in the region for transit rights and infrastructure improvements, including:

    Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania: states with Baltic Sea ports
    Russia, with a railroad network from the Baltic states to Central Asia
    Georgia and Azerbaijan: Caucasus states with ports and railroad network from Black Sea and Caspian Sea to Central Asia
    Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan: Central Asian states with rail networks from Russia and the Caspian Sea to Afghanistan

    In addition, some deals include air transit rights. This allows supplies delivered by aircraft to avoid transiting Pakistani airspace.

    There are now a number of supply routes to Afghanistan that bypass Pakistan. But the NDN is not a panacea. It remains a difficult supply route, with each part of the route having advantages and disadvantages. For example:

    The Northern Spur brings supplies by ship to a Baltic port, then by rail through Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan. While this route avoids Pakistan, it is more expensive. In addition, it goes through Russia, which has its own national interests. This makes the US vulnerable to Russian policy demands.
    The Southern Spur brings supplies by ship or rail to a Georgian port on the Black Sea, then by rail through Georgia and Azerbaijan, by ferry across the Caspian Sea, and by rail again through Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. This route avoids both Pakistan and Russia. But it is complex, transiting several countries, and requires offloading to several different transportation modes along the way. Consequently, it is the most expensive route and has limited capacity.

    While the NDN has taken time to develop, it is now delivering supplies in substantial quantities. The first shipments were made in March 2009, and since then the amounts have steadily increased, while the amounts delivered through Pakistan have decreased. The NDN provided 35% of US supplies in April 2010, 50% in April 2011, and 55%-65% in July-Sept 2011. By the end of 2011, the NDN is expected to provide 75% of US supplies to Afghanistan.

    At the same time, other ISAF nations with troops in Afghanistan are following the US lead, shifting their supply routes to the NDN. However, they are not as far along, with upwards of 60% of their supplies still being transported through Pakistan.

    Decreasing US supply needs

    The second factor affecting the US supply situation is an upcoming reduction in the demand. As part of the drawdown of forces announced by President Obama in June 2011, the US will reduce troop levels in Afghanistan from 100,000 to 68,000 by September 2012. The quantity of supplies needed should decrease by a comparable amount.

    The future

    With increasing NDN capacity, and decreasing demand for military supplies, it is possible that the need for a Pakistani supply route will end by late 2012. While the option is not publicly acknowledged, the US would have the capacity to halt supply shipments through Pakistan altogether, thus eliminating one of Pakistan's major levers on US policy. Although this is not Pakistan's only lever, it is one of the strongest and the one that Pakistan has been quickest to use. How Pakistan will react to future disputes, and how US policy will change due to this new calculus, remains to be seen.
     
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  8. Galaxy

    Galaxy Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,093
    Likes Received:
    3,895
    Location:
    Delhi
    Russia Steps Back From Afghanistan Transit Threat

    Russia Steps Back From Afghanistan Transit Threat

    December 8, 2011

    When firebrand Russian politician and ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin last week appeared to threaten to cut off NATO and U.S. military transit to Afghanistan, it was seen as another sign of the recently deteriorating relations between Washington and Moscow, and got a lot of attention. But now, apparently, Rogozin is saying he was misquoted.

    NATO's foreign ministers are meeting now in Brussels, and a State Department official, speaking on background, says Rogozin has told them he never said he would cut off the Northern Distribution Network:

    On the NDN, it’s actually – there was no confirmation. Even Rogozin, who was the one who was quoted, has said – he told us today, but he said all along his was misquoted and they are not linking the NDN to our disagreement on missile defense.

    Indeed, if you look at the original story from Interfax (in Russian) Rogozin doesn't exactly spell the threat out, and it seems that Interfax could have put the words in his mouth.

    But Rogozin apparently didn't talk to NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen who, in a press conference at the meeting, said Russian talk of the NDN was "an empty threat":

    I think, honestly speaking, that it’s an empty threat because it is clearly in Russia’s self-interest to contribute to a success in Afghanistan. Russia knows from bitter experience that instability in Afghanistan have negative repercussions in Russia as well.

    And obviously, that’s also the reason why Russia has embarked on a cooperation with NATO and with ISAF by providing a transit arrangement. Actually one year ago in Lisbon, we decided to expand that transit to be a reverse transit. So I would be very surprised if Russia took a step that is in direct contradiction with what is Russia’s self-interest.

    However, Rogozin (as far as I know) hasn't publicly disavowed those comments, and so they'll likely continue to be breathlessly quoted by hardliners in both Moscow and Washington. And knowing Rogozin, he'll likely say several far more outrageous things in the next few hours, so he'll continue to keep bloggers busy.

    Russia Steps Back From Afghanistan Transit Threat | EurasiaNet.org
     
  9. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    if russia had backed off then us and nato had no way to feed their soldiers and machines in afghanistan, causing high casualty and deterioration in security. thank god russia is still with the afghanistan to be precise. like pakistan, russia will also milk usa, a bit i guess.
     
  10. Bhadra

    Bhadra Defence Professionals Defence Professionals Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,687
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    But the crook Pakistanis will be sucked dry?

    What will happens of the thousand new trucks Kaiyani and Zardari bought for transportation of NATO needs inside Afghanistan ? Those will be sold to Russia or Talibans?
     
  11. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    dont you need any vehicle to bring back soldiers killed on borderpost back to cities?
     
  12. Bhadra

    Bhadra Defence Professionals Defence Professionals Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,687
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Or they would be busy smuggling opium from Afghanistan for ISI?

    Why do not the Indians open a route to Afghanistan via Rahim Yar Khan since 21 Corps is already deployed nearby?

    Let us how good is Arjun?
     
  13. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,554
    Will turn to India if Pakistan refuses to open Nato routes: Pentagon

    Will turn to India if Pakistan refuses to open Nato routes: Pentagon - thenews.com.pk

    WASHINGTON: A senior Pentagon official informed lawmakers Friday that if Pakistan did not reopen its Nato supply routes, the United States would be forced to rely on India and the Northern Distribution Network, it has been learnt.

    The Pentagon official, however, did not divulge details about how the United States intends to use Indian routes for supplies to be transported to Nato and US troops stationed in Afghanistan.

    “If we can’t negotiate or successfully negotiate the re-opening of the Pak GLOC (Ground Lines of Communication) we have to default and rely on India and the Northern Distribution Network, via increased strategic airlift,” Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics Marine Corps Lieutenant General Frank Panter told lawmakers. “Both are expensive propositions, and it increases the [cost of] deployment or redeployment,” he stated before the Readiness Sub-Committee of the House Armed Services Committee.

    “There’s always that sensitive issue about the nations. We’re dealing with the Indian network in itself. If, for some reason, there’s additional political strain related to these countries, that restricts the flow as well. Redeployment timelines, by not being able to use the Pak GLOC, will increase along with the cost as well,” he said.

    Deputy Chief of Staff Logistics Army Lieutenant General Raymond Mason, however, also reiterated that the Pakistan GLOC remained extremely important for US strategy despite the fact that it has been closed since November 2011.
     
  14. Tolaha

    Tolaha Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    1,404
    Location:
    Bengaluru
    Route to Afghanistan via India through Strategic Airlift!! We now need to demand huge discounts on our C-17 purchases! LOL!

    If Pakistan disallows Indian planes from flying over, they need to take a huge detour. Probably getting these supplies from the Russians would be cheaper!
     
  15. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,554
    They can use India to Iran route?
     
  16. Tolaha

    Tolaha Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    1,404
    Location:
    Bengaluru

    That's exactly what I had assumed initially, until I saw this statement:

     
    LETHALFORCE likes this.
  17. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,554
    They can threaten Pakistan to cut off aid if they can't use the air space?
     
  18. Tolaha

    Tolaha Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    1,404
    Location:
    Bengaluru
    If Pakistan can be convinced to allow Indian planes to fly over, they would be more than happy to be convinced to let the goods pass over land, earning them transit fee. Unless PA is thinking of pulling wool over their people, by publicly refusing to allow Americans any assistance and refuse transit over land, while privately letting Americans know that they are fine with the Indian planes, in return for aid. Would be similar to the scenario with drone attacks. But in my opinion, the PA, greedy as they are, would allow over land transit to the NATO, after taking a hefty cut, but not before sufficient grandstanding in front of their public!
     
  19. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    LMAO are they deluded ?

    Run along we're not your lackies....offer us something we cant refuse or dont bother. There is a world of difference between pakistan and India. The former will bend over and lick you where the sun dont shine because they are shameless while we may not be the most powerful as of now but we have pride about our motherland.
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2012
  20. Tolaha

    Tolaha Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    1,404
    Location:
    Bengaluru
    Even in the likelihood of the Talibanis being a far greater threat to Indian interests than that of US?
     
  21. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    USA will not help us. They only care about themselves. They will make agreement with taliban not to be anti-us and leave them be.

    Regarding afghanistan our priorities best match with iran who along with us and russia funded the northern alliance against the taliban for many years.

    If they are big threat then we should take them out ourselves rather than allow yanks on our soil.
     
    Son of Govinda likes this.

Share This Page