China, Russia, Pak meet an ‘interference in internal issues’: Afghanistan

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
Putin is doing more harm to his own country by messing around with NATO and fighting expensive wars in Syria and Ukraine. He is alienating Russia's oldest and most trustworthy friend, India for temporary gains. In the end Putin's strategy will leave russia being isolated and financially dependent on big brother China.
One cannot clap with one hand.

India is also not doing much to attract Russia other than past ceremonialism. The first year saw some intense activity after 2014, but then it was all about Obama and Obama and Obama.

That's not how we work.

We should also have signed that $30 billion deal with ROSNEFT on oil supply through a common pipeline system in Siberia to both India and China rather than going for the TAPI.
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
modi's team even registered a weibo account in his name, Chinese equivalent of tweet, posting greetings once in a while, which now owns 170 thousands followers. its latest post is greeting about Chinese spring festival.
The problem is with CCP and not with common Chinese people.

In fact, when targeted outside, Indians and Chinese mostly unite in fighting any sort of labelling.

Sadly, CCP doesn't think 2000 years of friendship matters.

We would love to stand by China but your government keeps backing our enemy and elements hostile to our country.

Imagine how wonderful an India-China military alliance would have appeared. India could have been a mediator in solving Japan-China relations and the three countries would have started an Asian NATO.

Sadly that's not the case.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,000
Likes
2,302
Country flag
The problem is with CCP and not with common Chinese people.
We can also say the same thing about India: the problem is with Indian government and not with common Indian people. But the problem is not with government, nor common people. It is all about national interest: the two big neighbors are doomed to confront each other.

In fact, when targeted outside, Indians and Chinese mostly unite in fighting any sort of labelling.
Yes, sadly, India often finds out that her "largest democratic country" doesn't help in most of times.

Sadly, CCP doesn't think 2000 years of friendship matters.
We would love to stand by China but your government keeps backing our enemy and elements hostile to our country.
How stand by China? By supporting the guerrilla of Tibet in 1950s? By unilaterally drawing the Sino-India border? By forward policy? Well, there is no doubt that Chinese has their faults to blame, but India was not innocent either.

Imagine how wonderful an India-China military alliance would have appeared. India could have been a mediator in solving Japan-China relations and the three countries would have started an Asian NATO.

Sadly that's not the case.
No, India doesn't have that influence. The real obstacle between China and Japan is US.
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
We can also say the same thing about India: the problem is with Indian government and not with common Indian people. But the problem is not with government, nor common people. It is all about national interest: the two big neighbors are doomed to confront each other.
USA and Canada are very large neighbours; they are the friendliest with each other. So your theory isn't correct.

Yes, sadly, India often finds out that her "largest democratic country" doesn't help in most of times.
I was talking about the expat concerns. Indians and Chinese usually are pretty friendly outside, especially in Malaysia and Singapore.

How stand by China? By supporting the guerrilla of Tibet in 1950s? By unilaterally drawing the Sino-India border? By forward policy? Well, there is no doubt that Chinese has their faults to blame, but India was not innocent either.
Well you shouldn't have started constructing roads without a formal meeting with our leadership in our area. Had the border meetings be done then, we both could have solved the mutual issue. But Mao thought he could impose anything on the basis of weapons and military.

Tibetan guerilla? The SFF formed only when clashes had started.

But yes, Nehru is as much to blame as Mao. We have no interest in taking Tibet from China.

Even today.

The Tibetans we received here, were unarmed monks who didn't want to be purged clean of Buddhism. Even today, HH Dalai Lama only talks about spirituality and peace and not about territory. But CCP in its classic revisionist style, labels him a terrorist.

No, India doesn't have that influence. The real obstacle between China and Japan is US.
Whom are you kidding, man.

You and Japan have been at each other's throats for over 4 centuries, long before USA even existed.

See, this is the problem with revisionist history. You never get to see the real picture and any questioning is culled forcefully until people only do what is taught to them.
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
Russia is sending weapons to Taliban, top U.S. general confirms

KABUL — The general in charge of U.S. forces in Afghanistan appeared to confirm Monday that Russia is sending weapons to the Taliban, an intervention that will likely further complicate the 15-year-old war here and the Kremlin’s relations with the United States.

When asked by reporters, Gen. John Nicholson did not dispute claims that the Taliban is receiving weapons and other supplies from the Russians.

“We continue to get reports of this assistance,” Nicholson said, speaking to reporters alongside Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. “We support anyone who wants to help us advance the reconciliation process, but anyone who arms belligerents who perpetuate attacks like the one we saw two days ago in Mazar-e Sharif is not the best way forward to a peaceful reconciliation.”

[While the U.S. wasn’t looking, Russia and Iran began carving out a bigger role in Afghanistan]

A senior U.S. military official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence on the issue, said the Russians have increased their supply of equipment and small arms to the Taliban over the past 18 months. The official said the Russians have been sending weapons, including medium and heavy machine guns, to the Taliban under the guise that the material would be used to fight the Islamic State in eastern Afghanistan. Instead, the official said, the weapons were showing up in some of Afghanistan’s southern provinces, including Helmand and Kandahar — both areas with little Islamic State presence.

“Any weapons being funneled here from a foreign country would be a violation of international law unless they were coming to the government of Afghanistan,” Mattis said, speaking during his first visit to Afghanistan as defense secretary. He added that it would have to be dealt with as such.

In the past, Nicholson has criticized Russia’s contact with the Taliban, saying that it has given “legitimacy” to a group that has undermined the elected government in Kabul.

In the 1980s, Russia fought its own war in Afghanistan, losing thousands of troops to insurgents supplied with advanced U.S. weaponry, such as shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles. In March, when the commander of U.S. forces in Europe, Army Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti, told lawmakers that Russia was providing support to the Taliban, the Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the allegations as “a lie” and said the charge was being promulgated to disguise Washington’s own policy failures in Afghanistan.


Mattis and Nicholson’s remarks come just days after the Taliban pulled off the single deadliest attack against Afghan security forces since the beginning of the war.

[U.S. defense chief arrives in Kabul as his Afghan counterpart resigns in disgrace]

On Friday, roughly a dozen militants infiltrated a sprawling Afghan base near the northern city of Mazar-e Sharif. Using suicide vests and small arms, the militants — disguised as Afghan soldiers — wreaked havoc at the installation and, according to some reports, killed at least 140 Afghans and wounded 60.

The six-hour assault began as Afghan soldiers were leaving their weekly prayers or ambling to the base’s dining facility. The Taliban fighters were eventually killed by a response force led by Afghan commandos. Nicholson praised the elite but overworked unit’s actions for bringing the “atrocity to an end.”

It is unclear how the attack will affect Afghan forces’ recruitment efforts, already strained by high casualties and low retention rates among the ranks. The Taliban has pledged that the attack is just the beginning of its annual spring offensive. However, since U.S. combat troops mostly withdrew in 2014, the pace of Taliban attacks has remained consistent across the country year-round.

Currently, there are 8,400 U.S. troops in Afghanistan split between performing two roles. One contingent helps advise the Afghan security forces while the other carries out unilateral and partnered counterterrorism operations against groups such as the Islamic State and al-Qaeda. In addition to the U.S. troops, roughly 5,000 NATO troops are in Afghanistan, split among various areas of responsibility.

Nicholson and the chief of U.S. Central Command, Army Gen. Joseph Votel, have both agreed that roughly 3,000 additional troops are needed to help prop up the Afghan security forces and break what top U.S. officials have called a “stalemate” in the country. At the height of the war, more than 100,000 U.S. troops were in the country.

Mattis said Monday that he is still deciding whether to ask President Trump to send more troops.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top