India, US pledge to stay for long-haul in Afghanistan

[Yusuf]

BONN: The West used an Afghanistan meeting on Monday to signal enduring support for Kabul as allied troops go home, but economic downturn in Europe and crises with Pakistan and Iran could stir doubts about Western resolve.

http://m.timesofindia.com/PDATOI/articleshow/10995083.cms

 

[nrj]

MEA listening to Vikram Sood now ?

Problem is Pak wants astan in one piece while West/India wants to split it.

Oh wait ! Somebody ask afgans what they want!

 

[pmaitra]

Let's bring Iran into the equation. For those who have read the report, Iran sits in pretty well.

Perhaps the West would like to bring in a regime change in Iran so as to open an alternative access route to Afghanistan?

Not a bad idea from the West's point of view.

 

[SADAKHUSH]

It is positive news that the friends of Afghanistan are not going to leave them as they did in 1989. Let us build a strong Armed Forces for them and make them ally of west and India for a long term and defeat the motives of their neighbours on the East border as well the desires of China to set up their shop.

 

[Yusuf]

Let's bring Iran into the equation. For those who have read the report, Iran sits in pretty well.

Perhaps the West would like to bring in a regime change in Iran so as to open an alternative access route to Afghanistan?

Not a bad idea from the West's point of view.

Or find a way to work with the present regime itself?

 

[SpArK]

Terror From Outside Poses Threat to Afghanistan: India

Hinting at Pakistan, India today said terrorism emanating from outside Afghan borders posed potent threat to Afghanistan and warned that the war-torn country could "slip back" by interference in its internal affairs.

Addressing a conference of over 100 countries here, External Affairs Minister S M Krishna underlined India's pledge to support Afghanistan's development while underlining that the world community's commitment to ensuring its stability and security should not end after international forces leave that nation in 2014.

Afghanistan "continues to face a potent threat to its security from terrorism and insurgency being fuelled from outside its borders," he said, in an apparent reference to Pakistan without naming it.

Talking about the proposal for withdrawal of international forces from Afghanistan in 2014, he said there was "a real danger" that there will be "a transition recession; i.E. That attention and aid will decline, just as the Afghan government's security demands increase."

Krishna emphasised the need for averting the possibility "that Afghanistan is let down or made to feel abandoned by, at least in terms of quantity, if not quality," of international assistance required in the era after 2014.

"We should not make the mistakes of the past and let Afghanistan slip back. We must ensure that Afghanistan's security is ensured through non-interference in its internal affairs," he said at the conference being boycotted by Pakistan but attended by world leaders including US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and British Foreign Minister William Hague.

Krishna said the international community had come to Afghanistan as it was under the control of an extremist ideology and under the influence of foreign countries and had become a sanctuary for international terror.

"Terrorism radiated outwards to the region, affecting firstly India, and then other countries. It culminated in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks," he said.

The External Aaffairs Minister said the international community then decided that this would not stand, that this bastion of extremism and terrorism was a threat to mankind and had to be replaced.

"Today, we have to ask ourselves, if that job is done, whether we have succeeded in eliminating terrorism, and the safe havens and sanctuaries from where it is emanating, right from its source," he said.

"We have to ask whether, if we withdraw our holding hand, Afghanistan will be able to withstand the forces of radicalism, extremism and violence, and stand on its own feet," he said.

The answer to this question should decide the nature and level of long-term engagement with Afghanistan, Krishna said.

He said Afghanistan faced deficits on four fronts -- security, governance, development and investment and needed international assistance to face these challenges.

Krishna said political commitments and conference decisions alone were not enough and there was a need to back up the commitments with both resources and actions.

Noting that India was willing to contribute its share, he said Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had pledged an additional USD 500 million to its development effort for Afghanistan until the period 2014.

This was in addition to the USD 1.5 billion India has already pledged to Afghanistan.

Krishna said India has announced the virtual elimination of sensitive lists affecting exports of all least developed SAARC countries to India, including Afghanistan.

India is also assisting Afghanistan in building an Agricultural University to tap the potential in Agriculture in that country, he said.

"We have extended our assistance to Afghanistan for capacity building; increased the number of civil scholarships offered to Afghanistan to enable more students from Afghanistan get requisite training in art, culture and technology, among other areas, to further the process of nation building in Afghanistan," he said.

Krishna said India was also prepared to make long-term investments in Afghanistan and Indian companies were willing to invest up to USD 10 billion in mining, setting up of a steel plant and related infrastructure in Afghanistan.

"These are concrete manifestations of our long-term political commitment to Afghanistan. If others do the same, we could set off a virtuous cycle of healthy economic competition in Afghanistan that benefits Afghanistan and the region," Krishna said.


FILED ON: DEC 05, 2011

news.outlookindia.com | Terror From Outside Poses Threat to Afghanistan: India

 

[Ray]

No one will abandon Afghanistan and hand it over to Pakistan and China.

Too many lives have been lost.

 

[trackwhack]

MEA listening to Vikram Sood now ?

Problem is Pak wants astan in one piece while West/India wants to split it.

Oh wait ! Somebody ask afgans what they want!

Can you elaborate nrj?

 

[pmaitra]

It will be easy for Pakistan and PRC to foment trouble in the region by getting the different ethnic groups to start fighting against each other. Ultimately, the Afghans will have to stay united and not let outsiders divide them.

PRC probably prefers a stable Afghanistan if they get to invest in resources exploitation in Afghanistan. That way, they will have a conflict of interest with Pakistan.

The US and India should do all they can to strengthen the Afghan Armed forces and the government.

 

[Ray]

India should enlarge her toehold.

 

[Virendra]

We're obsessed with being a soft power everywhere. It becomes irritating sometimes, to see many of the results limited only to few sweet words and applause in public forums. Lip service as payback, because we projected ourselves as looking for that only.
Not every headache gives in to the same medicine.

 

[asianobserve]

If this is the case then India should exhibit more cooperation with the US so as to mount an effective anti-China strategic policy while mainaining a rubost Afghan presence at the same time. For a start India should start diplomatically closing ranks with NATO on a broad range of issues so as to diplomatically isolate China.

 

[Iamanidiot]

Any "robust" presence of India in Afghanistan requires a proper logistical route through Iran.Now Iran is at loggerheads with US and Israel

 

[SADAKHUSH]

India and USA should stay as long as Afghanistan has not built a lethal Army to take on the neighbour on the Eastern border. The second logical step should to redraw the Afghanistan map by taking back by force if need be the territory under Pakistan occupation.

 

[SADAKHUSH]

Any "robust" presence of India in Afghanistan requires a proper logistical route through Iran.Now Iran is at loggerheads with US and Israel

I think India can work behind the door to bring an end to the stalemate between Iran and USA. On the question of Iran acquiring Nuclear weapons it will happen without any hitch as USA and Israel are making too much noise without any genuine intention to stop. By letting Iran having the nukes, it makes more sense for Saudi Arabia to ask USA to provide them umbrella for protection whereas Israel can defend itself. This way USA has a legitimate reason to stay in the area under the pretext of providing defensive shield to the countries in the region

 

[asianobserve]

If Iran acquire nukes Saudi Arabia will not ask the US for umbrella, it will also obtain nukes by any means. Saudi will play fire with fire. This is the most worrying part of a nuclear Iran. And after Saudi Arabia acquire nukes, the rest of the ME will follow.

 

[SADAKHUSH]

I am not sure, if USA will by the wayside and let them acquire when their own Kings cannot trust their own forces to provide bodyguards for Kings. If they do succeed than it is going to be a tinder box like situation due to presence of other undesirable elements in the area. On the other side if Iran comes back into USA camp than SA does not have to fear much. It will be back to pre revolution days when it comes to relationship with GCC.