India’s growing clout in Kabul may impact stability

Discussion in 'West Asia & Africa' started by LETHALFORCE, Sep 23, 2009.

  1. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,546
    Likes Received:
    6,549
    India?s growing clout in Kabul may impact stability: US Gen - India - NEWS - The Times of India

    India’s growing clout in Kabul may impact stability: US Gen

    WASHINGTON: As the grandees of the international community gather this week in Pittsburgh, formerly the city of steel, with international economy
    and climate change on top of the agenda, the issue before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his 30-hour sortie there is to figure out why the United States is blowing hot and cold in its dealings with India.

    The mixed signals emanating from Washington is best illustrated by one paragraph, the only one relating to India, in the report by US General Stanley McChrystal about the dire situation in the Af-Pak theatre. It reads: “Indian political and economic influence is increasing in Afghanistan, including significant development efforts and financial investment. In addition, the current Afghan government is perceived by Islamabad to be pro-Indian. While Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India.’’

    Dubbed the “McChrystal Unclear’’ report, the observation has left Indian officials scratching their heads. So what exactly does the remark imply? That India should scale down its influence in Afghanistan, even though its activities “largely benefit the Afghan people”? That the Obama administration needs to ask New Delhi to dilute its presence in Afghanistan in order not to “exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India’’ a thinly-disguised euphemism for Pakistani terrorism?

    In as much as New Delhi is loath to make Pakistan the focus of its exchanges with Washington, preferring to rise above regional issues to tackle a much broader bilateral and international agenda, Islamabad remains a festering sore by its side. In fact, Pakistan, famously described as an “international migraine” by Madeleine Albright, does not make the G-20 cut, but will be the unpleasant ghost in the room both in Pittsburgh and New York where world leaders will confer this week on subjects ranging from climate change to trade barriers.

    The G-20 pow-wow also provides an opportunity for Singh to get some clarity on the US-India civilian nuclear deal, which appears to be getting derailed by President Obama’s zealous pursuit of a non-proliferation agenda he is expected to elaborate on during his UN appearance. Sorting out these complex, inter-related matters – including climate change and trade issues – will be crucial to the success of the Prime Minister’s state visit to Washington DC two months from now, on November 24.

    Foreign secretary Nirupama Rao dropped in on a day-long visit here on Monday to confer with her opposite number William Burns about the bilateral agenda, including vexing counter-terrorism issues where Washington and New Delhi clearly do not see eye-to-eye. In fact, her visit coincided with the US Congress clearing a massive $ 2billion plus aid package for Pakistan that does not inhibit Islamabad from using the military component against India. While Singh has avoided meeting the Pakistani leadership by skipping the UN General Assembly meeting in New York, foreign minister S M Krishna confirmed to TOI that he will be meeting his Pakistan counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi.

    But it is a meeting sans joy or expectation, given Pakistan’s open reluctance to act on its terrorist
    protégés such as Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, although Islamabad undertook some phony custodial measures over the weekend to prepare ground for the exchanges that Krishna says will focus primarily on the issue of Pakistan’s actions — or inaction.

    While Pakistan presents itself as a victim of terrorism, and an innocent one at that, the McChrystal report should disabuse Washington and other Friends of Pakistan (which is meeting in New York this week to dole out additional $ 5 billion) of that.

    “Afghanistan’s insurgency is clearly supported from Pakistan. Senior leaders of the major Afghan insurgent groups are based in Pakistan, are linked with al-Qaida and other violent extremist groups, and are reportedly aided by some elements of Pakistan’s lSI,’’ America’s top General in Afghanistan said.
     
  2.  
  3. mehwish92

    mehwish92 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    61
    India’s growing clout in Kabul may impact stability?...so, is India the problem, or Pakistan the problem? If India is trying to rebuild Afghanistan, and Pakistan believes that India is trying to spy on Pak from Afg - as a result of which it decides to blow up an Indian consulate in Kabul - is it India's fault or Pakistan's fault?

    Should India back out of Afghanistan solely because of Pakistan's "concern"? Rather than lecturing India, maybe they should tell Pak to stop acting immaturely, and to stop blowing things up in India and Afghanistan!
     
  4. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,546
    Likes Received:
    6,549
    USA is stuck in a difficult position in afghanistan, statements like this are to please the pakistanis USA's ally in the afghanistan war.
     
  5. RPK

    RPK Indyakudimahan Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,882
    Likes Received:
    130
    Location:
    13° 4'60.00"N 80°16'60.00"E
    Indian role in Afghanistan may invite Pak reaction: US

    New York: India's growing influence in Afghanistan could "exacerbate" regional tensions and encourage Pakistani "countermeasures" in Afghanistan or India, a top US military commander says.


    At the same time, General Stanley McChrystal, commander of the US and coalition forces in Afghanistan, has in his report to the Pentagon noted that "Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people".

    "Indian political and economic influence is increasing in Afghanistan, including significant development efforts and financial investment. In addition, the current Afghan government is perceived by Islamabad to be pro-Indian," the general said.

    "While Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India," added McChrystal.

    India has pledged $1.2 billion for a host of reconstruction projects in Afghanistan ranging from roads and bridges to power transmission lines and grassroots training.

    Pakistan has repeatedly objected to India having four consulates in Afghanistan in addition to the embassy in Kabul, saying these are used to spy on Islamabad.

    The Pakistani intelligence was blamed for a devastating suicide attack in July 2008 on the Indian embassy in Kabul that killed 58 people including two diplomats and two security personnel from India.

    The Indian consulates are in Mazar-e-Sharif, Herat, Kandahar and Jalalabad.

    McChrystal, in the same report, had asked for a troops' surge in Afghanistan, warning the coalition forces were in danger of losing the war within a year unless this was done.

    US secretary of state Hilary Clinton has shot this down saying: "I can only tell you there are other assessments from very expert military analysts who have worked in counter insurgencies that are the exact opposite."

    Clinton's comments came during an interview to PBS television Monday.
     
  6. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    228
    I just dont understand What this McChrystal is trying to say...one side he says Indian involvement is helping Afghanistan to rebuild and the other side he tells it will create trouble for US from Pakistan. Is US there to establish democracy or a strategic foothold with a supply line...I just dont know...But one thing is clear US is going to colonize Afghanistan against the Asian giants. I can sense it only that way. US is there just to gain a strategic foothold there is nothing called as 'Freedom' and stuff there.
     
  7. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    They just want the entire pie for themselves, and will use all sorts of twisted logic to prove they're right.
     
  8. Sabir

    Sabir DFI TEAM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,118
    Likes Received:
    782
    Doesnt America have the guts to say clearly to Pakistan not to disturb Indian development and rebuilding proggrames in Afganistan.
     
  9. ppgj

    ppgj Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    156
    another instance where USA will never let anybody anywhere to take control. instead of being supportive of the good guy around they are trying to diminish that. if they face problems from pakistan and if one were to beleive it as genuine, then let them face it. they were the partners and creators of the problem. india should just brush aside these and do what they have been doing and bring some semblance of balance and make a difference to the lives of our poor brothers.
     
  10. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,546
    Likes Received:
    6,549
    He is giving a veiled threat that Indian assistance to Afghanistan can become a premise for Pakistan sponsored terrorism. When the next terror incident takes place (after USA aid money arrives) USA can say we told you guys your role in Afghanistann caused this (not the aid money coming from USA).
     
  11. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,546
    Likes Received:
    6,549
    India, US now disagree on Afghanistan crisis


    India, US now disagree on Afghanistan crisis


    The crisis in Afghanistan is the latest source of disagreement between India and the US, with External Affairs Minister SM Krishna rejecting US top commander in Afghanistan, Stanley McChrystal’s remarks that Indian influence in that country was likely “to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani counter-measures.”

    “This is a baseless allegation,” Krishna said in New York, adding, “India’s role in Afghanistan is to help them to stabilise on their infrastructure development…That’s our immediate concern. That is the reason why we were asked to come to Afghanistan. We are building roads, we are building school buildings and we are building transmission lines,” he said.

    Indian officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said they were surprised and angered at the US general’s remarks, describing it as “entrenched Pentagon thinking,” but pointed out that the Obama administration itself seemed divided on its Afghan policy and India’s role in it.

    Krishna also called for a “political settlement” of the Afghan crisis, indicating that Delhi would favour a government of national unity in Afghanistan after the disputed elections, in which people from Abdullah Abdullah’s camp could join a government led by President Hamid Karzai.

    While India issued a statement welcoming the victory of the “democratic forces,” signaling it was ready to do business with Karzai who had won 54.62 per cent of the vote, US officials openly complained of fraud and rigging by Karzai and his men.

    “Karzai is a friend of India, as is Abdullah Abdullah. But if the Afghans have elected him, then his victory is good for Afghanistan and good for India,” a senior official said on condition of anonymity.

    Meanwhile, Peter Galbraith, the UN deputy representative in Kabul and a close friend of “AfPak” envoy Richard Holbrooke, asked for at least 1,000 booths to be re-polled, alleging that they had been rigged by Karzai’s people.

    The divergence of assessment between India and the US on Afghanistan comes in the wake of differences on climate change and non-proliferation issues. Both sides are now hoping that President Barack Obama will reset the tone for America’s India policy when he receives Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on a state visit to Washington DC from November 22-25.

    The prime minister is the first foreign visitor who is being given the honour of a state visit by the Obama administration, but on the ground several differences seem to be widening the perception gap.

    What has really upset India is McChrystal’s refusal to identify the prime motivators behind the insurgency, although he has admitted that the three key groups — the Quetta Shura Taliban, headed by Mullah Omar, who live and direct their operations from the Pakistani city of Quetta, the Haqqani network and the Hezb-i-Islami of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar — are supported “from Pakistan”.

    “In Helmand, which is the size of Switzerland, the insurgents carry out strikes in Afghanistan and then slip back into Pakistan. But is anyone going after the Quetta Shura?” asked a government official.
     
  12. StealthSniper

    StealthSniper Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    Likes Received:
    56
    Location:
    With Stealth Ninja Assassins
    Reading these articles are reaffirming to me why I don't trust the Americans. If you noticed, if something is threatening their plans or interest they are quick to blame someone. Right now Pakistan is America's ally and it doesn't matter how helpful India is to another country or how it is stabilizing the region in the end India is wrong. Also I find it ironic that they are in Afghanistan to stop terrorism when they are allies with a country that promotes terrorism and harbours terrorist in it's country.

    I actually think Americans are destabilizing the region and creating more problems then fixing them.
     
  13. Rajan

    Rajan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    1
    If theywant to please pakistan that means they dont want to win the war. There is something fishy here. They knows that pakistan supporting AQ and other terrorist organisations but still aiding pakistan and want to please it against India and Afghanistan!!!! India is contributing large amount of man power and money in Afghanistan's reconstruction destroyed by pakistan aided talibans but USA dont want it!!! Something really fishy.
     
  14. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,546
    Likes Received:
    6,549
    something has been fishy for a long time; fighting a war on terror and not going after the terrorists.
     
  15. ppgj

    ppgj Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    156
    a good reason to stay forever.
     
  16. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    Very true. The USMC could find Saddam Hussein in hiding within weeks of Operation Iraqi Freedom. It's been what, 8 years? and still no sign of Osama Bin Laden. It's almost as if this is an orchestration.

    "The War on Terror" is such a broad-spectrum term that it's almost ambiguous. Another such term by the Americans is the dreaded "New World Order", which really is just a resumption of the Anglo-American power center/dominion.
     
  17. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,546
    Likes Received:
    6,549
    USA has closed the division that is searching for Osama. Something fishy again.

    CIA Closes bin Laden Department - Blogcritics Politics
     
  18. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    So you see, ye olde British model of "invade, depopulate, colonize" hasn't gone anywhere, only this time around, colonization has mutated from veni, vidi, vici to economic parasitism.
     
  19. ppgj

    ppgj Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    156
    the best part of the whole show is how well pakistan keeps double crossing the usa. beating them at their own game.
     
  20. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    That's because the Americans let them double-cross them to make headlines/opinions. America is well aware of what Pakistan is using its aid money for, and how genuine their end of the deal for "fighting the war against terror" really is. Yet nothing stops monetary aid. Aid beggar is one of Pakistan's biggest industry. "Friends of Pakistan" is its platform/footpath. "Don't let Pakistan fail, for your own good" is the cry.
     
  21. ppgj

    ppgj Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    156
    tarun, agree partly. the thing is USA needs human intel too inspite of all their hitech stuff and somebody to fight the WOT(?) in pakistan. only pakistan can provide that in the name sovereignty. so while knowing what pakistan does with the aid USA is still half blind, which gives pakistan the space to keep them that way and curry aid. also pak knows the moment all this is over USA just may walk away they did in the past which means they will lose money plus they have to fight all those guys on their own (who have turned from friends to enemy now 'cos of siding with USA) which they dread. so keep the drama going for as long as it takes.
     

Share This Page