US can either fight terrorism or support PA!

Discussion in 'West Asia & Africa' started by johnee, Oct 9, 2009.

  1. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    466
    Forbes

    A very good point made by the author. This is the point that Indian politicians must make to US, either fight terrorism or support PA. US cant do both. US is effectively funding the terrorism against India and our interests abroad. Why does GOI never raise this issue with US(even though its an open secret)? Instead, our PM issues ridiculous statements like 'India and Pakistan are both victims of terrorism', effectively rubbishing the Indian case that Pakistan State is sponsoring terrorism against India.
     
  2.  
  3. Martian

    Martian Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,303
    Likes Received:
    237
    Location:
    Boston
    Geopolitics is complicated. It cannot be viewed through a simple lens. Countries have multiple objectives; not just one.

    US does not want any of its soldiers to die in the lawless Pakistani NWFP. Consequently, US must provide financial assistance/bribe to Pakistan. Pakistan may have diverted some of the money for its own use.

    US is also interested in making lots of money from billions of dollars of sales to Indian military. A bonus is that a technologically upgraded Indian military will create a pressure point on China. This will lessen Chinese military and political influence in Asia.

    US relations with Pakistan may not serve India's interests. US selling of high-tech arms to India does further Indian interests. In conclusion, the reality is that the US is a frenemy (friend/enemy) of India. American goal is simple. America wants to advance American interests, otherwise she could not have become a superpower.

    By the way, India is not in a position, economically or militarily, to dictate to America to choose to either "fight terrorism or support PA." Sorry guys, that's the reality.
     
  4. qsaark

    qsaark Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    2
    America is a friend of no country. America will support India only that far. America or even Russia will not help India or any other country for that matter to give a decisive edge over China. It is not only China that they want to contain; they also want to stop India from becoming more powerful both militarily and economically beyond a certain point.
     
  5. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,343
    Likes Received:
    6,293
    I also wonder if we should be playing a china containment role for USA? If relations were better with China we would not be in this self imposed position, maybe things can change and USA will have to face China on their own? Also if China is not #2 for any reason and India is in the #2 spot guess who USA will be actively undermining??
     
  6. ppgj

    ppgj Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    156
    many times different countries' interests coincide like in india-china context. i guess india is not playing for USA, rather taking care of its own interest. if a helping hand is extended, they may take it.
    that is really interesting.
     
  7. thakur_ritesh

    thakur_ritesh Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,434
    Likes Received:
    1,719
    Location:
    Land of the GODS - "Dev Bhomi".
    there is certainly not a case of “either”, “or” but one certainly of “and”. without a doubt americans need the support of the pakistan army or else there will be planes after planes heading back home with coffins of dead usaf soldiers from a'stan and they certainly need to fight the terrorists or else the very reason of them being in afpak gets defeated.

    pakistan and especially the pakistan army fits into the scheme of things very well for the americans. the geographic location gives them access to car, south asia and especially to new rising powers india and the prc and through the presence in pakistan the us can further its agenda in the region very well and keep a check on all the activity in the region and for this the pakistan army is the key which happens to be the de facto force running affairs of pakistan.

    one cant fault the americans in doing that, they are just making sure their interests are well looked after and as a matter of fact they are being, not one terror attack has happened since 9/11 and if we are expecting anything else as in they might look after our interests, well then indeed in future we are in for a shock.

    LF,

    we need the us and that is the need of the hour. chinese have made good use of the americans and see to what a dominant position they have reached. india wants to make the same use of the us. a certain nuke deal did not happen out of no where, india today is so active in a'stan all thanks to the us, pakistan listens to our concerns to whatever extent is all thanks to the us, there is hardly any pressure on us with regards to kashmir again thanks to the us and there is a lot more to the credit of the us that we need to be thankful for and if tomorrow india intends to be a permanent member of unsc then without a doubt the us will be required more than ever before.

    india has its apprehensions about the rise of china and this is a concern which gets shared by the americans and till the time the us is convinced that the rise of china will bring no harm to them till then the us will have interest in propping us up.

    good relations with the prc is a very difficult thing to have, certainly not today since we today negotiate from a point of weakness. to begin with india will most certainly have to expel dalai lama and the other tibetans and declare them a terrorist outfit. chinese are hungry for land like none other and for the border dispute to settle india will have to handover arunachal to them along with other areas that are a reason for contention between our two countries, and lastly the prc would want india to play its subordinate as is played by pakistan, where india will be a second fiddle and we will quite clearly have to accept the dominance of china in the region and as a future super power and we will have to commit that we will never be any sort of a threat to them.

    will india ever dare and say yes on any of these three accounts, and i may add, never. so there is no way one can see brotherly or friendly relations between the prc and india in times to come. india has to grow to a point of immense strength to force the chinese to accept us the way we are and here the us will and is already playing a big role by making our uphill drive to the top a little easier.

    in today's context, the moment we move to the prc, the pakistanis with their inherent fear about us will not take a second to move completely in the fold of the americans and slowly and steadily b'desh will as well do the same and our border with pakistan will again become a case of frequent ceasefire breakouts with increased level of infiltration with hardly any checks like in the past. as of today there is not much to be gained with having good relations with the prc when compared to the advantages we gain by having good relation with the us, there will come a time for those good relations with the prc even at the expense of having not so good relations with the us but that time is certainly not today, but a few decades from today.
     
  8. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,268
    Location:
    011
    With all due respect I will have to disagree.

    US couldn't stop India from
    1. Conducting Nuclear tests in 74 and 98
    2. Achieving a trillion dollar economy
    3. Becoming one of the fastest growing economy
    4. Developing Ballistic Missiles
    5. Acquiring Aircraft Carriers
    6. Producing Nuclear Subs
    7. Developing Spy Sats
    etc.

    The only thing stopping India from becoming more powerful economically and militarily is India itself. (Same goes for Pakistan, China etc.)
     
  9. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,268
    Location:
    011
    --

    Beijing’s Afghan Gamble


    IN Afghanistan’s Logar Province, just south of Kabul, the geopolitical future of Asia is becoming apparent: American troops are providing security for a Chinese state-owned company to exploit the Aynak copper reserves, which are worth tens of billions of dollars. While some of America’s NATO allies want to do as little as possible in the effort to stabilize Afghanistan, China has its eyes on some of world’s last untapped deposits of copper, iron, gold, uranium and precious gems, and is willing to take big risks in one of the most violent countries to secure them.

    In Afghanistan, American and Chinese interests converge. By exploiting Afghanistan’s metal and mineral reserves, China can provide thousands of Afghans with jobs, thus generating tax revenues to help stabilize a tottering Kabul government. Just as America has a vision of a modestly stable Afghanistan that will no longer be a haven for extremists, China has a vision of Afghanistan as a secure conduit for roads and energy pipelines that will bring natural resources from the Indian Ocean and elsewhere. So if America defeats Al Qaeda and the irreconcilable elements of the Taliban, China’s geopolitical position will be enhanced.

    This is not a paradox, since China need not be our future adversary. Indeed, combining forces with China in Afghanistan might even improve the relationship between Washington and Beijing. The problem is that while America is sacrificing its blood and treasure, the Chinese will reap the benefits. The whole direction of America’s military and diplomatic effort is toward an exit strategy, whereas the Chinese hope to stay and profit.

    But what if America decides to leave, or to drastically reduce its footprint to a counterterrorism strategy focused mainly on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border? Then another scenario might play out. Kandahar and other areas will most likely fall to the Taliban, creating a truly lawless realm that wrecks China’s plans for an energy and commodities passageway through South Asia. It would also, of course, be a momentous moral victory achieved by radical Muslims who, having first defeated the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, will then have triumphed over another superpower.

    And the calculations get more complicated still: a withdrawal of any kind from Afghanistan before a stable government is in place would also hurt India, a critical if undeclared American ally, and increasingly a rival of China. Were the Taliban to retake Afghanistan, India would face a radical Islamistan stretching from its border with Pakistan deep into Central Asia. With the Taliban triumphant on Pakistan’s western border, jihadists there could direct their energies to the eastern border with India.

    India would defeat Pakistan in a war, conventional or nuclear. But having to do so, or simply needing to face down a significantly greater jihadist threat next door, would divert India’s national energies away from further developing its economy and its navy, a development China would quietly welcome.

    Bottom line: China will find a way to benefit no matter what the United States does in Afghanistan. But it probably benefits more if we stay and add troops to the fight. The same goes for Russia. Because of continuing unrest in the Islamic southern tier of the former Soviet Union, Moscow has an interest in America stabilizing Afghanistan (though it would take a certain psychological pleasure from a humiliating American withdrawal).

    In nuts-and-bolts terms, if we stay in Afghanistan and eventually succeed, other countries will benefit more than we will. China, India and Russia are all Asian powers, geographically proximate to Afghanistan and better able, therefore, to garner practical advantages from any stability our armed forces would make possible.

    Everyone keeps saying that America is not an empire, but our military finds itself in the sort of situation that was mighty familiar to empires like that of ancient Rome and 19th-century Britain: struggling in a far-off corner of the world to exact revenge, to put down the fires of rebellion, and to restore civilized order. Meanwhile, other rising and resurgent powers wait patiently in the wings, free-riding on the public good we offer. This is exactly how an empire declines, by allowing others to take advantage of its own exertions.

    Of course, one could make an excellent case that an ignominious withdrawal from Afghanistan is precisely what would lead to our decline, by demoralizing our military, signaling to our friends worldwide that we cannot be counted on and demonstrating that our enemies have greater resolve than we do. That is why we have no choice in Afghanistan but to add troops and continue to fight.

    But as much as we hone our counterinsurgency skills and develop assets for the “long war,” history would suggest that over time we can more easily preserve our standing in the world by using naval and air power from a distance when intervening abroad. Afghanistan should be the very last place where we are a land-based meddler, caught up in internal Islamic conflict, helping the strategic ambitions of the Chinese and others.

    Robert D. Kaplan is a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and a correspondent for The Atlantic.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/07/opinion/07kaplan.html?_r=1
     
  10. Martian

    Martian Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,303
    Likes Received:
    237
    Location:
    Boston
    "In Afghanistan, American and Chinese interests converge."

    Singh, that's a good article. It demonstrates that US and China are very alike. Despite being competitors/rivals, they are willing to work together to pursue their self-interests.

    "American troops are providing security for a Chinese state-owned company to exploit the Aynak copper reserves"

    The US and China are strange bedfellows. However, they both exhibit a common feature of extreme pragmatism.
     
  11. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    US/NATO is now in a quagmire called Afghanistan. US is actually funding Pakistan to kill its own soldiers. The logical sequence goes like this.

    US/NATO is in Afghanistan to stabilize it and give the power to Afghans so they can rule themselves. This will make their exit from Afghanistan respectful and graceful in the eyes of the world.

    The only hindrance US/NATO has to achieve this goal is Taliban which under the tutelage of Al-Qaeda is attacking US/NATO soldiers and Afghan infrastructure and keeping the Afghan society insecure with no sense of stability being resorted.

    So, why can't US/NATO kill these Afghan Taliban??. That is because Afghan taliban has safe sanctuaries across the Afghanistan/Pakistan border from where they operate, more precisely hit and run.

    So what is Pakistan doing and why Pakistan is being funded by US/NATO to fight taliban?.

    Taliban are a creation of Pakistan Army/ISI who were formed by clubbing together of the Mujahideen who fought soviet. Post soviet vacation of Afghanistan, Taliban came to rule Afghanistan and they enforced most extreme and barbaric form of Islamic fundamentalism and way of life. Al-Qaeda under the tutelage of Taliban led by Mullah Omar has used Afghanistan to plan 9/11 attacks. As a result, US/NATO came after both Al-Qaeda and Taliban which drove them into safe sanctuaries in Pakistan. Pakistan did nothing at this stage to stop them from coming into Pakistan and establishing safe havens. And American lost focus on Afghanistan due to preoccupation by Iraq invasion. This gave Musharaff leverage and breathing space to nurture the Taliban for future strategic depth in Afghanistan when US/NATO exits.

    Musharraf has double timed Americans by hunting with hounds and running with hares. He captured some third or fourth ranking leaders of Al-qaeda and handed them over to US while covertly supporting the Taliban. But due to increased influence of Taliban in Pakistan, local people in NWFP/FATA were radicalized and formed the so called Pakistani Taliban (TTP) led by Baitullah Mehsud who was a mule driver and ferried the Taliban from Afghanistan to Pakistan during the attacks by US/NATO post-9/11 attacks. As a result, he has earned a lot of money and good will from Taliban that he was able to establish his own Army of 5000 people who were well weaponized and mobile and their aim was to establish Islamic way of life in Pakistan. But then Musharraff made peace deals with such people like Behtullah mehsud by not acting against the Taliban and in exchange wanted them to not attack Pakistan and its Army. But during this peace time TTP has grown in size, power and lethality. The turning point to all this charade was Pakistani army attack on 'Lal Masjid' during which madrassa students from NWFP/FATA in lal masjid were killed and this enraged the parents and tribal of NWFP/FATA and this in turn led to increased attacks on Pakistan by TTP who resented the Musharaff's action on Lal masjid.

    In the past couple of years the situation has deteriorated so much that Pakistani Army had to take action against Pakistan Taliban led by Baitullah Mehsud. So, they started pounding SWAT with Artillery and air dropped bombs leading to massive humanitarian crisis of internally displaced persons. Eventually, a drone got to Baitullah Mehsud and killed him but then it is being now led by Hakemullah mehsud, who was deputy of Baitullah Mehsud.

    In the mean time, Afghan Taliban represented by so called 'Quetta Shura' was gathering resources and increasing in its power and launched attacks on US/NATO soldiers killing the maximum number in 2008 after 2001 invasion of Afghanistan by US/NATO. The Afghan Taliban comprise of Mullah Omar, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Jalaluddin Haqqani led groups. Jalaluddin Haqqani network is suspected to be the one which attacked Indian Kabul embassy in 2008 at the behest of ISI and many intelligence agencies have corroborated to this fact based on the intercepts tapped by them between Taliban and their ISI handlers in Pakistan. And Pakistan has never acted on these groups at all. Due to lack of intelligence in the hands of US/NATO on these groups, they are unable to launch Drone attacks. Pakistan has supplied intelligence on Pakistani taliban for Drone attacks but no intelligence was provided on Afghan Taliban for the Drone attacks.

    While Pakistan happily used the funding from US to buy military hardware to be used against India instead of buying weapons required for counter-insurgency ops against Taliban. None other than Musharraf accepted this fact in unequivocal terms. At the same time, Pakistan Army is still handling the Afghan Taliban by providing intelligence about the American attacks and by providing resources. They want to use Afghan Taliban for increased attacks on US/NATO soldiers and forcing them to exit increasingly quagmire situation in Afghanistan. This will pave way for Afghanistan to be ruled once again by Taliban and giving Pakistan the so-called 'strategic depth' against India.

    Pakistani sincerity will be proven only when they go after the Afghan Taliban ('Quetta Shura') but that seems to be very unlikely for now. They are only acting against Pakistani Taliban (TTP) which is a threat to Pakistan but not to US/NATO. Interesting times ahead.
     

Share This Page