Afghanistan Is Now India's Problem

Anonymous

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
114
Likes
13
This week, the second U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue under the aegis of Barack Obama's administration will be held in New Delhi. While much attention will undoubtedly focus on July 13's horrific bombings in Mumbai, it's the impending drawdown of U.S. forces from Afghanistan that will likely consume most of the discussions.

India is a significant player in Afghanistan. It has the world's fifth-largest aid program there, having committed $1.5 billion in developmental assistance. It has played a key role in reconstruction and has developed training programs for Afghan civil servants and police. India has made these investments in the country because its policymakers are keen on ensuring that a radical Islamist regime does not return to the country, that Pakistan not wield a disproportionate influence on any future government, and that Afghanistan might serve as a bridgehead for India's economic ties to the Central Asian states.

But as the U.S. military drawdown has begun, there is growing apprehension in New Delhi that India's investments may be at risk. These fears are far from chimerical; India's past experiences with the Taliban regime provide much basis for serious anxieties -- and not just due to the radical movement's long-standing ties to Pakistan.

Above all, India fears that a reconstituted Taliban regime would allow a host of anti-Indian terrorist groups, most notably Lashkar-e-Taiba, to find sanctuaries and training grounds in Afghanistan. Some astute New Delhi-based analysts also worry that a resurgent Taliban may actually help broker a peace agreement between the Pakistani regime and Pakistani domestic terrorist groups like Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan. That, they argue, could redirect the collective wrath of various jihadi organizations from internecine conflict and focus it on India, and more specifically Indian-controlled Kashmir. Finally, they are concerned that a Taliban-dominated regime would forge links with the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and other jihadi groups in Central Asia, thereby adversely affecting India's quest for access to energy resources and markets in the region.

Yet New Delhi also sees the writing on the wall. In mid-June this year, India dropped its previously unyielding opposition to any form of reconciliation with the Taliban when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh suggested that India would be open to any form of reconciliation that is Afghan-led. This concession was far from trivial, and reflects India's recognition that it needs to demonstrate a degree of flexibility as the U.S. withdrawal approaches to ensure that its interests are not wholly ignored.

According to an ABC poll conducted in December 2008 and January 2009, India is popular in Afghanistan, despite its past mistakes during the Soviet invasion and occupation of the country. Yet without security, it is far from clear that India will be able to maintain its current profile in the country. Thanks to Pakistani intransigence (with America's acquiescence), India has been unable to place any viable security contingent in Afghanistan and has also shied away from training the Afghan army. Even its substantial diplomatic presence within the country has been subject to routine Pakistani diplomatic barrages and, in all likelihood, at least one Pakistan-linked attack on its embassy in Kabul, in October 2009. Despite these pressures, India has stuck to its guns in the country and has continued with its developmental activities. India will not easily walk away from Afghanistan.

That said, India's policymakers have yet to devise anything resembling a viable plan for a post-ISAF Afghanistan. Neither the Afghan National Army nor the Afghan National Police are up to the task of coping with a resurgent Taliban, and most foreign troops are scheduled to leave by 2014. So far, India's plans consist largely of hand-wringing and facile hopes.

Key members of the policy establishment apparently believe that the gradual American shift from counterinsurgency to counterterrorism will work. From their perspective, the steady erosion of the Taliban leadership through airstrikes and Special Forces raids could weaken the movement sufficiently to enable President Hamid Karzai's government to survive the U.S. drawdown. In large measure, their analysis draws on the experience of Mohammad Najibullah's regime, which survived a full three years after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. Compared with that brutal, Soviet-backed regime, Karzai's government, while widely perceived to be corrupt and inept, still commands some shred of legitimacy.

India's historic ties to the Northern Alliance could be helpful. Yet New Delhi has yet to decide when to decisively mobilize its contacts to prevent a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. Meanwhile, it appears strangely content with maintaining links with the Karzai regime and bolstering its developmental assistance programs in the country.

Given the stakes involved, a small handful of Indian security analysts has started to publicly argue that India should offer to train Afghan security personnel. They stress that such a policy choice would not only bolster the Karzai regime but would also enable India to help shape Afghan's political future. Sadly, the Indian political leadership has shown little inclination to act on this proposal.

Simultaneously, Washington has evinced little interest in promoting that prospect for fear that it would promptly elicit strenuous Pakistani objections. Quite predictably, its political and military leadership will argue that such a policy shift would grant India undue political influence within Afghanistan and prove detrimental to Pakistan's security. Such objections notwithstanding, Pakistan should not be in a position to exercise a unit veto over Indian policy choices.

Bluntly put, given the growing evidence of the Pakistani military's duplicity in sustaining the Taliban, its misgivings may have to be set aside. Despite its professions of cooperation, and after nearly $12 billion worth of U.S. assistance over the past decade, it has proved to be a Janus-faced ally. India's interest in ensuring a non-Talibanized Afghanistan actually dovetails with those of the United States. In this context, it is worth recalling that it was the Taliban that played host to Osama bin Laden after he was forced to leave Sudan. There is little reason to allow them to find their way back to power in Kabul, Karzai's recent overtures notwithstanding. Given that India shares a compelling strategic interest in preventing their resurgence and possesses the requisite institutional capacity to train Afghan security forces, Washington should prod it to assume that burden.

As U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her entourage sit down with their Indian counterparts, a candid discussion of the regional implications of the troop drawdown is more important than ever. The United States may have the option of washing its hands of Afghanistan, but India does not.
Source: Afghanistan Is Now India's Problem - By Sumit Ganguly | Foreign Policy

With United States getting over it's adventure in Afghanistan now India will have to tackle Afghanistan in the coming days.
 

sanjay

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
459
Likes
186
Screw that - we don't want to be stuck under UN command, especially when Pak Taliban forces aren't, and also when Pak crony China is on the UNSC.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
48,599
Country flag
Screw that - we don't want to be stuck under UN command, especially when Pak Taliban forces aren't, and also when Pak crony China is on the UNSC.
This could be a good way to get around not being able to place a military directly there and have in funded by the UN,while achieveing strategic goals. If US likes the idea China will not be a factor they have not been able to stop Indian/un peacekeeping forces elsewhere. USA may even like the idea since it keeps Chinese communist expansion in check.
 

gogbot

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
937
Likes
120
We are not shackled to Afghanistan , if even after total US withdrawal around 2015-16. Afghans don't have enough control we would just have to pull out as well.

If the Afghans can hold their own against the Taliban we can provide some sort of support.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
48,599
Country flag
We are not shackled to Afghanistan , if even after total US withdrawal around 2015-16. Afghans don't have enough control we would just have to pull out as well.

If the Afghans can hold their own against the Taliban we can provide some sort of support.
Building military ties and funding/gifting can be an indirect approach.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
...
Thanks to Pakistani intransigence (with America's acquiescence), India has been unable to place any viable security contingent in Afghanistan and has also shied away from training the Afghan army.
...
Source: Afghanistan Is Now India's Problem - By Sumit Ganguly | Foreign Policy

With United States getting over it's adventure in Afghanistan now India will have to tackle Afghanistan in the coming days.


My two cents:

India Commits To Help Afghan Security Forces
India promises to continue training Afghan security forces
 
Last edited:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
High And Dry

AFGHANISTAN: INDIAN ROLE
High And Dry
The West deals India new Afghan cards
PRANAY SHARMA



Newly-trained Afgan army soldiers pose before trucks donated by India

Indian Investment
  • $1.7 billion
  • key projects: power, hospitals, schools, the parliament power, hospitals, schools, the parliament

The London Conference on Afghanistan on January 28 has raised the spectre of the Taliban returning to the political centrestage, prompting many an alarmist in South Block to predict that India's worst nightmare is about to come true. In other words, the possible return of the Taliban has invariably been seen as a remarkable gain for Pakistan.

The conference has belied efforts of the Indian government to persuade its western interlocutors and the Afghan government of Hamid Karzai that the theory of "good Taliban and bad Taliban" is illusory. New Delhi had vigorously argued that the Taliban were votaries of the most virulent brand of Islam, and responsible for the devastation and instability in Afghanistan. London, consequently, was a rude shock, demonstrating the eagerness of most western powers to seal a rapprochement with the Taliban, and cobble together an arrangement in Kabul that would justify their early exit from Afghanistan.

As the news from London confirmed the worst fears of New Delhi, a senior official of the ministry of external affairs told Outlook, "Irrespective of what happened in London, the people of Afghanistan know what we are doing for them and they continue to show their support for our reconstruction effort." Aren't these just brave words aimed at justifying large sums of money, time and energy expended on Afghanistan for the past nine years?

Many in New Delhi want India to train the Afghan National Army. A role in bolstering it can yield rich dividends for India.
Obviously, India will have to rethink its Afghan policy. Some say New Delhi should review its existing policy of not committing troops in Afghanistan. The issue was discussed at a recent meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. India's reluctance to send troops there is guided by two factors. Since the US is crucially dependent on Pakistan to stabilise Afghanistan, it's quite possible Washington won't accept India's offer, apprehensive of the anxiety it could stoke in Islamabad. Second, there are many who feel India should send troops to a foreign land only under the United Nations banner.

This is the reason why many in the Indian establishment propose another option—train the Afghan National Army (ANA), more so because the London conference wants to put in place over 170,000 army personnel and another 140,000 Afghan policemen to take control of the country and contain fractious blood-letting. No better than a paramilitary force, the ANA remains poorly trained and ill-equipped as the US and others are wary of leaving sophisticated artillery in the hands of Afghan soldiers. India can step into this vacuum, putting in place effective infantry, artillery and armoured divisions.

Tipped as the ANA is to become a key player in Afghanistan's future, a role in bolstering it could yield India rich dividends. Some say this perhaps is the only way India could safeguard its investment of over $1.7 billion in Afghanistan. This investment include projects ranging from setting up power generation and distribution systems, schools, hospitals and other important buildings, including the Afghan parliament—essentially schemes that meet the "demands, needs and aspirations" of the people of Afghanistan. It has also been training a number of teachers, policemen, civil servants, and recently offered to train Afghans in the field of agriculture—a crucial sector in the Afghan economy.

But the million-dollar question is: can the US and other western powers be convinced by India that it's the best bet for engendering peace in this land at the heart of the fight for global security?

Source: www.outlookindia.com | High And Dry
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Rest assured that teh US will not "totally" pull out from Afghanistan. The mind boggling cost of the war in economic terms and the strategic importance of that country to the US willd definitely outweigh all arguments in the US for total withdrawal. India can capitalize on this either by directly sending troops there or actively funneling weapons, equipments, money ad training to the Afghans. UN stabilisation force will only clip the hands of the US and India in Afghanistan.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top