Indian Role in Afghanistan

Discussion in 'Foreign Relations' started by A.V., Mar 14, 2009.

  1. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    270
    Wow...six to seven Indians cause terrorism in Pakistan?...What were these guys smoking when they told this?....Seems Pakistan has got a lot of Zaid Hamid's even in its bureaucracy.
     
  2. Flint

    Flint Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,583
    Likes Received:
    26
    Well think about it. Who is Zaid Hamid's audience? Middle class Pakistanis. Which group forms the bulk of this middle class? Government employees of course.
     
  3. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    270
    Ok Flint I am all for Indian troops in Afghanistan...but under whom will we fight?...Definitely not under NATO as it is against our foreign policy. We must establish a whole command for our soldiers, Facilities, quarters, Food...et al. This sounds like a very costly affair. Instead we can train Afghan soldiers and build them a good military infrastructure.
     
  4. jackprince

    jackprince Turning into a frog Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,991
    Likes Received:
    4,102
    Location:
    soon to be Bengalistan
    Why should it be under someone? Your suggestion of entirely different infrastructure is reasonable. It's costly in deed, but it has it's advantage and bigger than the money issue. India gets to have strategic depth against Pakistan, and takes a gr8 leap in international arena too.

    But training Afghan soldiers is not something that would do any good IMO. India already trains bunch of Afghan officers; NATO also train them. But ultimately to what end? Afghan army simply don't have the depth or experience they need to face the Taliban terrorism problem.
     
  5. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,313
    Likes Received:
    8,322
    Location:
    011
    Indian troops are led by foreign commanders as part of UN forces. In any case, this Indian contingent will be tasked (joint?) responsiblity to patrol at most for 1 or 2 districts along with providing security cover to the projects which they are financing/building. Getting supplies is easy for India. (Iran). Cost to supply our troops in Astan will be cheaper imho than supplying our troops in North East or Kashmir. We are already training a few Afghan services(eg foreign service) but since NATO has been there and will be there, training part they would like to adminster. When the NATO are done, Afghan CO's will be trained by IA likely.
     
  6. deltacamelately

    deltacamelately Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    5
    3 principle points to consider.
    1. What is the US's perspective vis-a-vis Indian military presence in Astan?
    2. Who bears the overall cost, India, US or both?
    3. Will Iran allow transit of logistic and military ware through Chabahar?

    Asides, the IA has more than enough capabilities and experience to mount COIN operations in Astan. The terrain is just too similar, the enemy even more.
     
  7. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,291
    Likes Received:
    11,485
    Location:
    BANGalore
    India will not get involved in the US war there. We want our troops to safeguard our interest in Astan and also the presence of our troops there will be nightmare for Pakistan who will then wonder which border to concentrate on with Indian troops on both sides of its borders.

    India will bear the costs of its own deployment and extract the value for using its influence with Iran in allowing supplies to the US to be routed through Chhabar and the road that India built to Astan.
     
  8. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,313
    Likes Received:
    8,322
    Location:
    011
    India to get Afghan transit trade route

    WASHINGTON: Pakistan and Afghanistan signed on Wednesday a memorandum of understanding to begin talks on a transit trade agreement which will ultimately allow India to use the Wagah-Khyber route for trade with Kabul.

    The memorandum of understanding commits the two ‘countries to achieving a trade transit agreement by the end of the year, which we believe will have great economic benefits for both peoples,’ said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who hosted the Afghan and Pakistani presidents for the first round of the second trilateral talks.

    ‘This is an historic event. This agreement has been under discussion for 43 years without resolution,’ she said.

    ‘Afghanistan and Pakistan have reached an important milestone in their efforts to generate foreign investment and stronger economic growth and trade opportunities.’

    Secretary Clinton also used the opportunity to regret the loss of innocent lives in US bombings, saying that ‘she wanted to convey to the people of both Afghanistan and Pakistan that ‘we will work very hard with your governments and with your leaders to avoid the loss of innocent civilian life. And we deeply, deeply regret that loss’.

    Later, the Afghan and Pakistani foreign ministers signed the memorandum before Presidents Asif Ali Zardari and Hamid Karzai went to the White House for a trilateral summit with President Barack Obama.

    ‘Pakistan and Afghanistan are conjoined twins. Our suffering is shared. Our joys are always shared,’ said President Karzai while talking to the media after Secretary Clinton.

    ‘The life that we live is affected by the opportunities that we have and the lack of opportunities that occurs because of the circumstances in which we live today.’

    ‘Today we sit here as three democratic states, enjoined in the history of democracy, looking forward to working together,’ said President Zardari while responding to his remarks.

    Although India is not mentioned in the memorandum of understanding, it will be the main beneficiary of a transit trade agreement between Pakistan and Afghanistan as Kabul’s major trade partner.

    Both India and Afghanistan have long insisted that Pakistan open its land route for transit trade between the two countries which do not have a common border.

    But Secretary Clinton said that the opening of a transit trade route will also open new opportunities for both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

    ‘When … I look at the map of the world and see how strategically located both countries are, this is an agreement that will bring prosperity to both countries along the trade routes and beyond,’ she said.

    ‘Nothing opens up an area to economic development better than a good road with good transit rules and an ability to transport goods and people effectively.’

    The agreement, she said, would also help bring more foreign direct investment into Afghanistan and Pakistan, because that’s always the first question: ‘How do we get our goods to market? How do we get them to another economy in another country?’

    Secretary Clinton brought a high-powered delegation to the talks which included Director CIA Leon Panetta, Director FBI Robert Mueller, Pentagon’s Under-secretary for Policy Planning Michele Flournoy, and chief of the US Central Command General David Petraeus.

    The Pakistani delegation, headed by President Zardari, also included Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, three ministers, several advisers and the DG ISI.

    Bilawal Zardari, two ministers, advisers and the DG ISI left after the first round so did the CIA and FBI chiefs and Afghan intelligence and military officials.

    SECOND ROUND
    Only the two presidents, their foreign ministers and envoys in Washington attended the second round with Secretary Clinton who was assisted by the US special envoy Richard Holbrooke.

    Secretary Clinton said that Wednesday’s discussions focussed on concrete initiatives to expand economic opportunities and trade, to bolster the agricultural sector as an essential source of revenue and jobs in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

    The three countries also discussed measures to help build the industrial sector in Pakistan, to create more jobs and opportunities for people. They also discussed measures to improve joint cooperation on security.

    ‘We do not believe either Afghanistan or Pakistan can achieve lasting progress without the full participation of all of your citizens, including women and girls. The rights of women must be respected and protected.’

    President Zardari urged the US, ‘the world’s oldest and most powerful democracy’, to nurture democracies in other countries.

    ‘We thank the United States for its support for democracy, for security in Pakistan, and look forward to further support,’ he said. The president said that Afghanistan, Pakistan, and United States were all victims of terror.

    ‘I am here to assure you that we shall share this burden with you all, for no matter how long it takes and what it takes, democracies will deliver,’ he said. ‘My democracy will deliver.’

    The Pakistanis, he said, stood with ‘our brother Karzai and the people of Afghanistan against this common threat … this is a cancer. It needs to be done away with.’

    The president said that Pakistan carried a huge burden of confronting al Qaeda and Taliban together, ‘but we are up to the challenge because we are a democracy, and democracy is the only cure to this challenge.’

    Mr Zardari said that as the United States was making progress after seven years of engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan, Pakistan will too.

    He said that democracy in Pakistan was only seven months old and during this period, the government had performed better than the dictatorships in the past years.

    Mr Zardari said that Pakistan would need high level of support in the days to come and would also be far more transparent in its actions.

    ‘Democracy will avenge the death of my wife and thousands of other Pakistanis and citizens of the world. Pakistani democracy will deliver. The terrorists will be defeated by our joint struggle,’ he said.

    Afghan President Karzai welcomed the US promise to minimize civilian deaths in the fight against the Taliban, hoping that the US could work together with Pakistan and Afghanistan to reduce and eventually completely remove the possibilities of civilian casualties.

    ‘Afghanistan would like to assure the United States, its most valued strategic ally, and Pakistan, its neighbor, brother and friend’ that it would do its best to defeat the terrorists.

    DAWN.COM | World | India to get Afghan transit trade route
     
  9. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,313
    Likes Received:
    8,322
    Location:
    011
    We must not leave out the Afghan reaction to our military presence. Afghans are deeply suspicious people when it comes to foreign intervention or military presence.

    Our propaganda free media is favoured over pak media, our development efforts are favoured over pak aid to taliban, our intentions are favoured over pak intentions(durand line) etc.

    It would be in our interest to kill many birds with 1 stone, ie. make nato do the dirty work and get brickbats in exchange, win afghan hearts with development projects, ensure pak army has no excuse to let up COIN ops in nwfp. And for this we shouldn't/mustn't maintain overt military presence.

    Some points in favour

    1. Iranians consider West Astan a part of greater Khorasan Plateau. It has a very keen interest in seeing Persian speaking and shiite communities gaining power from radical sunnis, pashtuns and baloch. If taliban survives, Iran will be inundated with afghan refugees, drugs and weapons which are all putting a major strain on iran at present.

    2. If Iran (continually) lends support to Nato-India in Afghanistan, it could see some thaw in hostile US attitude towards its nuclear programme and at the same time, Iran would've full control over the supply-lines.

    True, Pak will refuse to mount a coin ops in nwfp if India were to maintain presence on Af-pak border, and we could see a rise in insurgent activity backed by pak in astan.

    The Iranian supply route is useful if India wants to maintain presence in N-W afghan that is far from Pashtun areas/Pak border. If India wants to supply troops to S. Astan it has to build more roads and secure some of the most hostile provinces in Astan.
     
  10. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,684
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Given the latest soft peddling by the Obama administration, India should have no truck with them in
    Afghanistan.

    Let the US foist Pakistan and once again be mauled as they are always being mauled whenever they soft soap Pakistan.

    A good mauling is what the US requires to make it realise what they are up against.

    No Muslim can abandon another Muslim and Zardari will be roasted over a pit should he try to be serious about it. At best, he can do some cosmetic actions to appease the US.

    Already there was a report that the CIA or was it the FBI which foiled another Islamic plot to blow synagogues in the NY state.

    Islam is on the march and it will take real effort and not sops to halt it.

    The majority of Pakistanis and of the world are all for the Taliban!

    It is only when the US gets a real drubbing will they realise which side of the bread is buttered!
     
  11. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,291
    Likes Received:
    11,485
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Sir IMHO, its the Taliban on the rise. Islam is where it was.
    These guys use the guise of Islam to garner more followers. There are ample number of fools who get sucked into their propaganda.
     
  12. Vinod2070

    Vinod2070 मध्यस्थ Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    101
    Ray sir, do you think only USA will pay the price for this foolishness of trusting the Pakistanis? Can we really afford to take a hands off approach?

    But yes, it does look like the USA will do the right thing...











    After trying all else. One hoped it had already made all the mistakes, looks like they have still some stupidities in their bag.
     
  13. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,684
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The major players affecting India’s strategic insight vis a vis the neighbourhood are the US, China and Pakistan.

    In so far as the US is concerned, it is focussed on Afghanistan for its strategic reasons, on Pakistan because it can be a spoiler to the US aims, India for its markets and a balance to China and China since it is the closest competitor to US supremacy.

    Global Warming or Alternative Energy notwithstanding, oil shall still play an important role for a decade at least. The US economy is oil fuelled and so US will continue to be dependent on oil. Hence, the Middle East and the CAR are important, CAR having the largest untapped hydrocarbon resources. Therefore, CAR and the Middle East (ME) are very much in the US strategic view. The US has to have a base to address upheavals in the Middle East and hence Iraq, which is the centre of ME and is neighbours to most, was selected as the focal point to ‘influence’ the ME nations. Having a lien on the sweet oil and has the second largest oil reserves in the world. (US Energy Information Administration (EIA), "Iraq holds more than 112 billion barrels of oil - the world's second largest proven reserves. Iraq also contains 110 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and is a focal point for regional and international security issues.") This was also to ensure that the blackmail of OPEC over oil prices and supply control was destroyed. Therefore, troop withdrawal or otherwise, Iraq will continue to be in the US strategic scheme of things. That is why the largest US base outside the US is in Iraq i.e. the Balad Airbase and the largest US embassy at Baghdad!! Iraq also protects the southern flank of the oil pipeline from CAR to Ceyhan. Iraq also plays an important part in the US gameplan of squeezing Russia from the South and West along with Georgia and Ukraine. The CAR nations had come on board, but then the Shanghai Five apparently has prevailed on the CAR nations to remain ambivalent. China is to have a pipeline running from CAR into Xingjian and onto the mainland.

    Afghanistan remains an important cog since it practically ‘peeks’ into China through the Wokhan Corridor. It also covers the northern flank of Iran, which is inimical to the US. Therefore, Afghanistan is ideal as a ‘listening post’ as also as launch pads for military or covert action against Iran. In so far as China is concerned, apart from it being a listening post, with India ‘in the bag’ (India’s reluctance is a bother to the US), the US game of encircling China would be in place. That is also one of the reasons why Vietnam is being given a sympathetic ear by the US (and Vietnam’s animus to China is well known). Thailand is already with the US. As is Japan and South Korea. Afghanistan is also the route to Gwadar port in Pakistan’s Balochistan where the US pipeline from CAR is to terminate. This is also the reason why Karzai was made the head of Afghanistan since he was a Unocal man and Unocal was to build the pipeline and supply the oil to India and China, the modern oil guzzling industrial nations that will shore up the US economy! Balochistan is also important to the US strategic perspective. Apart from opening up the CAR – Afghanistan – Balochistan – Gwadar pipeline, it also squeezes Iran from the East, having done so from Iraq and Afghanistan! Having access to Gwadar also eliminates the Chinese listening post at Gwadar which is monitoring US activities in the ME, as also ruins the Siring of Pearls strategy of the Chinese. Gwadar, is also close to Diego Gracia which is so important to the US that the population there has been shifted and it is only inhabited by the US military personnel!!

    Therefore, to assume that Afghanistan is not paramount to US interest and that they will pack up and go would be incorrect. It is a part of the encirclement of inimical states programme. One should read Cheney’s DPG and NEP to realise the same.

    This aspect is more important to the US for the moment than encircling China through India, even though that will also be pursued with vigour and more so now with a favourable government of Man Mohan Singh who claimed that Indian loves Bush. I am sure he will not hesitate to say that India also loves Obama. Once Iraq and Afghanistan stabilises, the second phase will start.

    Pakistan, the immediate concern for India since it is a fanatical and mercurial neighbour with instability writ large is a problem. It is a fallacy to feel that the world will allow Pakistan to become a Taliban headed state. If it were so, then why was Afghanistan taken to task? Taliban with its repressive ways brought Afghanistan to order, even if it a crude way. The US is pouring in money just to avoid it as also to ensure that Pakistan survives in the comity of nations. If Pakistan is Talibanised, then pop will go the weasel as far as the world is concerned.

    So long as Pakistan keeps her terrorists in check, India can rest. If not, the US and the international community should be ready for the Cold Start turning a Hot pursuit, come what may! Yes, some of us will perish, but Pakistan would not exist! They are well aware of this!

    At this juncture, I would leave it to the reader to judge if the US in not interested in having Balochistan boiling, why allow seven consulates of India in Afghanistan when the US calls the shots?

    China requires to be encircled. China is no friend of India, no matter how much of pious platitudes they spew. India perforce has to shake hands with the US on this count. India’s overture with Vietnam is in the correct direction. Thailand. Cambodia and other nations of Indo China have to be brought on board. If India can give such huge assistance to Sri Lanka, then India is capable of the same in these areas.

    Sri Lanka requires being isolated. If they do not give the Tamils their due, then there are good reasons to put them on the spit.

    Bangladesh should be taken on board since the govt is not inimical to India. All assistance should be given including a justified water treaty as also indicating India’s and hence Bangladesh’s concern of China planning to divert the Brahamaputra water for China! It is enough to scare the living hell out of Bangladesh.

    Nepal requires India to promote the Madeshis and control the Marwaris who run Nepal’s economy.

    Myanmar’s military has existed for years. It would be naïve to feel that the west has not tried to topple it. Since it has not toppled and may not be possible to topple, it is better to work with them and get the best bargain.
     
  14. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,132
    Likes Received:
    23,684
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Shias are where thy are.

    Sunnis are on the move!

    Check the Tablighi movement. They are going great guns!
     
  15. F-14

    F-14 Global Defence Moderator Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,563
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ray sir you should be sitting in south block formulating India's Forieng Policy

    awsome as ever
     
  16. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,550
    Likes Received:
    1,278
    Location:
    Bangalore
    What a mess, Mr. Obama is going to make the situation worse

    US for smaller India role in Kabul




     
  17. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    21,921
    Likes Received:
    9,248
    The Hindu : International / India & World : The Afghan question and a unique opportunity

    The Afghan question and a unique opportunity

    Sandeep Dikshit

    NEW DELHI: Which foreign country will be the first stop for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh after he completes Cabinet formation?

    Going by the expectations in diplomatic circles, Dr. Singh will have the unique opportunity of interacting with several states, all of which are crucial to solving the Afghanistan problem, when he makes his maiden foreign visit abroad in his second term to the Russian city of Yekaterinburg in mid-June.

    His primary purpose will be to attend the meetings of the heads of government of the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and RIC (Russia, India and China) groupings. But his officials — and possibly Dr. Singh himself — will also come across a busier assembly of heads of government, who will be there for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit, of which India has been an unenthusiastic participant at best.

    But the situation unfolding on the Durand line and beyond, in Afghanistan, makes each of the SCO summit participants (except Turkmenistan, which is not a participant) part of the regional solution to the problem. It is still not clear whether the SCO’s promise to give a greater role to the observers (of which India is one) will convince Dr. Singh to attend the summit.

    But the opportunity to interact at one place with countries neighbouring Afghanistan is unlikely to be missed out by New Delhi, though at the non-heads of government level. This is more so because one of the main objectives of the Indian foreign policy is to check the expansion of Islamic fundamentalism in the region, and the excessive engagement of the five Central states with Pakistan on the basis of a common Islamic identity.

    With its multiethnic composition, Kazakhstan has always steered clear of Islamic fundamentalism. Its President Nursultan Nazarbayev’s initiative of setting up a fund for lean days will help him soften the impact of financial crises, especially with the sharp fall in the prices of petroleum products. This leaves out Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

    India is keen on ascertaining Kyrgyzstan’s future moves in respect of Afghanistan against the backdrop of the closure of the U.S. military base at Manas, which was in use for eight years under Operation Enduring Freedom. India would like to know whether there are other considerations for the closure, besides the fact that Russia outbid the U.S. in helping the Central Asian country avert the slowdown. While the U.S. gave the country $30 million last year, Russia, which was flush with petroleum revenues at that time, wrote off a $180-million debt and offered $2.15 billion in assistance, of which a considerable portion was meant for hydro power so as to reduce Kyrgyzstan’s dependency on fossil fuel.

    But Tajikistan comes with a set of positives and negatives. India’s investment in an airbase, which could be the launch pad for its special forces, has outmanoeuvred Pakistan. Furthermore, the Indian military presence did not evoke any concern among the locals, as New Delhi has always been seen as a benign presence. Some even feel India will be a useful ally, if Tajikistan needs friends to secure its thinly policed border from the Taliban.

    High-level sources say India wants more cooperation with the SCO in trade and culture, but will not like to engage with the bloc in the military and political spheres.
     
  18. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    21,921
    Likes Received:
    9,248
    Pakistan objects to US' Afghan surge - Yahoo! India News

    Pakistan objects to US' Afghan surge


    New York, July 22 (ANI): While the United States is planning a massive surge in Afghanistan, what may be seen as a final assault against Al-Qaeda, theTaliban and other extremist groups, Pakistan is not supportive of any such US move.

    Pakistan intelligence officials say Islamabad is apprehensive about the expanding US offensive, as it feels that it could create further problems in already troubled Balochistan.

    Pakistan fears that allied troops fighting in southen Afghanistan will force the militants across the border into the country, which can inflame Balochistan further, officials said.

    They said Pakistan does not have enough troops to counter the infiltration on its western border, and moreover it can not afford to move troops from the Indian border, The New York Times reports.

    Pakistan's stand clearly suggests that it still considers India the prime threat and the Taliban a problem that can be tackled or negotiated.

    It also points towards probable fissures in the alliance engaged against the outlawed outfits in Afghanistan.

    The Obama administration has expressed its frustration many a times in the recent past over Pakistan's inaction against the full array of Islamic militants using the country as a base.

    After intense international pressure, Islamabad initiated operation against the Taliban, which it felt is threatening country's sovereignty, while ignoring the Taliban and other terrorist groups fighting Americans in Afghanistan or terrorizing India, US officials said.

    The US believes that Pakistan was still picking proxies and choosing enemies among various Islamic militant groups inside the country.

    General Stanley A. McChrystal, who is the new leader of NATO combat operations in Afghanistan, recently said that Pakistan must crush the terror safe havens based on its soil which the Afghan Taliban utilize for their operations.

    "What I would love is for the government of Pakistan to have the ability to completely eliminate the safe havens that the Afghan Taliban enjoy," said McChrystal. (ANI)
     
  19. hit&run

    hit&run Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    7,576
    Likes Received:
    11,829
    http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/indian-sub-continent-china/2601-pakistan-political-military-developments-5.html 43# Permalink
    The divide is very evident in many issues since the operation has started in afghanistan. Pakistani concerns are very genuine as they want to keep these terrorists alive from the day one. They are assets to pakistan. its like to be or not be as after 9/11 when were threatened to be sent back to stone age. After SWAT operation they are having a feeling of genuine partner in US's war against terror and so they want to negotiate. Due to internal pressure from their own nourished jihadies they are in a mode of damage control cause at the end of day they are going to ask help from these assets to destabilize India.
     
  20. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    21,921
    Likes Received:
    9,248
    they will object because now they will have to act.
     

Share This Page