Indian Role in Afghanistan

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

  1. RPK

    RPK Indyakudimahan Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,882
    Likes Received:
    144
    Location:
    13° 4'60.00"N 80°16'60.00"E
    The Hindu : Front Page : We have no agenda in Afghanistan: India

    NEW DELHI: India on Monday told the United States that it had no agenda in Afghanistan except seeing it emerge as a stable and peaceful country.

    To this end, India would continue to work in Afghanistan on development projects but with no geo-political ambitions, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna told the visiting U.S. Special Envoy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, here.

    Mr. Holbrooke was also told about India’s involvement in infrastructure building in Afghanistan.

    The U.S. Special Envoy said he was looking forward to the international conference on Afghanistan, scheduled for January 28 in London, and expected a positive contribution from India.

    He also informed Mr. Krishna of two preparatory meets scheduled in Turkey with India participating in one of them. Mr. Krishna is scheduled to attend the London meeting.

    Mr. Holbrooke briefed the Minister on the steps taken by the U.S. in Afghanistan and the content of his talks in Islamabad and Kabul.

    Sources in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said Mr. Krishna indicated India’s keenness to see the situation stabilise in Afghanistan but professed disinterestedness on other issues of tactical military importance.

    Emerging from the talks, Mr. Holbrooke said India was a “tremendously important participant in the search for peace and stability not only in south Asia but throughout the vast region that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Pacific.”

    He reiterated the U.S.’ expectation of “more action” from Pakistan in routing the Taliban from its bases on the Afghan-Pakistan border despite being encouraged by its battle with the militants in the Swat Valley.

    The main subject of his talks with the Pakistani leadership during his ongoing three-nation visit was the spread of the Taliban in the North West Frontier Province. Mr. Holbroke did not think Monday’s attack in Kabul was surprising “since they are desperate people.”

    He said:

    “They are ruthless and the people who are doing this will certainly not survive this attack nor will they succeed, but we can expect this sort of thing on a regular basis.

    “That is what Taliban are. They are part of extremist groups operating in the border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan and they do these desperate things all the time and India knows all this.”
     
  2. RPK

    RPK Indyakudimahan Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,882
    Likes Received:
    144
    Location:
    13° 4'60.00"N 80°16'60.00"E
    The price of greater Indian involvement in Afghanistan | Analysis & Opinion | Reuters

    [​IMG]


    U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is heading to India, and one of the things Washington is looking at is how can regional players such as India do more in Afghanistan. “As we are doing more, of course we are looking at others to do more,” a U.S. official said, ahead of the trip referring to the troop surge.

    But this is easier said than done, and in the case of India, a bit of a minefield. While America may expect more from India, Pakistan has had enough of its bitter rival’s already expanded role in Afghanistan since the fall of the Taliban in 2001. Indeed, Afghanistan is the new battleground on par with Kashmir, with many in Pakistan saying Indian involvement in Afghanistan was more than altruistic and aimed at destabilising Pakistan from the rear. Many in India, on the other hand, point the finger at Pakistan for two deadly bomb attacks on its embassy in Kabul.

    Against such a difficult backdrop, what can New Delhi possibly do without complicating things further?

    Several proposals are afoot but the one that the Afghans are pushing for and which is equally likely to stir things up further is an expanded training programme of the Afghan National Army by the Indian army. A small number of Afghan army officers have been coming to Indian defence institutions, such as New Delhi’s National Defence College, for training under a programme that India has been running for years for several countries.

    But this is a nation at war at the moment, and as retired Indian major general Ashok Mehta points out in this article for the Wall Street Journal, the Afghan army chief General Bismillah Khan is keen on sending combat units for training in India’s counterinsurgency schools. The Indian army has been battling insurgencies for six decades in terrain as diverse as the hills of Nagaland in the northeast to Kashmir in the north. None of these have been snuffed out, save for the Sikh revolt in the Punjab in the 1980s, and you could argue about the success of their campaign. But they have held firm, developed tactics along the way, and rarely ever seemed to be losing ground against insurgents even at the height of the Kashmir revolt. Their experience is obviously something the Afghans would like to draw on.

    But isn’t this going to antagonise Pakistan further? Running courses for a few officers is one thing, but training a whole combat unit is another. A deepening military relationship between Afghanistan and India would be an uncomfortable prospect for any security planner in Pakistan. Imagine, for a moment, the Pakistani army training strike formations of the Bangladesh army.

    Perhaps a bit more palatable to Pakistan would be training of the Afghan National Police, also seen as a key element in the fight to restore peace in the country. Again the Indians have amassed a vast degree of experience, inherited from British colonial masters in the area of policing.

    “We have the best institution for training the civilian police, and the paramilitary to some extent … if you want a civilian police with a little bit of strength to the elbow,” India’s national Security Adviser M.K.Narayanan told the Times of London, adding that India had spent a quite a lot of time discussing with the Americans in recent weeks an expanded role in Afghanistan.
     
  3. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    720
    World rejects India's Taliban stand


     
  4. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    720
    Clear views from the Afghan summit

     
  5. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    720
    India offers 100 fellowships to Afghan farm students

     
  6. lupgain

    lupgain Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    1,085
    Location:
    India
    Good opportunity earned should not let it go...

    I think its truly an good opportunity for us.... India should not leave this opportunity and learn from past mistakes.... Opportunity earned is advantage taken.... Its an good opportunity because....
    a) It will keep us ahead of the race in south asian region..
    b) Its of strategic importance ...
    c) Just our presence in that region will help us to help us to keep pakistan away in dilemma and its focus would get diverted.... and the will feel the real heat of loosing their foothold in that area.. which they call as their backyard... its not good to treat another country like so bad..
    d) Having good access to the intelligence of Taliban insurgents and further pressurizing Taliban and LeT into Pakistan Territory.. which they are afraid of.. this will allow to intensify the presence of US in Pakistan and mounting pressure on pakistan to act against Taliban..

    So, its one opportunity and multiple advantages.... we need to grab it ASAP...
     
  7. Agantrope

    Agantrope Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes Received:
    69
    If china comes to pakistan to keep a military base, then we have no other go that keep a base in the Afghanistan possibly the IAF airstrips also. We should not do the same mistake as we did with the bangladesh, need to be more proactive in this issue as this will the i the interest of national security
     
  8. bengalraider

    bengalraider DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,767
    Likes Received:
    2,524
    Location:
    in a fast food joint next to the imperial shipyard
    Indian Motion
    From New Delhi's perspective, the "AfPak" debate is all about the "Pak."
    BY KAPIL KOMIREDDI | FEBRUARY 4, 2010


    There was a lone dissenter at last week's Afghanistan conference in London: India.

    As representatives from more than 60 countries convened at the historic Lancaster House, New Delhi's representative to the summit, Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna, emphasized to his British counterpart that it would be a monumental folly, at this juncture, to make a distinction "between a good Taliban and a bad Taliban" or to legitimize the former through reaching out. From India's perspective, because the Taliban was originally an extension of Pakistan's intelligence agency and because it has been used by Islamabad to mount attacks against India, there can be no "good Taliban."

    But Krishna, seated in the second row, was politely ignored. Alas, it wasn't the first time.

    The contours of the Afghanistan debate as it plays out in Washington, London, and Islamabad are well known. But India arguably has just as much at stake as the Western countries -- if not more. New Delhi is worried that legitimizing elements of the Taliban may increase India's vulnerability to terrorist attack. While the world discusses security strategies for Afghanistan, India focuses on how these proposals will impact its relationship with Pakistan. For New Delhi, the "AfPak" debate is really just about "Pak."

    Thus far, India's policy toward Pakistan has been hands-off, leaving it to the paymasters in Washington and London. In the immediate aftermath of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, New Delhi even acceded to Washington's requests and took no action against Islamabad in order to facilitate the war in Afghanistan.

    But now that dynamic is changing. As control of Afghanistan is being gradually handed back to the Taliban, an increasingly alarmed New Delhi will start looking for ways to prevent trouble. Although deployment of troops has been categorically ruled out by Defense Minister A.K. Antony, pressure will probably mount on the government to reconsider that decision. New Delhi will actively work to resuscitate remnants of the Northern Alliance, India's longstanding allies against the Taliban. Most immediately, India will apply pressure on Pakistan, demanding that Islamabad act against the plotters of the Mumbai attacks. While New Delhi's recent offer to resume diplomatic talks with Pakistan is a positive sign, should another terrorist attack take place, India will not be as patient as it was last time.

    India may well feel slighted when it comes to gratitude from the global community on Afghanistan. Currently, New Delhi is the fifth-largest donor of civilian aid to Kabul. India has constructed the new parliament building, the Palace of Democracy; trained the country's parliamentarians; and donated aircraft to resuscitate Afghanistan's national airline, Ariana. Its workers are engaged in major infrastructure projects ranging from highways and electricity grids to dam projects, telecommunications, and the expansion of a TV network. As India's junior foreign minister, Shashi Tharoor, put it, "The reason that Kabul has 24 hours of electricity a day is because of Indian engineers who have actually delivered the power supply."

    Besides, the wild popularity of Indian cinema and TV shows in Afghanistan means that India enjoys a soft-power edge over every other country currently engaged there. Unsurprisingly, in the most recent opinion poll, India emerged with the highest favorability rating of any country involved in Afghanistan: 74 percent.

    Yet in the endless debates focusing on Afghanistan, India's role in the region has usually been ignored by the United States and Europe -- often deliberately, as New Delhi is quick to point out, in order to appease Pakistan.

    Washington is keenly aware of the benefits that New Delhi brings to Afghanistan. But so far it has been wary of openly embracing India as a partner. As Gen. Stanley McChrystal wrote in his assessment of the war last fall, "Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people." But a larger role for India in Afghanistan, he warned, "is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan and India."

    What this means is that India, the only stable secular democracy in the region, is being actively prevented from helping in Afghanistan in order to appease the Pakistani regime, lest it re-enact the carnage that was visited upon Mumbai in 2008 and the Indian Embassy in Kabul in 2008 and 2009. Which raises the question: Is the U.S. objective in Afghanistan to oust the Taliban, or is it to secure the country for Pakistan? To New Delhi, the answer looks increasingly like the latter.

    Washington's critics trace the origins of today's crisis to the United States' abrupt abandonment of Afghanistan in the late 1980s. The trouble with this version of history is that it skips over the 1990s. But contrary to what is now conventional wisdom in the West, the Taliban in its current incarnation is not a remnant of the Cold War. It is a creation of Pakistan. It was during the 1990s that the Taliban -- actively backed by Pakistan -- seized control of Kabul. Since then, New Delhi has witnessed Afghanistan become a launching pad for anti-India terrorism.

    Today, the tragic irony of President Barack Obama, who invokes the virtues of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi while simultaneously making overtures to the Taliban in an oxymoronic pursuit for "moderate extremists," has not been lost on India. A tiny but vocal band of skeptics in India is already questioning the wisdom of New Delhi's alignment with the United States over the last ten years. Of course, it is unlikely that New Delhi would directly oppose U.S. policy in the region. But in the first year of the Obama administration, much of the progress achieved over a decade of aggressive diplomacy to bring India closer to the United States has been undone.

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/02/04/indian_motion?print=yes&hidecomments=yes&page=full
     
  9. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,550
    Likes Received:
    1,279
    Location:
    Bangalore
  10. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    720
    Centre mulls more Afghan security

     
  11. anoop_mig25

    anoop_mig25 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,523
    Likes Received:
    2,480
  12. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    720
    Natural law brings AfPak crashing

     
  13. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    (same post with the 'inappropriate' language removed)

    Why would India want to have a role in Afghanistan? Afghanistan is the center of global terrorism, the home base of taliban and a strong hold of Al-Quada. It is also a land locked country with 99% muslim population and a neighbor of Pakistan, India's sworn enermy. Time and again it has proven that who ever dares to venture into Afganistan, be it British, Soviets or now US, will eventually shoot themselves in the foot. These people are wild and indominable.

    Now look at India. India has an image problem with the muslim world, it is viewed as an ally of US, has cozy relationship with Israel and a sworn enermy of fellow muslim bretheren Pakistan. If india does indeed send troops to Pakistan, it will be seen as a huge provocation in the muslim world, and will for sure invite more jehadis & terrorists, which India already has enough of, to the country.

    Also in the eyes of the jihadis, India is a muslim country gone bad. It has a huge muslim population, was ruled by muslims for millenium. Thus bringing India back into the islamic grip is seen by the jehadis as a holy duty and conquering india would thus have higher priority than any other none-muslim country. Under such circumstances, If I were an indian politian, I would try anything to keep india out of the current christian-islam struggle.

    Also logistically it's not possible for India to station troops there. As someone said this requires to bring Iran into a anti-taliban coalition. Do you guys realize that Iran is 1000 times closer to Taliban than it is to US. Unless the Ayatollahs fall from power, there is no prospect of Iran providing passage way to India into Afghanistan.

    Reportedly the US invited both Russia and China to participate in the fight against taliban in Afghanistan, and both declined with good reason. Don't think India is that stupid.
     
  14. Vinod2070

    Vinod2070 मध्यस्थ Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    101
    This is mostly your imagination. India has one of the largest Muslim populations enjoying democracy the like of which Muslims enjoy nowhere, even in Muslim countries. India has good relations with most of the Muslim world.

    There is no image problem for India in the Muslim world. Most of the muslim world has good relations with the USA, many with Israel too. China has relations with Israel as well.

    Regarding the "fellow muslim bretheren Pakistan", one just has to see the depth of Afghanistani enmity for these brothers. They have not forgotten what their Taliban proxies did to them. No love lost for Pakistanis as far as Afghanistan is concerned. Remember this country didn't even recognize Pakistan and even now doesn't recognize the Durand line and would like to "liberate the tribals" living there.

    You post is mostly an ill informed rant.
     
    LemarKhan likes this.
  15. Vinod2070

    Vinod2070 मध्यस्थ Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    101
    These Jihadi scum may imagine what they want. India was never a Muslim country. It was ruled by invading Muslims for a small part of her history like it was by the British. The British were kicked out and before that India had already kicked out the foreign Muslim invader rule from most of India. Read history to find the details.

    Check out this post:

    http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/sh...ary-on-Partition&p=85563&viewfull=1#post85563

    The over-all all-lndia causes of partition are well enough known. At the root of it all was history. The Hindus had an acute sense of grievance over the Muslim mayhem in India. But the Muslims on the other hand were dismayed that Islam, which had prevailed everywhere else, had been checkmated in India. In the celebrated words of poet Hali:

    Woh deene Hejazi ka bebak beda
    Nishan jiska aqsai alam mein pahuncha
    Kiye passipar jisne saton samandar
    Woh dooba dahane mein Ganga kay aakar.

    (The fearless flotilla of Islam, whose flag fluttered over all the world, the ship that crossed the seven seas, came here and sank in the Ganga.)

    In the eighteenth century, Hindu society stood up triumphant from Attock to Cuttack and Delhi to Deccan --- having contained the poison of the preceding centuries like a `Nilakantha'. Islam stood tamed --- and Indianized. And then came 1761 and the defeat of the sovereign power of the Mahrattas in the Third Battle of Panipat, which opened the way to British rule in India. It also revived the Wahabis and the Waliullahs, who took Islam back to fundamentalism and greater fanaticism in hopes of an Islamic revival.
     
  16. Vinod2070

    Vinod2070 मध्यस्थ Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    101
    Also, right now their focus seems to be on Muslim countries that are not Islamic enough! No?
     
  17. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    There is a difference between China and India in the eyes of muslims. Right now anti-us sentiment runs strong among them, and China is seen as outside the US camp whereas India is seen as very much in it. Also you need to differentiate the goverment and the people, yes some muslim countries (btw not too many, justb Eqypt and Turkey if I remember correctly and Turkey's prime minister just had a hot-headed run-in with Simon Perez) have diplomatic relationship with Israel, out of convenience, but generally speaking anti-semitic sentiment across the Islamic world has never run higher. Even though I'm from east asia which for the time being is not threatened by the islamic extremism, I have come to my realization that world wide the muslims are on a mission to conqur the world, and India is top in their agenda.
     
  18. Vinod2070

    Vinod2070 मध्यस्थ Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    101
    There is some deep problem with this narrative. India allows every religion to be practiced freely. You just need to see how much freedom China gives its Muslims. They have a raging Muslim insurgency which they are controlling with iron fist.

    China-US relationship is again very strong. Most of these issues are make believe. They may think of India as a softer target compared to China, anything else is BS.

    You are wrong about just "Eqypt and Turkey" as well, there are several more.

    These Jihadis have had their arse handed to them. Right now they are no more than a nuisance. They are not going to capture a single street corner, leave alone a nuclear armed country.

    Those N. bombs are not made for show, they are made to be used when needed!
     
  19. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    Nukes are useless against spread of extremism. Ironically its the goverments and armies in the muslim world that are keeping islam extremism in check. And for India, and too lesser extent also China or any country with sizable muslim population, the danger mainly comes from within, external factors like al-qaida or foreign insugency fighters and ideologues could only play the role of catalysts. India, if I remember correctly, has over 150 million muslims spread throughout the country, and you can probably not tell muslims just by look, for me that's whese the danger starts. If only 1% of those 150 million people actively take part in jihad, you are screwed. Muslim extremism is spreading like wild fire, almost everywhere in the world including US and UK, there is no reason to believe that India with such huge muslim population is immune to it. China has problem with extremists too, but muslims are mainly confined in the remote west, and even there they are not majority. And most importantly at all, we look different so its not possible for the extremists to sneak upon us.
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2010
  20. Vinod2070

    Vinod2070 मध्यस्थ Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    101
    I disagree with the threat assessment provided by you. Muslim extremists have not shown the ability to take over even small countries with minuscule forces let alone a country the size of India!

    Indian Muslims have proven themselves as totally patriot for decades. There is no reason to get alarmist over that as well.

    Anyway we are going off topic and I would suggest that you open a new thread if you want to discuss this particular line.
     

Share This Page