Ratus Ratus
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2008
- Messages
- 806
- Reaction score
- 0
I put this here but if its in the wrong forum, Mods just have it moved..
Ok some real things to look at seriously consider.
Also has this actually come to the notice of the GoP and Military??
ORBAT.COM
0230 December 30, 2008
The following:
"India offers US 120,000 troops for Afghanistan" appeared at ORABT.COM on or before 29 Dec 2008
The following complete quote comes from another forum
Another post, by the report writer:
Post #1
Ok now before all you collective zealots jump in with pure national pride and SFA, dont.
The above is serious for more than pure nationalism both Pakistan, Indian, not to mention USA, Russia and China to name a few nations this will directly cross.
First a number of this magnitude will be bigger than that of the current US forces. This places the US in second place troop number wise.
So will the US still be able to maintain their control of Ops in Afghanistan?
Also face a few things how do you move a whole Div into Afghanistan? This opens a few big problems but also the approaches may be detrimental to all. Direct route through Pakistan, via Iran, (I thought there was a cooling of Iran India relations), though Iran may allow it as it would soften up the anti Iran rhetoric from the US.
Other questions, where will these troops be deployed and under what overall control?
There are many serious questions to ask and I have not even started to list them all.
Hence need for a real discussion and not to cloud this with nationalistic drivel.
Ok some real things to look at seriously consider.
Also has this actually come to the notice of the GoP and Military??
ORBAT.COM
0230 December 30, 2008
Correction: India mulling offer of 120,000 troops for Afghanistan Thanks to some quick work by Bill Roggio and Mandeep Singh Bajwa we were able to avoid getting a big smack on our news story yesterday. India has not offered US troops, but is working on a proposal to make an offer, to the new Administration. We got the military details because the military was quick off the mark with a response.
So today you should have the details of the formations etc. India is earmarking - in case the proposal is made and accepted.
Nonetheless, when planning goes as far as to identify specific units, a force commander, and matters such as the battle-training schools will be set up, you have to see this is completely serious from India's view.
The following:
"India offers US 120,000 troops for Afghanistan" appeared at ORABT.COM on or before 29 Dec 2008
The following complete quote comes from another forum
Ravi Rikhye from Orbat.com makes the following comment via a message as he was not at that time able to log in to the forum I got this from..Quote:
orbat.comIndia offers US 120,000 troops for Afghanistan
Please note that Pakistan has withdrawn a second divisional HQ from the NWFP. We assume its is HQ 23 Division plus the one brigade that went with the HQ to NWFP; Mandeep Singh Bajwa will let us know when he has confirmation. we are approaching the point where two-thirds of the reinforcements sent west are in the process of withdrawing. Please also note Bill Roggio at Long War Journal reports that in the Orakzi agency, one of the seven tribal agencies of the NWFP, Taliban has enforced Sharia law on 15 of 21 tribes in the agency. In other words, the Talibanization of the NWFP is proceeding rapidly. We also have an analysis on why Pakistani soldiers are refusing to fight the insurgents - we already knew why, but for the first time we have information from someone on the scene. We will give it to you tomorrow. But all in all, the US by insisting Pakistan fight the insurgents set itself up for failure. Again, we have said this before, we can now say it from another angle. US policy in the region has to change dramatically if there is to be hope of success in Afghanistan.
Our trusty correspondent, Mandeep Singh Bajwa, informed us this morning that India has offered to send 120,000 troops to Afghanistan. Naturally we asked Mandeep "are we being used by the Indians in a psyops game to put pressure on Pakistan?" Not that the Government of India knows we exist, but in all the movies about the media the Editor always asks if the paper is being played.
Mandeep's answer, paraphrased, was this: "I don't know at what level the offer has been made, but the Indian Army and Air Force are down to identifying specific units, formations, and squadrons..." - details, as we said, at Long War Journal - "...as well as discussing a specific name for force commander, plus working on the details of pre-deployment training, so this is a lot more elaborate than needed for a psyops game.'
We'd prefer to discuss this after we learn more, rather than waste your time with elaborate theories spun out of nothing ("Orbat.com's military sources say..."). But the following points are immediately apparent.
For the new US administration, this offer would be heaven-sent and just making it would put the US Government in debt to the Indians - "your other friends/allies talked, we walked." The administration could turn around to to its own people, and say: "Americans, you complain we are carrying the Afghan burden by ourselves, now we have a partner."
At Orbat.com we've been constantly talking about the need for more manpower; well, here you have a whacking big increment of manpower. With US/Allied troops it takes one to 75% of what Orbat.com considers a minimum force if Afghanistan is to be won.
In one deft swoop, India forces the Americans to chose Delhi over Islamabad. To the Indians the constant US attempt to "balance" the two countries has been a source of serious blood pressure since the 1940s; obviously if the Americans accept it has to be India First from now on and Pakistan gets marginalized. Moreover, the Indians put America up the creek without the paddle regarding Pakistan: "what is it your so-called ally is doing, compared to what we are willing to do."
The devious cunning of the Indian move becomes more apparent when you consider if the US government refuses, the American people are going to get on the Government's case: "The Indians are offering and you're still sticking with those slimey two-timers the Pakistanis?"
For India, offering a huge contingent takes the pressure off the Indian government to act aggressively against Pakistan. India does not have a launch a single sortie against Pakistan to punish it for acting against India. Indian government can tell its own people: "What good will a pinprick do? The Israelis have been bashing up the Palestinians for two decades, and where are the results? What we are doing is to strike a hard blow at Pakistan without crossing the Pakistan border and getting beat up by everyone for provoking war."
Plus India neatly destroys Pakistan's strategic depth objective. The Indians have been wanting to get into the act in Afghanistan for several years, because they know a Taliban government means more fundamentalist pressure on Pakistan and thereby on India. But the Americans have been refusing India help for fear of offending the Pakistanis. For India to get into Afghanistan in force is to again change the paradigm of Indian-Pakistani relations as happened in 1971 when India split East Bengal from Pakistan. For the last almost 40 years India's efforts to marginalize Pakistan have been stymied. If the US accepts the Indian offer, India gains hugely.
But right now a lot of American decision-makers do not care if Pakistan is offended because they see the latter has no interest in fighting the insurgents or helping the US against the Taliban. Once alternate supply routes are available, US can write off Pakistan and as a consequence, paradoxically, vastly increase its leverage in that country.
As for Pakistani/jihadi retaliation against India or the Indian contingent in Afghanistan, we've said before the Indians don't care. Their point is India is squarely in the sights of the jihadis: India is already under severe, sustained attack and unable to retaliate. As for the security of the Indian troops, that really is the last thing the Indians are concerned about. They want to go to Afghanistan to fight, not to protect their troops against suicide bombers.
Two other minor points in passing. By making this offer, India takes the wind out of Pakistan's sails because the latter has very successful turned the world's attention from the Bombay atrocity to getting the world to stop escalation between India and Pakistan. Every day that goes by, India has less diplomatic/geopolitical freedom to hit Pakistan. But if India has offered several divisions for Afghanistan, obviously the last thing the Indians are thinking of is attacking Pakistan - 3/4th of the Army troops (as opposed to the CI troops) India is earmarking for Afghanistan are from the three strike corps. So India undercuts Pakistani claims that Delhi is preparing to attack.
The second point we find interesting. PRC knows if Pakistan falls to the jihadis, Sinkiang is the next target. By offering to go to Afghanistan, India is directly helping Beijing. Which puts Beijing in a very awkward spot as India is a big rival for influence in Asia. Not only will Indians be helping PRC, if China does send troops to Afghanistan, Delhi will canoodle with Washington without competition from China. The Chinese will have no choice but to join the Afghan venture or lose influence in South and Central Asia, and with Washington.
To sum up: Orbat.com has been second to none in bashing the Government of India as incompetent and impotent. But with this offer, India has overnight changed the rules of game in South/Central Asia and struck a potentially fatal blow at Pakistan. In the end, this could become much, much bigger by an order of magnitude than breaking off East Pakistan in 1971.
Writer of original post comments
This is going through some serious considerations, Orbat.com contains some esteemed members of the Indian Foreign Service as well as one of them is a moderator at think-tank BR.
This is what Mandeep had to say
Quote:
For those wondering whether India is prepared to send troops to Afghanistan let me assure you that serious consideration is being given to the proposal. It makes real sense, never more so than at this particular time.Domestically it'll be a real winner with everyone on board except the Commies whom no one takes seriously any more in any case.
How will the troops be maintained ? If the US is successful (and when they put their mind and will to it they more often than not usually are) in opening up an alternate logistical route, well then that's how we'll ensure that our troops get their supplies. That also means that the US no longer hase any stake in allying with Pakistan which is more of a nuisance, to put it mildly than a partner in any sense of the word.
As for Orbat.Com's credibility those who've read our work over the years will understand that we don't get our facts from the newspapers and they're most often right.
Lou, I tried to register but it wont let me, I've emailed the HELP people. This is the message I wanted to post:
Bill Roggio of The Long War Journal has impeccable contacts at Centcom. He tell us that the Khyber operation is being led - again - by the Frontier Corps. This in itself shows the Pakistanis are not serious because (1) The FC are the weakest units in Pakistan, and (2) the men are recuited locally and are part and parcel of the tribal culture.
People have to understand that the Pakistan does NOT want to fight the Taliban because the Taliban on both sides of the border are instruments of Pakistan military and foreign policy. They are in effect another arm of the Pakistan military.
Pakistan's entire strategy in NWFP has been to do the absolute minimum needed to keep the US from punishing Pakistan, and to keep the money the US gives monthly for the so called CI operations. The Pakistan Army fights ONLY when it is directly challenged by some tribal faction or the other, or if it needs to get rid of a tribal faction that's growing too big for its boots.
This does not mean the Pakistanis are evil, all it means is the US arrival in Afghanistan and destruction of the Taliban also destroyed the entire Pakistani policy of strategic depth and of denying India a foothold in Afghanistan (which has traditionally been close to India). The primary Pakistan purpose is to get the US/West out of Afghanistan, and our people say Afghanistan is just about done - 85% is under Taliban control, the situation is much worse than the press realizes.
The US military/state/intelligence in the field is perfectly aware of what is going on, but when it tells Washington, Washington's basic reply is: "5% of Pakistani cooperation is better than no cooperation. What's our alternative if we abandon Pakistan? Where are the supplies going to go through?" (BTW, US is moving something like 1.2-million tons a year through Pakistan) Not only are alternate routes at least a year away, but they create their own problems because Russia is going to want a very great deal for agreeing.
This entire mess has come about because the US wants to fight the GWOT with what? 50 brigade equivalents for the whole world? You just cannot substiute manpower with technology in CI, there are no ifs, buts, and maybes. How many troops can the US send, 10 brigades? That's a drop in the sea, and what is more, IMHO, the way the west conducts operations, with force protection as its primary goal, is a one way street to defeat.
US has so far refused India's help because obviously Pakistan will not allow it, and supplies have to go through Pakistan. India can supply any amount of manpower you want, and its soldiers are used to hardship, they are used to casualties, and they a tenth of the tonnage the US does, But then how to supply the Indians?
The situation is getting so bad that we hear murmers of: "Declare Pakistan a failed state in Baluchistan/NWFP, seize Gwader, and force a route to south Afghanistan to join the "garland" highway route around Afghanistan."
Frankly, we ourselves were a bit amazed that anyone would come up with this option even as a thought experiment.
But then, we asked ourselves: "What's the alternative? If the US cannopt get the Indians into Afghanistan, afghanistan is lost in 2009, and if someone it survives the coming year, in 2010.:
US is between a rock and a very inflexible place. Some really, really hard decisions will have to be made or else the game is over. No course of action is without the gravest of risks.
But you know what? No one in their right mind would have launched a corss-English Channel operation 60 years ago. The entire idea was insane from the word Go to start planning. If any of a hundred things had not fell into place, you would have seen the greatest defeat America has ever seen. But the US knew it had no choice, and it was in the war to win at all costs. So it followed a simple military rule: the point of warfare is to impose your will on the enemy. Its not a question of what's realistic or not. Its a question of how badly you want to win.
And you further know what? From that day after 9/11, the US has not been serious about winning the GWOT.
Another post, by the report writer:
Post #1
Post #2As the writer of the original report let me assure everyone that the offer is under serious consideration by the Indian Govt. They'd like to present it to the incoming US President as a sort of goodwill offer.However its early days yet and the project will take some time to near realisation.
The offer is certainly worthwhile. India can deploy large numbers of battle-hardened troops with decades of experience fighting Jihadi terrorists and guerrillas in Kashmir and other insurgents in India's North-East. Unlike European nations the Indians can take casualties in the national interest, they have a grudge with the Taliban and Indian troops will take absolute pleasure in taking on Pakistani-sponsored forces.
If an alternative supply route is worked out one can then be quite sure that India will deploy troops in Afghanistan.There's a lot of anger in India over continuing Jihadi terrorism which threatens social and communal harmony and economic progress.
Nothing is decided yet. I would think that initially at least div+ would be sent with all the necessary supporting arms including air support and transport and special forces. There's also a strong likelihood of specialised CI units like the RR being deployed.
The issue will necessarily become politicised with it being milked for all its worth in an election year.
Ok now before all you collective zealots jump in with pure national pride and SFA, dont.
The above is serious for more than pure nationalism both Pakistan, Indian, not to mention USA, Russia and China to name a few nations this will directly cross.
First a number of this magnitude will be bigger than that of the current US forces. This places the US in second place troop number wise.
So will the US still be able to maintain their control of Ops in Afghanistan?
Also face a few things how do you move a whole Div into Afghanistan? This opens a few big problems but also the approaches may be detrimental to all. Direct route through Pakistan, via Iran, (I thought there was a cooling of Iran India relations), though Iran may allow it as it would soften up the anti Iran rhetoric from the US.
Other questions, where will these troops be deployed and under what overall control?
There are many serious questions to ask and I have not even started to list them all.
Hence need for a real discussion and not to cloud this with nationalistic drivel.
