Afghan president Hamid Karzai hands India weapons 'wish list'

[Spring Onion]

Wary of Pakistan, India hesitant over Karzai wish list for military hardware


NEW DELHI: In the backdrop of a Nato withdrawal and fears of a Taliban resurgence, Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Tuesday said he had given the Indian government a 'wish list' for military equipment. The list, said sources, comes after considerable discussions with Afghanistan on what exactly they would want. New Delhi has committed to provide training, equipment and capacity building for Afghan armed forces as part of the strategic partnership pact signed in 2011.

However, India appears more hesitant this time, largely because of the Pakistan factor. Afghan foreign minister Zalmai Rassoul observed, "A decade ago the BJP government wanted to help us militarily but we refused, due to Pakistan's sensitivities. This time, we are keen, but India is hesitant."

In response, MEA spokesman Syed Akbaruddin said, "There was a discussion on political and security issues, without going into specifics. But he said at the end of Karzai's visit, the nation stood ready to help in all the areas that Afghanistan asked for.

"India is ready to stand by Afghanistan as a close, friendly and historic neighbour through these transitions and will play a due and responsible role in this regard," he added.

Karzai took a more diplomatic approach. "We understand when India can help and when it cannot," he said. Addressing a press conference before returning to Kabul, Karzai said in relation to India's economic capacity, it had been the largest donor in Afghanistan. While he did not specify what exactly he had asked for, officials said Afghanistan had asked for artillery and attack helicopters.

India's hesitation this time seems to stem from certain factors: Pakistan is certainly on UPA's mind, particularly if they want to be cordial with the Nawaz Sharif government and are not sure how this would play out in Islamabad. Second, India's own defence hardware is of rather low order. In fact, New Delhi is the world's largest importer of military hardware itself.

The future of the Taliban-Afghan peace process may also have an effect. Karzai sought to dispel any notion that he might continue as president after 2014. "There are two reasons. First, I am exhausted, and I want to retire. Second, why would I ruin my legacy and take an opportunity away from Afghanistan to become an institutionalized democracy? It's not good for me or Afghanistan," he explained.

Wary of Pakistan, India hesitant over Karzai wish list for military hardware - The Times of India

 

[MilSpec]

Easier said than done in Afghanistan, because the only thing the Afghans are united in, is being disunited.



I doubt it, there is no "Across the Board" when you talk about the Durand Line. You could unite people against the Soviets and Americans because:

1) They were foreigners.
2) They were non-Muslims.

Pakistan is neither, never has any tribe tried to cede from Pakistan, even though the USSR and Afghanistan pushed the Pukhtunistan issue to it's height. I don't expect them to do so any time soon either. These people are known for their strong sense of loyalty, they will not let it fall pray to the fancy of a state that has yet to learn to stand on it's own.



Karazai will have to wait for that officer cadre to mature, even if you expedite their promotion, let's say you have a fresh military hierarchy in 10 years from now (I am being overly generous, a more realistic estimate would be near 18 minimum). Where do you see the Afghan govt and military stand until then? They cannot hope to call time out and expect the Taliban to wait until they have a mature enough officer corp.
As for the other point, an offensive against Pakistan will be the untimely demise of the ANA, let's not forget that the PA is trained keeping in mind that these men will be expected to fight almost 6:1, The PA is and will be, quite realistically speaking, a fighting force much superior to the ANA for many coming generations.



Again, you seem to ignore or misunderstand the Afghan situation. To the non-Pushtun portion of the Afghans, the former Soviet states of their ethnicity appear as a very desirable model of statesmanship. These people are literally jumping out of the country for a chance to move abroad, a united Afghanistan will require decades of sustained economic growth, which under the threat of the looming withdrawal and expected post-withdrawal violence looks dim. Pakistan itself would choose to support a peaceful transition, we have enough Afghans within our borders than we would care for, another refugee crisis in the offing is not our favourite option.



Interesting it would be indeed, however, one has to wonder how much liberty India would be willing to extend to Kabul at the expense of deteriorating it's dealings with Islamabad. We're far from bossom buddies but India knows that a content Kabul is not a great counterweight to a pissed off Islamabad. As much as it would hurt India to admit, Pakistan is still a greater priority as compared to Afghanistan and to keep Islamabad pacified is in India's best interests, which at the time are vested in it's continuing state of security and economic fertility, an escalation with Pakistan would upset the balance and throw India off her goals on both grounds. Remember the flight of capital in the 2002-03 escalation? India would always choose to avoid the same situation from re-accuring.

As always brilliant points made, I concede my argument has glaring flaws. Your statement about 10 years for fresh military hierarchy is the most interesting one.
Strategically, Indian fantasy would be to develop afghanistan as a counter to pakistan, just like china uses pakistan for India. About pissing of Islamabad at the cost of kabul, I would diverge a little. Pakistan does support activities against India, but it still is engaged diplomatically, similarly china arms Pakistan for next to pennies in costs, but it soesn't affect Indo-china relations.

What India must realize that if equal impetus is provided in training military, diplomatic and bureaucratic staff in afghanistan, it can be effectively used by India as a bargaining chip against pakistan, which it currently lacks.


About your last point of pakistan throwing a wrench in the power -balance and strategic engagement in the region, I think it's a valid possibility, but Indian economy now I think can absorb some of the risk that comes to offset the threat. We need to face it, if afghan end game turns out to be black turbans all over again, then it will be a nightmare for indian interests in afghanistan, Indian assets and infrastructure, Indian strategic concerns ...all of it will go down the drain.

 

[GR!FF!N]

@Oscar @WebMaster

time to clean up this thread..looks like whole thread is deviated from Afghan "wish list" to "Rape" and "Murder" cases..help from Moderators is needed to clean up this thread..thanks in advance..


According to news report,Afghanistan requested Artillery and Attack Helos(Actually it was reported that they want 105 mm artillery, medium-lift aircraft, bridge-laying equipment and trucks.But the list has many more)..but they operate small amount of various field guns and howitzers,right??also,is Tanks going to be included under "Artillery"??they desparately need Tanks..They asked USA about Aircraft,Tanks and Artillery only few months ago.while USA offered various kind of logistical weapons primarily,it was reported that Afghanistan pushed them for Big Ticket weapons for "Border Management"..They might have asked that kind of weapons too..


other than that,It was reported that India already provided various kind of Arms to the Afghanistan already..what kind of Arms that could be??any idea or any reports on that??

 

[Parul]

@WebMaster @nuclearpak @mods is PDF a RAPE FORUM???? Do you think RAPE's, Poverty can be discussed in a Civilized Manner????

 

[Ayush]

what was the topic of discussion??

 

[PakPrinciples]

Are you and your Taliban puppets so sh!t scared of a 100,000 Americans ??

If that was the case why is it the Americans who are running away?

ANA/ANP are dying at about 500 men a month and overall with desertions, people being thrown out or not re-enlisting 1/3 of the army has to be replaced every year. This isn't a force that's going to survive for very long post 2014.

The true puppets are the Afghan government, military and police who are paid by foreigners to maintain the occupation and support the kafir agenda.

Karzai and the rest of those pieces of **** that dare to call themselves Afghanistan's "government" are going to go the way of your friend Najibullah.

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

If that was the case why is it the Americans who are running away?

ANA/ANP are dying at about 500 men a month and overall with desertions, people being thrown out or not re-enlisting 1/3 of the army has to be replaced every year. This isn't a force that's going to survive for very long post 2014.

The true puppets are the Afghan government, military and police who are paid by foreigners to maintain the occupation and support the kafir agenda.

Karzai and the rest of those pieces of **** that dare to call themselves Afghanistan's "government" are going to go the way of your friend Najibullah.

Dont worry this time Drones are available, remember what happened to OBL?? despite Full military protection it got killed like animals.

Drones will make them sleep in holes which is exactly the places for animals.

Americans came when they want and will go when they want, everyone knows they will after few years when they will and foolish Taliban claiming victory that american going.

 

[Icarus]

@Icarus

Glad to see you back boss, holidays?

Please enlighten me on what may happen in the upcoming Afghan selections,,,oops i mean elections?

It's the quiet before the storm, if I might say so. Been awfully busy, looking to unwind sometime soon, will be logging in more often if the routine permits me. As for the Afghan elections, it's too premature to say what the situation will be like. For now, I think that Hashmat Ghani has the political and tribal connections to come up as a strong contendor for the presidency.

 

[Icarus]

As always brilliant points made, I concede my argument has glaring flaws. Your statement about 10 years for fresh military hierarchy is the most interesting one.
Strategically, Indian fantasy would be to develop afghanistan as a counter to pakistan, just like china uses pakistan for India. About pissing of Islamabad at the cost of kabul, I would diverge a little. Pakistan does support activities against India, but it still is engaged diplomatically, similarly china arms Pakistan for next to pennies in costs, but it soesn't affect Indo-china relations.

It is always a fresh breath of air to discuss with you, you are amongst those Indian members that I judge to speak based on substance and substance alone, which is why it is always a treat to engage in discourse with you. Now, moving towards the issues highlighted. Yes indeed, China does use Pakistan as a regional counterweight against India but never at the cost of upsetting the chair in Delhi, to quote the Chinese Premiere on his recent trip to India:

"I visited India as a young man, I have many beautiful memories attached to your country"

Involving personal experience in diplomacy is a HUGE show faith, something not many statesmen would care to engage in but the Chinese Premiere's willingness to extend his arm out towards India shows that they want India to be comfortable with Beijing. Similarly, any decisions that India takes with respect to Afghanistan will have to come with a liberal helping of diplomacy for Pakistan top avoid coming off as aggressive in the face of recent and upcoming events in the region.
Another important point to emphasise is that China did not have to groom Islamabad for it's role in the regional setting, if anything, it was Beijing that made the quantum shift from "Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai" to "Pak-Cheen Dosti Zindabad". Pakistan's stance towards India and vice versa was hostile since the inception of both nations. On the other hand, Afghanistan lacks the political resolve and might to be able to engage against Pakistan on a diplomatic level, it is also imperitive to note that Pakistan, along with India and Turkey is still one of the countries training the Afghan Military, owing to which a number of officers and soldiers have a soft corner for Pakistan in their hearts. Then there is the entire matter that EVERY Afghan including Karazai himself has at some point in their life, grown up as a part of Pakistan. Don't get me wrong, they have no love lost for Pakistan, these guys hate our guts but that is more of a political jealousy than a politcal hatred.

What India must realize that if equal impetus is provided in training military, diplomatic and bureaucratic staff in afghanistan, it can be effectively used by India as a bargaining chip against pakistan, which it currently lacks.

Which brings me back to the grooming point, granted, India has the monetary power to groom an ally but India would have to pause to think if it would be making a wise investment against a country that is unstable, largely undeveloped with an almost completely illiterate population? Then there's another factor, we say that "Politics is politics but in the end, geography screws all". Will India be prepared to invest in an ally that itself depends on Pakistan for much of it's trade, fuel supply and food? Afghanistan would make a very poor counterweight to Pakistan if it is that dependant on Pakistan for meeting it's basic needs. Which then begs the question, how would India supply Afghanistan if Pakistan chooses to intervene? Our roads and our ports are out of the question and China won't let India haul weapons into Afghanistan, not to keep Pakistan content but rather because the Chinese are themselves looking to Afghanistan as a region they would like to have influence over. So the question is, will India be prepared to ship weapons to Russia and truck them through the CARs? Not only supplying weapons to a new and unstable ally but meeting the monetary and political consequences of it as well? That is a question that Delhi will be pulling it's hair over if this issue is occupying any importance there (which I honestly doubt), India has a very mature diplomatic corp, they can stab you in the heart and convince you it is for your own good and they never make mistakes.

About your last point of pakistan throwing a wrench in the power -balance and strategic engagement in the region, I think it's a valid possibility, but Indian economy now I think can absorb some of the risk that comes to offset the threat. We need to face it, if afghan end game turns out to be black turbans all over again, then it will be a nightmare for indian interests in afghanistan, Indian assets and infrastructure, Indian strategic concerns ...all of it will go down the drain.

India can probably take a hit to the economy, no doubt but the question is, with plenty of emerging alternate markets in Asia and Africa, will it be able to recover? One must think for the long haul after all. As for Afghanistan falling to Turbans and Kalashnikovs, I doubt that even Pakistan will stand by to see that happen. The last thing we need is to be fighting an insurgency that has a god damn country! The deepening Afghan Taliban-TTP connection means that as each day passes, Pakistan is seduced less and less by the concept of the Taliban back in power again. If anything, Pakistan would at this moment, be playing all it's cards for a settlement in Afghanistan that would convince the Taliban to drop their weapons because if the Afghan Taliban deweaponize, then the TTP automatically loses what little legitimacy it enjoys with the ultra-conservatives, allowing us to better root out the TTP from Pakistani society.

Dont worry this time Drones are available, remember what happened to OBL?? despite Full military protection it got killed like animals.

Drones will make them sleep in holes which is exactly the places for animals.

Americans came when they want and will go when they want, everyone knows they will after few years when they will and foolish Taliban claiming victory that american going.

Proof for the bold text?

 

[MilSpec]

It is always a fresh breath of air to discuss with you, you are amongst those Indian members that I judge to speak based on substance and substance alone, which is why it is always a treat to engage in discourse with you. Now, moving towards the issues highlighted. Yes indeed, China does use Pakistan as a regional counterweight against India but never at the cost of upsetting the chair in Delhi, to quote the Chinese Premiere on his recent trip to India:

"I visited India as a young man, I have many beautiful memories attached to your country"

Involving personal experience in diplomacy is a HUGE show faith, something not many statesmen would care to engage in but the Chinese Premiere's willingness to extend his arm out towards India shows that they want India to be comfortable with Beijing. Similarly, any decisions that India takes with respect to Afghanistan will have to come with a liberal helping of diplomacy for Pakistan top avoid coming off as aggressive in the face of recent and upcoming events in the region.
Another important point to emphasise is that China did not have to groom Islamabad for it's role in the regional setting, if anything, it was Beijing that made the quantum shift from "Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai" to "Pak-Cheen Dosti Zindabad". Pakistan's stance towards India and vice versa was hostile since the inception of both nations. On the other hand, Afghanistan lacks the political resolve and might to be able to engage against Pakistan on a diplomatic level, it is also imperitive to note that Pakistan, along with India and Turkey is still one of the countries training the Afghan Military, owing to which a number of officers and soldiers have a soft corner for Pakistan in their hearts. Then there is the entire matter that EVERY Afghan including Karazai himself has at some point in their life, grown up as a part of Pakistan. Don't get me wrong, they have no love lost for Pakistan, these guys hate our guts but that is more of a political jealousy than a politcal hatred.



Which brings me back to the grooming point, granted, India has the monetary power to groom an ally but India would have to pause to think if it would be making a wise investment against a country that is unstable, largely undeveloped with an almost completely illiterate population? Then there's another factor, we say that "Politics is politics but in the end, geography screws all". Will India be prepared to invest in an ally that itself depends on Pakistan for much of it's trade, fuel supply and food? Afghanistan would make a very poor counterweight to Pakistan if it is that dependant on Pakistan for meeting it's basic needs. Which then begs the question, how would India supply Afghanistan if Pakistan chooses to intervene? Our roads and our ports are out of the question and China won't let India haul weapons into Afghanistan, not to keep Pakistan content but rather because the Chinese are themselves looking to Afghanistan as a region they would like to have influence over. So the question is, will India be prepared to ship weapons to Russia and truck them through the CARs? Not only supplying weapons to a new and unstable ally but meeting the monetary and political consequences of it as well? That is a question that Delhi will be pulling it's hair over if this issue is occupying any importance there (which I honestly doubt), India has a very mature diplomatic corp, they can stab you in the heart and convince you it is for your own good and they never make mistakes.




India can probably take a hit to the economy, no doubt but the question is, with plenty of emerging alternate markets in Asia and Africa, will it be able to recover? One must think for the long haul after all. As for Afghanistan falling to Turbans and Kalashnikovs, I doubt that even Pakistan will stand by to see that happen. The last thing we need is to be fighting an insurgency that has a god damn country! The deepening Afghan Taliban-TTP connection means that as each day passes, Pakistan is seduced less and less by the concept of the Taliban back in power again. If anything, Pakistan would at this moment, be playing all it's cards for a settlement in Afghanistan that would convince the Taliban to drop their weapons because if the Afghan Taliban deweaponize, then the TTP automatically loses what little legitimacy it enjoys with the ultra-conservatives, allowing us to better root out the TTP from Pakistani society.

Like wise, I thoroughly enjoy reading your very well informed and educative posts.

India:

Indian foriegn policy post Rajiv's death has been meek and sometimes directionless.
Directionless part: India is almost trying to see what it wants to see in the current pro-west/India NA leadership. Unfortunately the fact that Indian policymakers deliberately choose to ignore is the majority of population are completely oblivious to the line of thinking of this elite class (irrespective of pashtuns or tajiks or hazaras). The salehs and karzai's I think are quite detached from the everyday concerns of afghans.

Meek ishness: India's rhetoric is to help rebuild Afghanistan and it is doing it's part, but on the other hand it also sees potential in Afghanistan as a counter to Pakistan. the meek ness is the inability to CO-mmmmmmmmit to it's goals. Indian foreign policy makers (both the hawks and the hippies) need to grow a spine and commit to it's objectives. If it wants to really help afghans develop, it should talk to pakistan and address all it's concerns and purely help afghanistan economically by building infrastucture. If it want's to play afghanistan as a strategic lynch pin, then it needs to throw actual muscle behind the afghans irrespective of pakistani concerns and be ready to take damage, but this indecisive agenda is hurting India and pakistan and most importantly is hurting Afghans! The geography and culture of afghans doesn't help India's cause either, afghans are dependent of pakistan for every pound of bread, economy is shattered, main produce is opium, corruption is rampant. There last grass root leader which was connected to the people I think was massoud, his death was one of the biggest setback. The next ones can't measure even to 10% of his foresight.

Pakistan:

Pakistan's foreign policy specializes in India and is extremely agile, but when it comes to other countries, it faces same directionless footsteps of India. Pakistan doesn't want a anti-pak afghan border, but it hesitates to get into discussion with karzai government and instead negotiates with factions (call them pashtuns, local tribes, taliban, mujhahideeen, take your pick). When pakistan was so pro-active in engaging taliban leadership when most of them were nuts, why can't Pakistan engage NA leadership (today pakistna is even engaging russia for heavens sake). If pakistan can come to the table irrespective of Indian dealings in afghanistan and bring a fresh start to afghan process, reminding the diplomatic chip of pro-pakistan assets that ISI still holds, pakistan can effectively brow beat Indian security influence from kabul. But instead pakistan is ruining it's reputation among the general afghans by shelling durrand line. All it will do is develop hostilities, which karzai govt is already trying to spin.

Afghanistan:
Afghanistan leadership is trying to play a game that is not equipped to play, one faction is trying to demonize Pakistan and leverage India, the other one wants america to stay while it milks american taxpayers, another class is working hard to get a status-quo with taliban (dis armed offcourse) to have a some kind of political/warlord division of territories under the name of afghanistan. None of them are even trying to address the problem of the common afghans. No matter which elite faction gets the steering wheel, this buggy is destined for the ravines. Afghan leadership needs at-least 10 years of sincerity towards it's people. atleast something similar to 5-year plan of say green/industrial revolution. Educational programs, de-weaponisation, and building some sense of nationality without propping up existential threats that it is used to (monarchy, communism, religion, taliban, america, pakistan etc etc)

Ideally India-pakistan should sign a treaty and stick to it where it wont use Afghanistan as a chess board, but I suspect neither of two nations are sincere or have the foresight to do so. With current policies no matter who wins in afganistan (ind/pak), afghans still will lose.

 

[Icarus]

Like wise, I thoroughly enjoy reading your very well informed and educative posts.

India:

Indian foriegn policy post Rajiv's death has been meek and sometimes directionless.
Directionless part: India is almost trying to see what it wants to see in the current pro-west/India NA leadership. Unfortunately the fact that Indian policymakers deliberately choose to ignore is the majority of population are completely oblivious to the line of thinking of this elite class (irrespective of pashtuns or tajiks or hazaras). The salehs and karzai's I think are quite detached from the everyday concerns of afghans.

Meek ishness: India's rhetoric is to help rebuild Afghanistan and it is doing it's part, but on the other hand it also sees potential in Afghanistan as a counter to Pakistan. the meek ness is the inability to CO-mmmmmmmmit to it's goals. Indian foreign policy makers (both the hawks and the hippies) need to grow a spine and commit to it's objectives. If it wants to really help afghans develop, it should talk to pakistan and address all it's concerns and purely help afghanistan economically by building infrastucture. If it want's to play afghanistan as a strategic lynch pin, then it needs to throw actual muscle behind the afghans irrespective of pakistani concerns and be ready to take damage, but this indecisive agenda is hurting India and pakistan and most importantly is hurting Afghans! The geography and culture of afghans doesn't help India's cause either, afghans are dependent of pakistan for every pound of bread, economy is shattered, main produce is opium, corruption is rampant. There last grass root leader which was connected to the people I think was massoud, his death was one of the biggest setback. The next ones can't measure even to 10% of his foresight.

Pakistan:

Pakistan's foreign policy specializes in India and is extremely agile, but when it comes to other countries, it faces same directionless footsteps of India. Pakistan doesn't want a anti-pak afghan border, but it hesitates to get into discussion with karzai government and instead negotiates with factions (call them pashtuns, local tribes, taliban, mujhahideeen, take your pick). When pakistan was so pro-active in engaging taliban leadership when most of them were nuts, why can't Pakistan engage NA leadership (today pakistna is even engaging russia for heavens sake). If pakistan can come to the table irrespective of Indian dealings in afghanistan and bring a fresh start to afghan process, reminding the diplomatic chip of pro-pakistan assets that ISI still holds, pakistan can effectively brow beat Indian security influence from kabul. But instead pakistan is ruining it's reputation among the general afghans by shelling durrand line. All it will do is develop hostilities, which karzai govt is already trying to spin.

Afghanistan:
Afghanistan leadership is trying to play a game that is not equipped to play, one faction is trying to demonize Pakistan and leverage India, the other one wants america to stay while it milks american taxpayers, another class is working hard to get a status-quo with taliban (dis armed offcourse) to have a some kind of political/warlord division of territories under the name of afghanistan. None of them are even trying to address the problem of the common afghans. No matter which elite faction gets the steering wheel, this buggy is destined for the ravines. Afghan leadership needs at-least 10 years of sincerity towards it's people. atleast something similar to 5-year plan of say green/industrial revolution. Educational programs, de-weaponisation, and building some sense of nationality without propping up existential threats that it is used to (monarchy, communism, religion, taliban, america, pakistan etc etc)

Ideally India-pakistan should sign a treaty and stick to it where it wont use Afghanistan as a chess board, but I suspect neither of two nations are sincere or have the foresight to do so. With current policies no matter who wins in afganistan (ind/pak), afghans still will lose.

You have hit the nail right on the head there. I believe that the points highlighted are pertinent points that must be addressed in order to balance the Afghan situation where it doesn't upset the scales of power into another regional scramble.