Hypothetical Afghan-Pakistan War & Repercussions

[Hamza913]

Why does this thread exist? If a war broke out, we know Afghanistan wouldn't stand a chance and the Taliban (or possibly ISIS) would take over.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Most likely; you'll see Afghanistan split into another surge of ethnic tensions - Pakistan as always will support the Pashtuns.

In the future; Pakistan will most likely infringe on Afghan territory with the possible support of the locals - right now; Pakistan has the legal rights to capture a tenth of Afghanistan's territory.

 

[gangsta_rap]

We'll enforce the original durand line agreement.

 

[A-Team]

I don't Intend to open this discussion for War mongering but With Intention to have viable discussion.Will it ever happen? If so How will the world react .
Below I have Some reasons which can support my Thread that Pakistan can In-fact go to war with Afghanistan under some conditions.
-A(Afghans Continue to have border skirmishes killing and Injuring Pakistani Soldiers and civilians

You do realize there is already a state of hostilities between AF-PAK in the works for the last one decade now, so this is not a hypothetical situation but a reality on the ground thanks to the hawkish GHQ policies.
The Generals in the GHQ are fighting a war in Afghanistan to make a client state, while the AF side is fighting a war to defend its sovereignty.

Lines have been drawn already, and the recent NATO summit where the world has pledged 5 more years of sustained assistance to the AF gov is a clear cut sign to the GHQ.

 

[pakistani342]

You do realize there is already a state of hostilities between AF-PAK in the works for the last one decade now, so this is not a hypothetical situation but a reality on the ground thanks to the hawkish GHQ policies.
The Generals in the GHQ are fighting a war in Afghanistan to make a client state, while the AF side is fighting a war to defend its sovereignty.

Lines have been drawn already, and the recent NATO summit where the world has pledged 5 more years of sustained assistance to the AF gov is a clear cut sign to the GHQ.

Don't you think a clear sign to the GHQ should imply clear means to defeating the GHQ -- the 5 billion will barely maintain the status quo.

 

[A-Team]

NATO, nor the US wouldn't go to war against Pakistan. In fact, the security pact that Ghani agreed to actually address that US/NATO forces would not defend Afghanistan's territory, nor fight on its behalf, if a foreign national force attacked or invaded Afghanistan. This was the main reason why Karzai didn't want to sign the pact, as he felt that foreign forces should have helped Afghanistan, if Afghanistan ever went to war with Pakistan.

----

On topic, Afghanistan will no longer exist in its current borders, if it goes to war with Pakistan. Likely, Pakistan will go in, force Afghanistan to surrender, and get out. If Afghanistan's government, or military doesn't survive the war, Afghanistan will likely break into multiple states.

Wrong, actually US/NATO and practically the rest of the world has taken sides already in the conflict which is AF, it's actually Pakistan that is fighting a losing war. If you have missed the recent Warsaw NATO summit, 5 more years of assistance to the AF side is not only signal to the allies but to foes alike.

Here is a quick peak of the agreement between US and AF in case of external agression.

4. In the event of external aggression or the threat of external aggression against Afghanistan, the Parties shall hold consultations on an urgent basis to develop and implement an appropriate response, including, as may be mutually determined, consideration of available political, diplomatic, military, and economic measures on the list developed pursuant to paragraph 3, in accordance with their respective constitutional procedures.

http://mfa.gov.af/Content/files/BSA ENGLISH AFG.pdf

 

[pakistani342]

I don't Intend to open this discussion for War mongering but With Intention to have viable discussion.Will it ever happen? If so How will the world react .
Below I have Some reasons which can support my Thread that Pakistan can In-fact go to war with Afghanistan under some conditions.
-A(Afghans Continue to have border skirmishes killing and Injuring Pakistani Soldiers and civilians

• • 13 June 2016 - A Pakistan Army Major Ali Jawad Changezi was injured by Afghan firing along Torkham border. Jawad later died in CMH Peshawar on 14 June. Two Pakistani border guards and nine civilians were also injured in Afghan firing. Afghans started "unprovoked firing" at roughly 9pm on Sunday to disrupt the construction of a gate 37 meters inside the Pakistani side of the border.The gate is designed to curb illegal cross-border movement and check the movement of terrorists, and is part of the greater under-construction Pakistan–Afghanistan barrier.The Torkham border crossing was forced to close due to skirmishes.Afghan chief executive Abdullah Abdullah claimed that one of their soldiers was killed and six were wounded. Pakistan reacted by capturing three Afghan border outposts.
  • 14 June 2016 - An Afghan soldier and two civilians were killed allegedly in Pakistani firing and 12 soldiers were also injured.
  • 15 June 2016 - An Afghan soldier, Khushal Wakilzada was killed and five others were injured in Pakistani firing, whereas the Torkham crossing remained closed. Pakistan reportedly restarted the construction of the border gate. Two Pakistani soldiers were also injured in Afghan firing.

-B(Blame game of terrorist backing in the region and a terrorist attack from which Pakistanis blame fully on war torn Afghanistan,Believe it or not APS attackers and various other attackers have planned their attacks and crossed into Pakistan from Afghanistan.

Pakistan responsible for failure of peace initiatives of Afghanistan: Ashraf Ghani

WARSAW: President of Afghanistan Ashraf Ghani has held Pakistan responsible for failure of the peace initiatives taken by Afghanistan saying Pakistan differentiates between good and bad terrorists "in practice".


Addressing Nato summit on Saturday, Ashraf Ghani said,"Our regional initiatives with neighbours are beginning to yield significant cooperative dividends. However, the exception is with Pakistan."


He went on saying that despite clear commitments to the quadrilateral peace process, Pakistan's dangerous distinction between good and bad terrorists was being maintained in practice.


Ashraf Ghani said that the key problem among our neighbouring states was an absence of agreed rules of the game, thus we seek regional and global support in creating those rules, which will bind us to collective security and harmony.


The world leaders should understand that Afghanistan is facing a multi-dimensional conflict and is fighting all sorts of groups "ranging from Al-Qaeda and Daesh to terrorist groups with Central Asian, Chinese, and Russian origins, to Pakistani groups classified as terrorists by Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban groups," the Afghan President maintained.


Citing the 2015 Makkah declaration against terrorism as an example, Ashraf Ghani claimed that Afghanistan's dialogue within the Arab-Muslim community was also productive.


He was of the view that the recent terrorist attack near the Mosque of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) in Madina has outraged the Muslim community and "should result in a consensus against the minority which is attempting to hijack our civilization".


Ghani thanked all the Nato countries for "fighting shoulder to shoulder" with Afghanistan's own forces and claimed that the organization has maintained its relevance and effectiveness in the paradigm shift presented by post-9/11 Afghanistan.


"The organization’s fulfillment of both its combat and support missions in Afghanistan is a corroboration of NATO’s continued global relevance, adaptability and effectiveness. Its transformative legacy, however, is building our 352,000 strong security and defense forces," said Ghani.


He also thanked US President Barack Obama for expanding the authorities of the Resolute Support Mission and his latest decision to maintain American troops throughout his term.

http://nation.com.pk/international/...peace-initiatives-of-afghanistan-ashraf-ghani
-C(Pakistan Invades under a dictatorial Leader (Civil or military) short tempered.
-D(Pakistan wants to Expand its borders and takes a Afghan state for resources.
-E(Continuous Influence of India on Afghanistan and which draws concerns to Pakistan's National security prompts Pakistan to have Air raids inside Afghanistan.(A disturbed and dysfunctional Pakistan is in the Interests of India because honestly Economic downfall of Pakistan is also in the Interests and serves in the Interest of India)

Hopefully this never happens we saw the whole world laughing on Muslims when Iran Iraq Kuwait war happened.

I think to the *Jurnail sahiban's* slight defense: I think the GHQ knows the only way to successfully invade Afghanistan is by never crossing the Durand line.

If ever Pakistan did cross the Durand line in any significant way: Pakistan will face humiliation and destruction of material, loss of blood and significant treasure: it simply does not have the wherewithal to be anything remotely approaching an occupying power in Afghanistan. Actually even the strongest powers have found invading Afghanistan relatively easy: holding it is an altogether different story.

Wrong, actually US/NATO and practically the rest of the world has taken sides already in the conflict which is AF, it's actually Pakistan that is fighting a losing war. If you have missed the recent Warsaw NATO summit, 5 more years of assistance to the AF side is not only signal to the allies but to foes alike.

Here is a quick peak of the agreement between US and AF in case of external agression.

4. In the event of external aggression or the threat of external aggression against Afghanistan, the Parties shall hold consultations on an urgent basis to develop and implement an appropriate response, including, as may be mutually determined, consideration of available political, diplomatic, military, and economic measures on the list developed pursuant to paragraph 3, in accordance with their respective constitutional procedures.

http://mfa.gov.af/Content/files/BSA ENGLISH AFG.pdf

I'm no lawyer but some items to emphasize:
1. shall hold consultations on an urgent basis

^^^^ it simply commits the US to hold "consultations"

2. to develop and implement an appropriate response, including, as may be mutually determined, consideration of available political, diplomatic, military, and economic measures

^^^^ there is no guarantee spelled here: mutually determined

don't have the text of CENTO and SETO handy but I would bet you it was much stronger language: the result was Zero for Pakistan [as it should have been, the US is not in the business of fighting Pakistan's wars]

it's actually Pakistan that is fighting a losing war
^^^^ it definitely may be loosing some war: of the impact of climate change, over population, its competition with India -- but vis-a-vis Afghanistan the battle for now seems to not favor Afghanistan. It's simply a matter of size and scale and capacity

 

[A-Team]

I think to the *Jurnail sahiban's* slight defense: I think the GHQ knows the only way to successfully invade Afghanistan is by never crossing the Durand line.

If ever Pakistan did cross the Durand line in any significant way: Pakistan will face humiliation and destruction of material, loss of blood and significant treasure: it simply does not have the wherewithal to be anything remotely approaching an occupying power in Afghanistan. Actually even the strongest powers have found invading Afghanistan relatively easy: holding it is an altogether different story.

I didn't want to spoil the fun times some of the posters here were having when fantasizing about the conflict with Afghanistan, but I think you have summarized the folly of such exercise very well.

Kudos to you

@LT.GreenBullet

 

[Stannis Baratheon]

I think the main factor would be NATO.


Afghan army vs. Pakistan and Afghan army backed by NATO vs. Pakistan would result in 2 different scenarios and possibly results ..

There is absolutely no reason for NATO to get involved in a war between the 2.

 

[saiyan0321]

Although Afghanistan severely wants a war as seen by their aggression in the torkham incident and constant aggression the moment they got something remotely like an army, pakistan is not interested.. The thing is that we are moving forward economically and are looking to increase our trade ties with various nations whilst solve the many issues that plague us. The last thing we want is to go to war with a war torn nation that has nothing better to do.

This is why Pakistan is focusing on defensive points across our borders while also fencing and creating greater security points to combat cross border movements.

However Afghanistan that is severely divided needs an enemy to unite it and Pakistan has always been that boogie man. You see it's very easy to point to Pakistan by saying they hold half our lands in occupation and they must be returned. It unites a nation however the negative is that Afghanistan does not have mature politicians nor diplomats yo control the hatred to make sure incidents don't turn to war.

The constant blame of every Ill on the GHQ and not recognizing short comings in their own civil war has turned Afghanistan into a nation that hates Pakistan and wants total war against them. The funny thing it was the same story in 1960s and it's the same story now.

As for war. Pakistan is not going to annex Afghanistan and nor do I want it to. I could write what if scenarios and how insurgencies will rise against us if we annex but too lazy. So lets stay at We are happy as it is and we don't want them. They can do whatever they want.

We build check points, trenches, gates and walls and fences and move forward.

 

[pakistani342]

I didn't want to spoil the fun times some of the posters here were having when fantasizing about the conflict with Afghanistan, but I think you have summarized the folly of such exercise very well.

Kudos to you

@LT.GreenBullet

I'm no military expert -- frankly kinetic stuff does not interest me -- it seems too primitive

But as your favorite Sun Tsu said: The greatest general is he who wins without firing a single arrow.

Not that the Pindi boys know anything of great generalship -- but if you look at the last thirty years: they have never crossed the Durand line -- there is simply no need to. In between their sips of chardonnay: they have figured out a far more effective, cheaper instrument: "Extremist Islam" -- yes like chemotherapy it is poisonous for both the patient and tumor but that's all the Pindi boys have for now.

 

[.]

We'll enforce the original durand line agreement.

Original 1893 ? Another failure on Part of Pakistan?

You do realize there is already a state of hostilities between AF-PAK in the works for the last one decade now, so this is not a hypothetical situation but a reality on the ground thanks to the hawkish GHQ policies.
The Generals in the GHQ are fighting a war in Afghanistan to make a client state, while the AF side is fighting a war to defend its sovereignty.

Lines have been drawn already, and the recent NATO summit where the world has pledged 5 more years of sustained assistance to the AF gov is a clear cut sign to the GHQ.

Absolutely!!I'm fully aware of the blame game between the Afghan Nationalist population and Pakistani's ,you're right to say hostilities have been in Place since a decade now.
You are not new to saying this,I once came across a senior Person in bureaucracy who said that GHQ is playing blood games inside Afghanistan and is supporting terrorism to keep region destabilized and to get the money from the United states keep coming.
I was shocked hearing this I said"Uncle what is the evidence?"He said evidence is my argument" .So Just like my uncle you are not saying anything new ,Where is the evidence my friend? I agree on part of Pakistan it has made some mistakes like the Operations of Quetta shura was based inside Pakistan.
But my brother this is just blame games ...I don't think that GHQ's Military aid from the United states is based on war on terror but its based on providing support to its allies ,It does that to many countries around the globe!!
Btw do you agree in Splitting Afghanistan will resolve the internal fighting?

Although Afghanistan severely wants a war as seen by their aggression in the torkham incident and constant aggression the moment they got something remotely like an army, pakistan is not interested.. The thing is that we are moving forward economically and are looking to increase our trade ties with various nations whilst solve the many issues that plague us. The last thing we want is to go to war with a war torn nation that has nothing better to do.

This is why Pakistan is focusing on defensive points across our borders while also fencing and creating greater security points to combat cross border movements.

However Afghanistan that is severely divided needs an enemy to unite it and Pakistan has always been that boogie man. You see it's very easy to point to Pakistan by saying they hold half our lands in occupation and they must be returned. It unites a nation however the negative is that Afghanistan does not have mature politicians nor diplomats yo control the hatred to make sure incidents don't turn to war.

The constant blame of every Ill on the GHQ and not recognizing short comings in their own civil war has turned Afghanistan into a nation that hates Pakistan and wants total war against them. The funny thing it was the same story in 1960s and it's the same story now.

As for war. Pakistan is not going to annex Afghanistan and nor do I want it to. I could write what if scenarios and how insurgencies will rise against us if we annex but too lazy. So lets stay at We are happy as it is and we don't want them. They can do whatever they want.

We build check points, trenches, gates and walls and fences and move forward.

Brothor Pakistan keeps the 4rd highest exports with afghanistan 8.5% followed by Germany 5.1%.
You have no Idea what afghanistan is worth ,If Pakistan can take strategically located badakshan province it has abundant natural resources,Will provide safe and secure Passage of Gas-lines to Pakistan from Central asia and North Pakistani citizens.
http://mines.pajhwok.com/news/mineral-resources-badakhshan-province

 

[That Guy]

Wrong, actually US/NATO and practically the rest of the world has taken sides already in the conflict which is AF, it's actually Pakistan that is fighting a losing war. If you have missed the recent Warsaw NATO summit, 5 more years of assistance to the AF side is not only signal to the allies but to foes alike.

Here is a quick peak of the agreement between US and AF in case of external agression.

4. In the event of external aggression or the threat of external aggression against Afghanistan, the Parties shall hold consultations on an urgent basis to develop and implement an appropriate response, including, as may be mutually determined, consideration of available political, diplomatic, military, and economic measures on the list developed pursuant to paragraph 3, in accordance with their respective constitutional procedures.

http://mfa.gov.af/Content/files/BSA ENGLISH AFG.pdf

lol, you pretty much proved me right. The pact doesn't guarantee support, only a basis for consultation, meaning zero guarantee.

As for your point of Pakistan fighting a "losing war", that's actually Afghanistan you're thinking about. Pakistan's priorities are a stable western border, it doesn't give a shit what happens to Afghanistan itself. Terrorism is decreasing in Pakistan, and increasing in Afghanistan.

Also, the "support" that you're talking about which NATO is giving, that's actually a major decrease in assistance; Not only that, but according to Afghanistan's government, ANSF needed $5 billion from NATO every year, and it is only getting around $1 billion (with zero guarantees that it will even receive the money).

Don't get me wrong, I support the US decision to keep troops in Afghanistan for much longer. The last thing Pakistan, heck even the world, needs is an Afghanistan with a toothless ANA, unable to keep militants from creating new sanctuaries in Afghanistan, as they have in Nuristan province. We just need to be realistic about the situation on the ground, if militancy is to be eradicated.

Afghanistan cannot continue to blame domestic problems on Pakistan. It is not Pakistan's fault that the ANA has a high desertion rate, nor is it Pakistan's fault that the ANSF and Afghan government is filled with incompetency and corruption. Fix those, and you fix most of your problems.

 

[barbarosa]

In Future Pak would have war with Afghan army at full scale.

As Afghans considered Pak as there arch enemy.
Every solider and General , Major and colonel consider Pak as real and ultimate Enemy as every one in Pak army consider the India as enemy.

If U read Afghan views on Pak u will be shocked. They hate Pak by heart.

As There is war going in Pak between Talbian and Afghan army and the Afghan army consider Talbain as B team of Pak army.

Afghanistan would attack the Pak in case Indiao Pak war.

NATO gives $1bn to boost US security effort in Afghanistan
One billion US dollars of support for the American effort in Afghanistan has been agreed by NATO, Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said. The commitment…
RT.COM

Afghanistan reviewing Islamabad’s 8-Article Action Plan
http://www.en.rahapress.af/afghanistan-reviewing-islamabads-8-article-action-plan/

Pakistan has sent an 8-article action plan to President Ashraf Ghani through a high-level Afghan delegation that visited Islamabad on Thursday to convey the message of the Afghan president regarding action against the Taliban who are enjoying safe havens in the neighboring country, said an official.

In the aftermath of a wave of deadly terrorist attacks in Kabul that led to the killing of dozens of Afghans, Kabul sent a delegation, comprising of the acting defense minister Masoom Stanikzai, Minister of Foreign Affairs Salahuddin Rabbani and the chief of National Directorate of Security Rahmatullah Nabil, to Islamabad.

An official told Azadi Radio on condition of anonymity that the Afghan government is looking into the action plan.

Though contents of the action plan are not clear so far, a number of lawmakers assume that Pakistan may have stuck to its old demands—unconditional access to Central Asia via Afghanistan, recognition of the Durand Line as international border, control over Afghanistan’s foreign policy and natural resources.

With the full support of USA and India but we will not fight against Afghani but the ally.

 

[Sher Malang]

I would never wish a Pakistan -Afghan war. I would prefer dialogue and negotiations between both though.

Since its only a "hypothetical" scenario. In a hypothetical war, Considering ISAF will not join ANA and Pakistan will not attack ISAF, Pakistan's main aim should be to take Kabul and capture/kill Afghan top brass swiftly to end the war.

Just before the war, Pakistan finds local Afghani warlords who are against ANA and pays them handsomely to keep ANA engaged in all sectors outside Kabul till PA forces reach Kabul.

Militarily :

Pakistan Air Force:
1. Deploy PAF 16th Squadron to attack defensive positions of ANA 201st Corps around Kabul.

2. Deploy PAF 26th Squadron to attack reinforcements and supply columns coming towards Kabul.

3. Deploy PAF 19th Squadron on AD-Alert and to provide air cover to 16 and 26 squadrons to counter IAF Mig-29 from Tajikistan.

4. Deploy UAV squadron to monitor movements of Afghan Top brass leaving Kabul. Target top brass with UCAV Squadron when they leave Kabul.


Pakistan Army

1. SSG platoon along with an infantry company is heli-dropped near Jalal abad. Their task is to capture Jalalabad or engage ANA forces there till link up with ground troops.

2. Deploy AH-1 Squadron to clear the route on highway from Torkham to Jalalabad.

3. The Armoured Brigade from Nowshera spearheads the ground forces supported by an Infantry Brigade from 7th Infantry Division towards Jalalabad. Elements of AH-1 squadron provide Air-cover to advancing Pakistani ground troops on this highway.

This ground force is then followed up by remaining elements of 7th Infantry Division moving towards Jalalabd..

4. Once Jalalabad is captured. 7th Divison establishes Field HQ in Jalalabad and the airfield can now be used. Meanwhile forward elements of 9th Infantry Division start moving from Torkham to Jalalabad.

5. Airlift SSG to be paradropped around Kabul, near Kabul International Airport. Airlift 7th Division's 2 X infantry battalion for heli drop near Kabul, area secured by SSG. Deployed SSG and infantry forces at landing zone are provided air cover by AH-1 detachment and PAF 16th Squadron.

This force is required to secure Kabul Airport and then makes its way towards government buildings of Kabul city.

6. Two Infantry brigades of 7th Infantry division advance towards Kabul under air cover of AH-1 squadron on Kabul-Jalalabad highway.

7. Once Kabul Airport is secured, 1 X brigade of 9th Infantry Division is Air lifted from Peshawar and lands at Kabul Airport to reinforce SSG and battalions of 7th Infantry Division in kabul before the ground force of 2 Brigades of 7th Infantry Division arrives.

8. Once Kabul is taken, the war can come to an end.

Stop playing Call of Duty man!! the Afghan population will chew everything coming from Pakistan, flesh or metal doesn't matter! and will flood the plain terren of Pakistan via streets of Peshawar and Islamabad within days, Pakistan economically cannot sustain a war for more than a month inside Afghanistan nor PA has any experince of battle and equipment to fight in terrens like Afghanistan. The war will not be between ANA and PA it will be with whole Afghan nation against PA - Pakistani population are ducks infront of Afghans who are fighting from birth to death since 4 decades. Finally don't forget Pakistan's other enemies will not miss the chance to hit from left right top bottom

The above is my analysis for the current status of Afghanistan and Pakistan, but things will be different in 20 years from now ANSF will be a professional force with air defence and supriority and at that time Pakistan will think 10 times before going for any misadventure against Afghanistan just like it did in 60, 70s and 80s.