What's new

India in Afghanistan : Ministry of EA

We would take care our business the way it should be handled. Seems in Pakistan supplies are being personally driven to Afghanistan by Pakistanis who hate the living guts of USA. So whats stopping the Iranians and Afghanistanis from driving the goods to there respective destinations.

But india is not USA, it never was and never will be.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

india has 400 million people living below the poverty line. india has more poor people living in utter poverty than the entire total populations of Afghanistan and Pakistan combined.

india needs to take care of its massive poor population before worrying about Afghans.
 
.
Instead of this silly "Tu Tu Main Main" lets see if we can understand the issues and discuss them in a way that furthers our understanding - below is a piece from Gulf News, and I hope you will see in it some of the themes we have discussed before and which may inform Indian policy makers in the near near future



India can do more in Central Asia

If New Delhi seeks greater influence in the region, it needs to show more interest in developing relations with key West Asian states
By Mehmet Ozkan, Special to Gulf News, OpinionAsia 2010
Published: 00:00 October 26, 2010

What does Central Asia mean to India?

India's central Asia policy lacks holistic vision. Any effort to locate the area from an Indian perspective require, first, a redefinition of the existing parameters in Central Asia; and second, from a re-interpretation of the existing balance of power to portend possible policy options and alternatives.

The question of what Central Asia means to India can be addressed from at least three perspectives: historical, geopolitical and cultural. Analysing these elements in detail will not only explain the main determinants of India's policy towards Central Asia but also reveal options, obstacles and limitations.

From a historical perspective, one should accept that partition of the subcontinent in 1947 pushed India to the periphery of Central Asia and constrained its strategic options. While partition has influenced Indian domestic foreign policy greatly, its more profound impact has been on Indian foreign policy. After the creation of Pakistan, India was cut-off from its historical and natural neighbours: Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia.

From a geopolitical perspective, it is possible to argue there are three big players and three middle-tier players in Central Asia. The big players are Russia, China and the US (through their presence in Afghanistan). The middle players are Turkey, Iran and Pakistan. In this geopolitical setting, India is an outside power, and may influence the key questions in Central Asia in a mostly indirect way.

There is also a cultural element originating from India's own strategic thinking that shapes its policy towards Central Asia. A widely held view in the Indian strategic community is that ‘India's status is given, not earned'.

This has led many within the Indian political elite to take the rhetoric of a ‘Rising India' as an objective reality and to expect that others, especially those in Central Asia, to recognise India and act accordingly. This expectation has undermined India's Central Asian policy. More specifically, it has created a romanticised perspective within India about Central Asia. Curiously, the Indian policy elite tends not to query how the Central Asian republics see and perceive India.

India's foreign policy towards Central Asia has two characteristics. First, it has been generally mild and cautious, although it has become more assertive after the Chinese diplomatic offensive started in the region around 2005. Since then, India understood that despite the rising power rhetoric, its ability to shape the politics in Central Asia was very limited.

With China and Pakistan hostile, it is almost impossible for India to directly exert influence in Central Asia. The prime case here is in Afghanistan. This feeling of isolation accentuates India's need to develop a new and cohesive strategy. Discussions about this new strategy have been fitful and intermittent arguably because the basic question of what India wants from the region has not been answered.

Second, India's Central Asia policy has been ad hoc in nature and reactive.

In order to avoid this, India should define its position and priorities vis-à-vis other players in Central Asia. Does India want to balance the big players such as China and Russia in Central Asia? Or does India seek to balance middle players like Pakistan and Iran?

From a realist perspective, the possibility of India's balancing of the big players in Central Asia sounds like a stretch. However, whether India should balance the middle players in the area or not is a question that is directly related to Pakistan, since India has excellent relations with Turkey and Iran.

Middle-tier players

A new Indian strategy towards Central Asia should conceive of the region beyond Pakistan and China, and develop a policy of building inroads of cooperation with the middle-tier players, especially with Turkey and Iran. India's cooperation with Russia and the US in Central Asia is beneficial, but it is unlikely to secure the foreign policy posture India desires.

On the other hand, cooperation with Iran and Turkey might be beneficial for India for various reasons. First, Turkey and Iran are making significant strides in Central Asia in the political, economic and energy realms. Turkey's inroads are especially striking.

In September 2010, the presidents of Turkey and the Turkic republics decided to establish a new political mechanism — the Turkic Leaders Summit — which will have its secretariat in Istanbul.

Currently, India's principal foreign policy focus continues to be dominated by Pakistan and China. As such, it has overlooked ways to influence Central Asia through different channels such as cooperating with middle-tie countries. For that to happen, India should work to improve relations with at bilateral level first.

In India, there is a feeling that West Asia is of lesser interest for Delhi's foreign policy tsars. If India seeks greater influence in Central Asia, it needs to show more interest in developing relations with key West Asian states. After all, the nomenclature, "West Asia" connotes that Turkey and Iran are not far away lands.

Mehmet Ozkan is a PhD Candidate at Sevilla University, Spain, and a Visiting Fellow at Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi.
 
.
^ Well India can try its best to get into Central Asia but it cant take away the Geographical reality that there is a country called Pakistan blocking it off from C.A.

The author mentiones improving ties with Iran but recently ties have only deteriorated with India voting against Iran (surprisingly i might add) on several occasions. As for Turkey, Pakistan has too close relations with Turkey for us to worry about India getting too close with them. If there is one country whose friendship you can not doubt its got to be Turkey, which means that at the end of the day if India truly wants access to Central Asia it will have to come to some sort of compromise with Pakistan.
 
.
^ Well India can try its best to get into Central Asia but it cant take away the Geographical reality that there is a country called Pakistan blocking it off from C.A.

The author mentiones improving ties with Iran but recently ties have only deteriorated with India voting against Iran (surprisingly i might add) on several occasions. As for Turkey, Pakistan has too close relations with Turkey for us to worry about India getting too close with them. If there is one country whose friendship you can not doubt its got to be Turkey, which means that at the end of the day if India truly wants access to Central Asia it will have to come to some sort of compromise with Pakistan.

India already has lots of trade relations with central asian nations and we even have air bases there.

You talk as if India is going to central asia for the first time for picnic. :lol:
 
.
At Pakistani enthusiasts.

I think you are frozen in previous times or knowingly trying to went of your insecurities with premature comments.

The whole negotiation thing with Taliban is for not to get them on board as an ideology but people, this is what all powers involved are trying to peruse; not to the likes of many who think Taliban will be as sterile as it was before WOT.

WOT has opened doors for group of people who joined Taliban; left isolated by powers within and outside. Taliban was not Pakistan's progeny but an entity getting benefits from Pakistan to endorse its own ideology in Afghanistan. It a sheer over optimism and over estimation by part of Pakistan to consider Taliban as champions for the cause of their strategic depths in Afghanistan. You have natural strategic depth irrespective of any regime in Afghanistan, which all sane Pakistanis know.

Furthermore Taliban was not winning Afghanistan for Pakistan; cause Pakistan was investing in them? but for themselves. Pakistan as a winner of Afghanistan was a thrust upon tag by West before WOT and became recipe for infamous PR after.

Whatever twinkling tactical support (which was retracted post WOT gradually) Pakistan was providing to Taliban can be calculated as ineffectual due to magnanimity of WOT operations by USA and logistics available to Taliban; same as till date. Also the tactics used by Taliban is no where near to what PA learnt in its academies. How Pakistan army (who is well groomed to fight conventional war) struggled at the start fighting against these scatted insurgents is testimony to this. Also an honest audit can reveal how much Pakistan could have been pledging to Taliban by calculating how much a nation can afford who is self a security state due to its engagement with its eastern neighbor and regimes down to collecting funds after Friday prayers. Only in recent years Pakistan was convinced down to dilute the saturation at IB with India, not the just after years of WOT, suggest who was more precious to care.

I have read few comments by Pakistani posters betting on Taliban without knowing the fact that Pakistani textbook ethos are totally against such ideologies. The only homogeneity which Pakistan could boast about with Taliban was the religion. Encouraging Taliban version of zeal upon its own masses was deleterious to the very Pakistani fabric of diversity. The damage done to the society was spurt, can be seen today, who (society) was already in a transition to change, to get a rid from dictatorship and previous versions of radical Islamic ideologies.

Pakistan is at present fighting against Taliban and this is the only ground reality and only wise slogan to shout. Negotiations are on, but secondary to pressure created by offence not the opposite.

Also in near future another key player will be moving in to invest i.e. China. Pakistan has to tone down its pro Taliban slogans which usually are shouted to bully India or face saving farewell to previous stands. There is no need to be manipulate, Pakistan is not small to conspire avenges or stick with religion chosen by someone in power at the cost of its society but too big to project its national interests as a mean social state like any other nation.
 
Last edited:
.
India already has lots of trade relations with central asian nations and we even have air bases there.

You talk as if India is going to central asia for the first time for picnic. :lol:

You took it the wrong way my friend and yes i know you have an airbase in Tajikistan but you cant take relations to the next step without Pakistans support, Just a small example is the gas pipeline from Turkmenistan, It quite obviously has to go through Pakistan in order to reach India. Of course Pakistan gains in this as well so there is no reason for us to block this gas pipeline to India but this is just a small example of geographical realities :)
 
.
India has 400 million people living below the poverty line. India has more poor people living in utter poverty than the entire total populations of Afghanistan and Pakistan combined.

India has also lifted 400 million people out of poverty in the last 2 decades thats greater than twice the entire population of Pakistan,if its the games of number you wish to play,i can toy with you for a long time.


ontopic

India will do what in best interests of India,but we project those interests as if its in sync with that of the other nation.

The proof of the above fact is Tajikistan and Afghanistan.
 
Last edited:
.
You are right Bombensturm, but you replied to the biggest troll on this forum. He brought up the poverty card due to none of other trolls along him had no replies for there Incompetent attitudes. Sometimes it boggles my mind when they get to keep there Elite title after trolling obnoxiously.

True!:tup:

I 'm just tired of people bringing out this 400 million figure and making it sound like India has never done anything.

Though the poverty part does have some connection.Complaints were raised in UK parliament why UK still gives aid to India in the name of poverty eradication,a nation which has sent a rocket to moon and has its own aid program.
 
.
Its interesting to note that India has made gains in Central Asia,only where Pakistan has meddled .

Afghanistan is a known story.

As for Tajikistan ,Pakistan's support for Islamic militants during the Tajikistan civil war paved a way for Indian presence over there.
 
.
Our message is clear to the Afghanistan government and the people..we have the power to push their country back into stone age if they will collaborate with our foes against us. As long as that frame work is observed, and no bigoted plans are being carved out to establish Afghan kingdom, we are all at peace and have no problem with any bilateral relations of Afghanistan.

We have to beware that America ill designs in the region. The Indians are hell bent on proving Pakistan an artificial country by systematically isolating it all around with American help.
 
.
Its interesting to note that India has made gains in Central Asia,only where Pakistan has meddled .

Afghanistan is a known story.

As for Tajikistan ,Pakistan's support for Islamic militants during the Tajikistan civil war paved a way for Indian presence over there.

What’s the supply or trade route India has or any boarder link ? with land lock Central Asia.
China, Russia, Iran and Afganistan throught Pakistan (Favored by US) are the trade route. I don't see India in the equation?

Yes India has made road through Iran but with Iranian sanctions it use less to India.
 
.
Ambidex


I think you are confused about support for the Talib - I don't think talib have much support in Pakistan - Talib in Afghanistan do however; have support among Pashtun majorities in Pakistan.

As for India's role in central Asia and in particular in Afghanistanb, it's really a second tier role - I think they are doing a great job with the kinds of things they are a part of, especially with regard to media.

Pakistan's concerns are very different from those of India, Pakistan obviously, sharesa border with Afghanistan, India does not, a majority of Pashtun or Pakhtun, live in Pakistan and have a sense of solidarity with a majority of the Afghan population, who are Pashtun - so the dynamic is very different.

India at present, cannot inluence events such that it can effect Afghanistan, however; India with Iran and Russia, well that's another question altogether and in Pakistan, that is takjen rather seriously.

But a question to Indian friends, what is that you hope to achieve in Afghanistan or Central Asia that you think can be achieved at the expense of Pakistan? Is it even a reasonable proposition?
 
.
But a question to Indian friends, what is that you hope to achieve in Afghanistan or Central Asia that you think can be achieved at the expense of Pakistan? Is it even a reasonable proposition?

A complete end to the human fodder of Afghans that were trained and pushed in India as terrorists by Pakistan.

Enough influence to stop Pakistan taking Afghanistan as granted.

I think its rather reasonable.
 
.
Our message is clear to the Afghanistan government and the people..we have the power to push their country back into stone age if they will collaborate with our foes against us.

Why shouldn't the Afghans hate you,when you make such statements?

By the way,their country was is in stone age,during Taliban era.
 
.
A complete end to the human fodder of Afghans that were trained and pushed in India as terrorists by Pakistan.

Enough influence to stop Pakistan taking Afghanistan as granted.

I think its rather reasonable


Fair enough, what are you willing to do to ensure this outcome?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom