India supporting "Terrorists" in Afghanistan against Pakistan

[Bobby]

Secretary of defense nominee Chuck Hagel will remain nominee now....Indian lobby will not let him win now

 

[haviZsultan]

Actually its India responding in the same currency and same language. Unfortunately, in this proxy war, thousands of innocents lost their lives.

And I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel. This madness will keep on going while the borders will remain unchanged for decades to come.

That means you are largely admitting India's role in destabilizing Pakistan. Pakistan does is in the media attention and everyone criticizes it but what India does no one gives a damn about. Musharraf was so damn right about that one.

 

[F.O.X]

How come you guys started believing USA

WE didn't , they did ....

 

[haviZsultan]

Chuck Hagel is an excellent choice for defence nominee. He might successfully resolve the impasse between US and Pakistan there only and only because USA's support to India and the blind eye US has turned to efforts of India to destabilize Pakistan.

 

[Areesh]

For Kashmir East Pakistan ended up being the casualty.

We know what was the reason behind East Pakistan and we also know you can't do it again despite delusional Indians thinking otherwise. 2002 standoff was a great reminder for it.

Possibility of Modi becoming PM is low, though BJP coming to power is high.

Still it would be an opportunity for us considering the fact that BJP has religious right wing extremists in it.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

Chuck Hagel is an excellent choice for defence nominee. He might successfully resolve the impasse between US and Pakistan there only and only because USA's support to India and the blind eye US has turned to efforts of India to destabilize Pakistan.

So what makes you think that Chuck Hagel will not have the same "blind eye" that led to the present impasse between Pakistan and USA?

 

[Ayush]

That means you are largely admitting India's role in destabilizing Pakistan. Pakistan does is in the media attention and everyone criticizes it but what India does no one gives a damn about. Musharraf was so damn right about that one.

maybe,it is just the way we do it.our intelligence agencies are too good.

so good,that the world considers us a peace loving country.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

We know what was the reason behind East Pakistan and we also know you can't do it again despite delusional Indians thinking otherwise. 2002 standoff was a great reminder for it.

I never mentioned a repeat of 1971 is possible.

Still it would be an opportunity for us considering the fact that BJP has religious right wing extremists in it.

Your Govt attempted exploiting BJP Govt in 1999.

Kargil episode didn't go well for Pakistan

 

[RiazHaq]

American South Asia expert Stephen Cohen of Washington's Brookings Institution recently told his audience: "Not a few Indian generals and strategists have told me that if only America would strip Pakistan of its nuclear weapons then the Indian army could destroy the Pakistan army and the whole thing would be over."

These remarks sharply contrast with the volumes being written in the West, particularly in the United States, about Pakistan's "obsession" with India. Pakistan is being incessantly lectured by the Western leaders and media to stop worrying about the security threat from India and focus exclusively on its western frontiers and the Taliban. These positions are often echoed by some of the liberal media editorials and commentators in Pakistan as well, in spite of substantial evidence to the contrary.

Here's what Christine Fair of Rand Corporation thinks about Indian involvement in destabilizing Pakistan via its growing presence and influence in Afghanistan:

I think it would be a mistake to completely disregard Pakistan's regional perceptions due to doubts about Indian competence in executing covert operations. That misses the point entirely. And I think it is unfair to dismiss the notion that Pakistan's apprehensions about Afghanistan stem in part from its security competition with India. Having visited the Indian mission in Zahedan, Iran, I can assure you they are not issuing visas as the main activity! Moreover, India has run operations from its mission in Mazar (through which it supported the Northern Alliance) and is likely doing so from the other consulates it has reopened in Jalalabad and Qandahar along the border. Indian officials have told me privately that they are pumping money into Baluchistan. Kabul has encouraged India to engage in provocative activities such as using the Border Roads Organization to build sensitive parts of the Ring Road and use the Indo-Tibetan police force for security. It is also building schools on a sensitive part of the border in Kunar--across from Bajaur. Kabul's motivations for encouraging these activities are as obvious as India's interest in engaging in them. Even if by some act of miraculous diplomacy the territorial issues were to be resolved, Pakistan would remain an insecure state. Given the realities of the subcontinent (e.g., India's rise and its more effective foreign relations with all of Pakistan's near and far neighbors), these fears are bound to grow, not lessen. This suggests that without some means of compelling Pakistan to abandon its reliance upon militancy, it will become ever more interested in using it -- and the militants will likely continue to proliferate beyond Pakistan's control.

Here's another, similar view of India's involvement with the Taliban to foment trouble in Pakistan as seen by Laura Rozen in her article in Foreign Policy Magazine:

The former (American) intelligence official strongly supported the regional approach to Afghanistan suggested by US special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke. "Afghanistan is a classic power vacuum," the former official said. "Neighbors see it as point of instability to guarantee their own stability or an opportunity to score points."

While the U.S. media has frequently reported on Pakistani ties to ****** elements launching attacks in Afghanistan, it has less often mentioned that India supports insurgent forces attacking Pakistan, the former intelligence official said. "The Indians are up to their necks in supporting the Taliban against the Pakistani government in Afghanistan and Pakistan," the former (US) intelligence official who served in both countries said. "The same anti-Pakistani forces in Afghanistan also shooting at American soldiers are getting support from India. India should close its diplomatic establishments in Afghanistan and get the Christ out of there."

"None of this is ever one-sided," he added. "That is why it was so devastating and we were so let down" when India got taken out of Holbrooke's official brief.

Haq's Musings: India's Hostility Toward Pakistan

 

[PWFI]

after american exist
The Emergence Of Prophecy | The Black Flags From Khorasan - YouTube

 

[haviZsultan]

So what makes you think that Chuck Hagel will not have the same "blind eye" that led to the present impasse between Pakistan and USA?

You are one of the worst pessimists around.
I have some small spark of hope in my heart and I liked this speech of his. At least he is the first one to recognize there is a threat from India destabilizing Pakistan. Do you have a better option available? If not-then what!!!

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

American South Asia expert Stephen Cohen of Washington's Brookings Institution recently told his audience: "Not a few Indian generals and strategists have told me that if only America would strip Pakistan of its nuclear weapons then the Indian army could destroy the Pakistan army and the whole thing would be over."

These remarks sharply contrast with the volumes being written in the West, particularly in the United States, about Pakistan's "obsession" with India. Pakistan is being incessantly lectured by the Western leaders and media to stop worrying about the security threat from India and focus exclusively on its western frontiers and the Taliban. These positions are often echoed by some of the liberal media editorials and commentators in Pakistan as well, in spite of substantial evidence to the contrary.

Here's what Christine Fair of Rand Corporation thinks about Indian involvement in destabilizing Pakistan via its growing presence and influence in Afghanistan:

I think it would be a mistake to completely disregard Pakistan's regional perceptions due to doubts about Indian competence in executing covert operations. That misses the point entirely. And I think it is unfair to dismiss the notion that Pakistan's apprehensions about Afghanistan stem in part from its security competition with India. Having visited the Indian mission in Zahedan, Iran, I can assure you they are not issuing visas as the main activity! Moreover, India has run operations from its mission in Mazar (through which it supported the Northern Alliance) and is likely doing so from the other consulates it has reopened in Jalalabad and Qandahar along the border. Indian officials have told me privately that they are pumping money into Baluchistan. Kabul has encouraged India to engage in provocative activities such as using the Border Roads Organization to build sensitive parts of the Ring Road and use the Indo-Tibetan police force for security. It is also building schools on a sensitive part of the border in Kunar--across from Bajaur. Kabul's motivations for encouraging these activities are as obvious as India's interest in engaging in them. Even if by some act of miraculous diplomacy the territorial issues were to be resolved, Pakistan would remain an insecure state. Given the realities of the subcontinent (e.g., India's rise and its more effective foreign relations with all of Pakistan's near and far neighbors), these fears are bound to grow, not lessen. This suggests that without some means of compelling Pakistan to abandon its reliance upon militancy, it will become ever more interested in using it -- and the militants will likely continue to proliferate beyond Pakistan's control.

Here's another, similar view of India's involvement with the Taliban to foment trouble in Pakistan as seen by Laura Rozen in her article in Foreign Policy Magazine:

The former (American) intelligence official strongly supported the regional approach to Afghanistan suggested by US special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke. "Afghanistan is a classic power vacuum," the former official said. "Neighbors see it as point of instability to guarantee their own stability or an opportunity to score points."

While the U.S. media has frequently reported on Pakistani ties to ****** elements launching attacks in Afghanistan, it has less often mentioned that India supports insurgent forces attacking Pakistan, the former intelligence official said. "The Indians are up to their necks in supporting the Taliban against the Pakistani government in Afghanistan and Pakistan," the former (US) intelligence official who served in both countries said. "The same anti-Pakistani forces in Afghanistan also shooting at American soldiers are getting support from India. India should close its diplomatic establishments in Afghanistan and get the Christ out of there."

"None of this is ever one-sided," he added. "That is why it was so devastating and we were so let down" when India got taken out of Holbrooke's official brief.

Haq's Musings: India's Hostility Toward Pakistan

How about opinions of an American diplomat in Embassy Islamabad:

-----------------------------
The Baloch Weapons' Suppliers
-----------------------------

¶11. (S) The Baloch militias appear to be buying their weapons
from smugglers from Afghanistan, according to Embassy
contacts. These weapons are being run into the country by
hard-core criminal gangs, said Director General of the
National Police Bureau Muhammad Shoaib Suddle, who served
three tours with the police in the province. "They are not
doing it for tribal affinity; they are doing it for money."
The DGMI says it is easy to get weapons from narcotics
traffickers in the region. The GOP worries that Afghanistan
and India, the latter through its consulates in Afghanistan
and Iran, are providing funding and lethal aid to the Baloch
insurgents. (Note: Embassy has no evidence that India is
providing support to the Baloch insurgency through its
consulates in Afghanistan and Iran. End note.) Indian
financial assistance to the Baloch nationalists, if it
exists, could also be funneled through Baloch expatriates in
the Persian Gulf states who remit funds to the province.

Balochistan (6): The Nationalist Insurgency

 

[Hulk]

India financed problems for Pak in Afghanistan, says US defence secretary nominee Chuck Hagel

WASHINGTON: In a sharp contrast to US view on India's role in Afghanistan, President Barack Obama's defence secretary nominee Chuck Hagel has alleged that India has over the years "financed problems" for Pakistan in the war-torn country.

A video containing these remarks from an unreleased speech of Hagel at Oklahoma's Cameron University in 2011 was uploaded by Washington Free Beacon, sparking a strong reaction from India which said such comments are "contrary to the reality" of its unbounded dedication to the welfare of Afghans.

Hagel, during the speech said, "India for some time has always used Afghanistan as a second front, and India has over the years financed problems for Pakistan on that side of the border".

"And you can carry that into many dimensions, the point being [that] the tense, fragmented relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan has been there for many, many years," Hagel said.

Reacting to this, the Indian embassy here said,"Such comments attributed to Senator Hagel, who has been a long-standing friend of India and a prominent votary of close India-US relations are contrary to the reality of India's unbounded dedication to the welfare of Afghan people".

It added that India's commitment to a peaceful, stable and prosperous Afghanistan is unwavering, "and this is reflected in our significant assistance to Afghanistan in developing its economy, infrastructure and institutional capacities".

"Our opposition to terrorism and its safe havens in our neighbourhood is firm and unshakable.

"India's development assistance has been deeply appreciated by the people and the government of Afghanistan, and by our friends around the world including the US.

"We do not view our engagement with Afghanistan as a zero sum game," the embassy said.

Hagel's remarks are in sharp contrast to viewpoint of Obama Administration that has always been in praise of India's developmental role in Afghanistan and in fact has been pressing New Delhi to do more in Afghanistan.

Significantly, a deeply divided Senate is in the process of voting on US president's contentious nominee to head the defence department.

The embassy said India and the US have a shared perspective and a deep convergence of interests for ensuring peace and stability in Afghanistan.

"We will continue to work to help the Afghan people build a peaceful, prosperous, democratic and inclusive future for themselves in an environment free from terror and intimidation," the statement said.

The unearthing of anti-India comment by Hagel provided another ammunition to the Republican Senators to oppose his confirmation.

Once published, the news item was sent by the office of powerful Republican Senator John Cornyn, who is among the leading opponent of twice wounded Vietnam veteran's confirmation.

"In light of our shared interest in the US-India relationship, thought you would want to see this," said the email sent by Cornyn's office to top Indian American community leaders. Cornyn is co-chair of the Senate India Caucus.

"I am surprised and shocked. We did not know the story and background of Senator Hagel on India, Afghanistan and Pakistan. I think Indian community needs to work on to see how we can help to stop his nomination for the post of secretary of defence.

"We will definitely follow up with our senators and impress on them on the folly of such a nomination," Republican Sampat Shivangi, national president of Indian American Forum for Political Education, said.

As Nebraska Senator for two terms from 1997 to 2009, Hagel was member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, frequently travelled to South Asia and voted in favour of the historic India-US civilian nuclear deal.

During his trip to Pakistan he told the then Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf that a similar agreement was not on cards with Islamabad, because of the proliferation issues with his country.

Hagel's nomination has bitterly split the Senate, with Republicans turning on their former colleague and Democrats standing by Obama's nominee.

Republican lawmakers excoriated Hagel over his past statements and votes. They argued that he was too critical of Israel and too compromising with Iran. They cast the Nebraskan as a radical far out of the mainstream.

India financed problems for Pak in Afghanistan, says US defence secretary nominee Chuck Hagel - The Times of India

If the Pakistani does not consider 10 Americans view about their support to terrorism and terrorist in world and primary in the region, why should I care what one person says. We should have same yard stick, so I give a dam.

after american exist
The Emergence Of Prophecy | The Black Flags From Khorasan - YouTube

This guy is waiting for ages to send Afghanistan back to Taliban rule, hope god gives you what you are wishing for Afghanistan. You fully deserve it, since you think bad about Afghanistan.

 

[haviZsultan]

American South Asia expert Stephen Cohen of Washington's Brookings Institution recently told his audience: "Not a few Indian generals and strategists have told me that if only America would strip Pakistan of its nuclear weapons then the Indian army could destroy the Pakistan army and the whole thing would be over."

These remarks sharply contrast with the volumes being written in the West, particularly in the United States, about Pakistan's "obsession" with India. Pakistan is being incessantly lectured by the Western leaders and media to stop worrying about the security threat from India and focus exclusively on its western frontiers and the Taliban. These positions are often echoed by some of the liberal media editorials and commentators in Pakistan as well, in spite of substantial evidence to the contrary.

Here's what Christine Fair of Rand Corporation thinks about Indian involvement in destabilizing Pakistan via its growing presence and influence in Afghanistan:

I think it would be a mistake to completely disregard Pakistan's regional perceptions due to doubts about Indian competence in executing covert operations. That misses the point entirely. And I think it is unfair to dismiss the notion that Pakistan's apprehensions about Afghanistan stem in part from its security competition with India. Having visited the Indian mission in Zahedan, Iran, I can assure you they are not issuing visas as the main activity! Moreover, India has run operations from its mission in Mazar (through which it supported the Northern Alliance) and is likely doing so from the other consulates it has reopened in Jalalabad and Qandahar along the border. Indian officials have told me privately that they are pumping money into Baluchistan. Kabul has encouraged India to engage in provocative activities such as using the Border Roads Organization to build sensitive parts of the Ring Road and use the Indo-Tibetan police force for security. It is also building schools on a sensitive part of the border in Kunar--across from Bajaur. Kabul's motivations for encouraging these activities are as obvious as India's interest in engaging in them. Even if by some act of miraculous diplomacy the territorial issues were to be resolved, Pakistan would remain an insecure state. Given the realities of the subcontinent (e.g., India's rise and its more effective foreign relations with all of Pakistan's near and far neighbors), these fears are bound to grow, not lessen. This suggests that without some means of compelling Pakistan to abandon its reliance upon militancy, it will become ever more interested in using it -- and the militants will likely continue to proliferate beyond Pakistan's control.

Here's another, similar view of India's involvement with the Taliban to foment trouble in Pakistan as seen by Laura Rozen in her article in Foreign Policy Magazine:

The former (American) intelligence official strongly supported the regional approach to Afghanistan suggested by US special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke. "Afghanistan is a classic power vacuum," the former official said. "Neighbors see it as point of instability to guarantee their own stability or an opportunity to score points."

While the U.S. media has frequently reported on Pakistani ties to ****** elements launching attacks in Afghanistan, it has less often mentioned that India supports insurgent forces attacking Pakistan, the former intelligence official said. "The Indians are up to their necks in supporting the Taliban against the Pakistani government in Afghanistan and Pakistan," the former (US) intelligence official who served in both countries said. "The same anti-Pakistani forces in Afghanistan also shooting at American soldiers are getting support from India. India should close its diplomatic establishments in Afghanistan and get the Christ out of there."

"None of this is ever one-sided," he added. "That is why it was so devastating and we were so let down" when India got taken out of Holbrooke's official brief.

Haq's Musings: India's Hostility Toward Pakistan

Holbrooke, Christine Fair and Hillary Synnott are some of the more sympathetic western observors on Pakistan

 

[Kayoze]

That means you are largely admitting India's role in destabilizing Pakistan. Pakistan does is in the media attention and everyone criticizes it but what India does no one gives a damn about. Musharraf was so damn right about that one.

Pakistan has been doing the same since it came into inception and we Indians are just getting started and you folks seems to have already given up.
PA seems to be totally ignorant to fact India has great about of leaverage over Pakistan in terms of fact all pakistan's water flows from India and Pakistan has very badly treated its minorties.

Apart from these there are many faultlines in Pakistan which India never expolited in past because of pacifist nature of people at helm of affairs in India. Age of folks like Vajpayee and MMS is coming to an end and young assertive middle class wants Tit for Tat.