What's new

Post-9/11, US sought India’s military help for Afghan ops

angeldemon_007

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
5,298
Reaction score
0
NEW DELHI: Days after the 9/11 attacks in the US 10 years ago, the American administration had sent its Pacific Command chief to New Delhi with three specific military demands - direct assistance to its navy and air force and presence of Indian troops in Afghanistan. The requests were rejected after Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee overruled a divided cabinet committee on security, one of the stakeholders disclosed to TOI a decade after India took the decisive turn and refused to join the military operations in Afghanistan.

The key source involved in decision making in India's security apparatus, Admiral Dennis Blair, then head of the US Pacific Command, was dispatched to New Delhi to present the US demands. The demands were fleet support for US military ships in Mumbai and Goa, 'stage-through' facility at Indian Air Force bases for US long range bombers and Indian ground troops in Afghanistan.

The demands were placed in the last week of November 2001 when Admiral Dennis Blair visited New Delhi and met the government top brass, including then defence minister George Fernandes, then national security advisor Brajesh Mishra and Admiral Sushil Kumar, then Naval chief and chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee.

Blair's demands came after the US and the UK had started their war against terror in Afghanistan on October 7 to overthrow the Taliban regime that had refused to stop providing sanctuary to al Qaeda. Though Kabul had by then fallen, the decisive part of the war had only begun. Ten years on, the US operations in Afghanistan are still on.

The source said the three demands of Admiral Blair were placed before the cabinet committee on security chaired by PM Vajpayee, and attended by then home minister L K Advani, Fernandes, external affairs minister Jaswant Singh, Mishra and military chiefs.
The meeting saw at least two members of the CCS making "vigorous pitch" for accepting the three US demands. "They cited the global war on terror and wanted us to join without any conditions," the source said.

As the debate heated up, Vajpayee said, "Let's listen to our military chiefs" and turned to the three service chiefs. Admiral Kumar as the chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee took the opportunity to air the views of the three service chiefs and put forth the Force's opposition to US proposals. The counter argument was that US and its allies operations in Afghanistan did not enjoy UN mandate and also India had not declared war on Afghanistan.

The UN Security Council would approve the setting up of the International Security Assistance Force for Afghanistan only on December 20 - almost a month after the NDA-led government debated the US request for military assistance.

"Yeh toh bilkul baath hai," Vajpayee had said in his characteristic style, putting an end to what would have been a historic turn in India's military conduct.

Admiral Blair had dropped enough hint of his mission, saying the US was looking forward to building an unprecedented "non-traditional and unconventional" military-to-military ties with India.

Though there has been speculation through the decade about the exact nature of US demands, the specifics remained a closely-guarded secret.

Post-9/11, US sought India’s military help for Afghan ops - The Times of India
 
. .
Good decision by the Indians i would say.
when we Indian were telling US about the terrorism they were just ignoring us.
then when they felt that terrorism is hurting them they want our UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT.
what about Indian interests in the region.
 
.
Bl[i]tZ;2099966 said:
So Kafirs didn't take the bait. :P

It was a bad move on our part I believe.

Even today I think we should grab the slightest opportunity to up our military presence in Afghanistan.

It will build a lot of pressure on the Pak military.

Good for us in the long run.
 
.
good move
otherwise what would be the difference b/w us and pakistan who fights for some one else war.:azn:
 
.
It was a bad move on our part I believe.

Even today I think we should grab the slightest opportunity to up our military presence in Afghanistan.

It will build a lot of pressure on the Pak military.

Good for us in the long run.

US wants us to take a bigger role but what we should be doing is to develop economically.

Pakistan is a grim example of why you should not engage in military adventurism.

They wanted to look good in the eyes of the US to get more money and weapons and have some strategic depth in Afghanistan. With its economy in shambles, Pakistan wouldn't be able to achieve its objectives with all American aid. As far as using US pressure on India, US has de-hyphenated Pak from India at least officially. :P
 
.
good move
otherwise what would be the difference b/w us and pakistan who fights for some one else war.:azn:

The difference would be that the Pakistanis fought US's war on Pakistani territory.

India would be fighting India's war on Pakistan from Afghan territory.

Load of difference...
 
.
It was a bad move on our part I believe.

Even today I think we should grab the slightest opportunity to up our military presence in Afghanistan.

It will build a lot of pressure on the Pak military.

Good for us in the long run.
Another war which we would be fighting for the US..... No thank U, we already have enough mess around here. Thank God BJP was in power at that time..
 
.
Bl[i]tZ;2100040 said:
US wants us to take a bigger role but what we should be doing is to develop economically.

Nobody's saying that we should put our economy on the backseat.

In fact we must find time for everything and not ignore one thing for another.

...our strategic vision should also be as important as our economy.

Bl[i]tZ;2100040 said:
Pakistan is a grim example of why you should not engage in military adventurism.

Wrong. Pakistan is the perfect example of what mistakes you should avoid when looking to achieve strategic interests.

An Indian military presence in Pakistan, howsoever small, would be rid of those mistakes that the Pakistanis made.

The Pakistanis were adjoined to Afghans, hence the trouble. We are not.

Bl[i]tZ;2100040 said:
They wanted to look good in the eyes of the US to get more money and weapons and have some strategic depth in Afghanistan. With its economy in shambles, Pakistan wouldn't be able to achieve its objectives with all American aid. As far as using US pressure on India, US has de-hyphenated Pak from India at least officially. :P

How that relevant to the discussion?

---------- Post added at 11:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:35 AM ----------

Another war which we would be fighting for the US..... No thank U, we already have enough mess around here. Thank God BJP was in power at that time..

How exactly would it be the US' war?

It would be India's war.

...and do u seriously believe we are not at war already?

Shall I mail the pictures of the recent Delhi blast or the 26/11 attacks to you?

We ARE at war already. Wake up and smell the coffee, matey.
 
. .
Good decision by Vajpayee , good that we have leaders that back our independent foreign policy.

Getting involved in Afghanistan- Pakistan war would have been a nightmare scenario for India , apart from the political and diplomatic repurcussions. And I am not even mentioning the economic impact ......
 
.
Getting involved in Afghanistan- Pakistan war would have been a nightmare scenario for India , apart from the political and diplomatic repurcussions.

How exactly?

BTW, noone's saying that India should have sent battalions to Afghanistan.

A mere token presence would have done enough to get to the nerve of Pakistani Army.
 
.
good thinking by Vajpayee why the hell would we want to get into a war that is not ours? i mean seriously why fight an insurgency in a different country when there are insurgencies in our country that need to be squashed? adding on look what the war in Afghanistan has done to the USA the USA debt is higher than its GDP us getting involved in Afghanistan would have another Sri Lanka all over again there is no point to it why risk Indian soldiers and Indian money for a war that is not even ours? but as for giving the ports and airbases for US forces to use that could be allowed i'm sure we have no problem with they're ships in our ports and we have plenty of runway space for there aircraft
 
. .
good thinking by Vajpayee why the hell would we want to get into a war that is not ours?

The war is ours.

It has always been ours.

Be it in Kargil, Khalistan, Mumbai, Kashmir or what not.

i mean seriously why fight an insurgency in a different country when there are insurgencies in our country that need to be squashed?

Because the key to squashing our insurgencies lay in the AfPak corridor.

adding on look what the war in Afghanistan has done to the USA the USA debt is higher than its GDP us getting involved in Afghanistan

That means you nothing about why the US economy is in the mess it is in.

Afghan war has nothing to do with the state of the US economy.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom