The great American betrayal

[indushek]

Regional economic integration in south Asia is an interesting and attractive proposition.

But for that to happen, there must be trust, and for trust, there must be security. Unfortunately, security is almost non-existent in this part of the world, even with two countries with nuclear capability.

This is a very complicated matter. And best to leave Afghanistan out of this for now.

Another threat from Afghanistan is drug trafficking, which I believe complements with militant/terrorist operations. Drugs are the scourge of society, and can potentially couple in creating terror outfits. Containing the drug trade can be a very expensive and delicate matter too! So there goes regional economic integration.

I'd say that those militant outfits most certainly do have powerful external backers, most likely private individuals and organizations. Otherwise, it'd be impossible for them to survive for so long against a mighty opponent.

So, who are their backers? Any idea anyone? Did intelligence agencies ever track them down? No, a better question: Do they actually do their jobs?

You start of with important points like Trust and Security, then suddenly take a u turn on to drug trafficking .

I am laughing at the u turn mind u not the first two points. The first two points can be done actually on the lines of existing trilateral orgs but the lack is of political will. Regarding leaving Afghanistan, do u realize that for the three countries to benefit from this regional grouping Afghanistan becomes very important? a safe land route many times better than sea routes currently more in vogue for all three countries. For all of us to reach Central Asia and Europe this is an important event to happen.

The drug trafficking once firmly decided upon can be taken care of , i accept that this is not a phenomenon that is going to disappear overnight even with political will from all three. However when the Political will from the three doesn't exist for proper Trade and Security doesn't exist mechanisms for fighting drug trafficking is a long shot down the road.

Regarding Intelligence u would be surprised how much info the local inept corrupt Police Constable has, just for easy understanding if u loose a gold chain or say some thing valuble in a particular area and visit the Police Station; the police know 90% of times the culprit and can solve within 10 min but u will be going around till u pay the cut imagine the info these agencies have but it is always ego and i am not saying about interaction of Indian or Bangladeshi or Pakistani agencies of multiple agencies within the country. These agencies are like a bucket of crabs always pulling each other down.

 

[indushek]

Several Interesting responses, One Indian poster has suggested that there is an awareness that Pakistan must not suffer negative impact from the US withdrawal, another says it's a wet dream and yet another says Pakistan will be blamed - while a Pakistani poster resents the tone of the piece.

The narrative of "American Betrayal" is interesting, to me, primarily because it is as resilient as it is and as widespread as it is -consider, it plays in Pakistan, and now Afghanistan and by extension, India - whereas the US take pains to point out that the have no permanent friends and therefore no permanent enemies -- so what is this narrative about? domestic failures and failures of international policy which can be blamed o the US - don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that US policy has been a success, quite the contrary - but is this a one way street? not at all, the "Muslim bad guy" narrative in the US will long survive us.

But back to article and a question few of our Indian posters are taking seriously, if as Mr. Joshi suggests, that good for Pakistan means good for India, how then are India going to "ensure"that negative impacts of the US withdrawal do not effect Pakistan? What measures or policy changes will have to be effected?

We can go on about the measures that India has to rightfully undertake so that Pakistan doesn't get affected but is there a thinking in Pakistan which can accommodate 'India' in Afghanistan?? That being a non starter for the security establishment and lot of Think Tanks across the board where does the case Indian responsibility arise ??

 

[OrionHunter]

Such an interesting question and awareness in the Indian press is refreshing. How can India play a constructive role and ensure that Pakistan is not effected negatively, this question should concern greater numbers of Indians and the Indian press/media have arole to play in creating this awareness.

There are two issues that need to be addressed where Pakistan is concerned.

The first is eliminating the perceived Indo-Afghan 'threat' to Pakistan along its Western borders. And secondly freedom of trade and energy resources through Afghanistan, to and from the Central Asian Republics. If these two conditions are met, there could be stability in Afghanistan even if there is an Afghan government which includes the Taliban in any future dispensation.

But the question is how can Pakistan be convinced that there is no threat to its Western borders from a so called India-Afghan military alliance?

 

[muse]

We can go on about the measures that India has to rightfully undertake so that Pakistan doesn't get affected but is there a thinking in Pakistan which can accommodate 'India' in Afghanistan?? That being a non starter for the security establishment and lot of Think Tanks across the board where does the case Indian responsibility arise ??

Is there a thinking in India which can accommodate Pakistan on Kashmir and on removing and barriers? You are really not understanding what Mr. Joshi is pointing to --- Pakistan have been seeking bargain for a while, after all, trade is not a monopoly of India, in the same way that Pakistan can open up not just Afghanistan but central Asia, India can do much as well - think once again about Gwadar, why Chah Bahar when Gwadar is available, Why deep, expensive underwater pipelines or LPG when pipelines can run over land?

What Mr. Joshi is pointing to is a paradigm change.

 

[Bang Galore]

Is there a thinking in India which can accommodate Pakistan on Kashmir and on removing and barriers? You are really not understanding what Mr. Joshi is pointing to --- Pakistan have been seeking bargain for a while, after all, trade is not a monopoly of India, in the same way that Pakistan can open up not just Afghanistan but central Asia, India can do much as well - think once again about Gwadar, why Chah Bahar when Gwadar is available, Why deep, expensive underwater pipelines or LPG when pipelines can run over land?

What Mr. Joshi is pointing to is a paradigm change.

Removing barriers (I'm assuming on trade) won't be very difficult but what would you suggest is a reasonable accommodation of Pakistan on the Kashmir issue? I would be very interested in knowing your views & what is it that you seek that you believe is not damaging to India to grant.

 

[muse]

Removing barriers (I'm assuming on trade) won't be very difficult but what would you suggest is a reasonable accommodation of Pakistan on the Kashmir issue? I would be very interested in knowing your views & what is it that you seek that you believe is not damaging to India to grant.

Honestly I don't know what's doable - what I do know is there are obstacles in India to this paradigm shift - We were close to deal in the last year of Musharraf - but I think we have to create a will, a vision in society of the possibilities, of compromises and of what the prize is - right now a jingoistic press and an armed forces too impressed with themselves, will have give way to politicians who have vision -- I don't think the way to see this is as just India and Pakistan, it effects Afghanistan , Central Asia yes, but Bangla (it will always be a concern), Nepal, Lanka and China and Iran, should be thought of as part of the prize.

 

[Bang Galore]

Honestly I don't know what's doable - what I do know is there are obstacles in India to this paradigm shift - We were close to deal in the last year of Musharraf - but I think we have to create a will, a vision in society of the possibilities, of compromises and of what the prize is - right now a jingoistic press and an armed forces too impressed with themselves, will have give way to politicians who have vision -- I don't think the way to see this is as just India and Pakistan, it effects Afghanistan , Central Asia yes, but Bangla (it will always be a concern), Nepal, Lanka and China and Iran, should be thought of as part of the prize.

The Musharraf deal was jettisoned by your present government who saw protests in Kashmir as being a chance for pushing for more. 26/11 happened & the rest is history. Btw, India (all parties included-refer an interview with Musharraf & Jaswant Singh with Tim Sebastian) is now very wary of cutting any deal because they think that other stake holders in Pakistan may repudiate the deal(like PPP did with agreements reached with Musharraf) and are therefore very wary of making what will be seen as compromises in India and then being left high & dry by Pakistan.

 

[muse]

Then I guess we'll have to wait till they are less wary.

 

[indushek]

The Musharraf deal was jettisoned by your present government who saw protests in Kashmir as being a chance for pushing for more. 26/11 happened & the rest is history. Btw, India (all parties included-refer an interview with Musharraf & Jaswant Singh with Tim Sebastian) is now very wary of cutting any deal because they think that other stake holders in Pakistan may repudiate the deal(like PPP did with agreements reached with Musharraf) and are therefore very wary of making what will be seen as compromises in India and then being left high & dry by Pakistan.

Add to this the sectarian groups in Pakistan fighting their own ideological battles both with other groups and the state. Writ of the state being implemented is also a big question now in Pakistan, can the state guarantee safe passage?? of pipe lines or the other planned corridors.

Is there a thinking in India which can accommodate Pakistan on Kashmir and on removing and barriers? You are really not understanding what Mr. Joshi is pointing to --- Pakistan have been seeking bargain for a while, after all, trade is not a monopoly of India, in the same way that Pakistan can open up not just Afghanistan but central Asia, India can do much as well - think once again about Gwadar, why Chah Bahar when Gwadar is available, Why deep, expensive underwater pipelines or LPG when pipelines can run over land?

What Mr. Joshi is pointing to is a paradigm change.

Ten years back or before WOT this paradigm shift could have brought us both benefits. However current security situation in Pakistan has to settle and the disparate groups fighting for supremacy should be quelled too, after all Pakistan to be a 'good bet' like the Amrikans say should be properly stable?

 

[Bang Galore]

Then I guess we'll have to wait till they are less wary.

More than anything, Indian decision makers hold great fears about the viability & sustainability of any agreement reached with the government of Pakistan. India, to reach that point would have put its cards on the table regarding the kind of compromises it would make & those would have to be explained to the Indian people on the basis of making peace with Pakistan. What happens then if sections within the Pakistani state decide to push for more & try & ratchet up leverage using "non-state actors"? Or what if some non-state actors decide independently to continue the "jihad" and the Pakistani state expresses its inability to control them? Having put its cards on the table, the GoI will end up with egg on its face & Indian blood on its hands. Suicidal position to be in.

I remain very sceptical of manufacturing peace between India & Pakistan while Pakistan itself remains torn within. Unlike Indian insurgencies which are based on regional aspirations (excepting Maoists), the Pakistani groups are fighting for an idea, not only territorial positions & almost all of them are hostile to India. With such internal problems, what exactly does the GoP bring to the table in any negotiation on Kashmir?

 

[muse]

Yes a great deal of "If" and "buts" what I do find curious is that all of these are expressed by one side, don't you think that curious?

 

[SamantK]

Yes a great deal of "If" and "buts" what I do find curious is that all of these are expressed by one side, don't you think that curious?

Apologies to jump in between, but is it not that the only side expressing those concerns is the biggest bettor in such a scenario?

 

[muse]

Apologies to jump in between, but is it not that the only side expressing those concerns is the biggest better in such a scenario?

Certainly not, it's a curious notion to bring in size and concern - after all, if this is the wrong time for India, so be it, at some later date it may be the wrong time for other players - what really matters is the will to do it and that is well, t has not developed as yet, I don't think it's unfair to say.

 

[SamantK]

Certainly not, it's a curious notion to bring in size and concern - after all, if this is the wrong time for India, so be it, at some later date it may be the wrong time for other players - what really matters is the will to do it and that is well, t has not developed as yet, I don't think it's unfair to say.

Your statement may hold true, I for one cannot be sure on why the will is not present. But we can only interpret from what is given and that points to a mistrust both parties have. Also, now with China as thier ally Pakistan may also be acting smug IMO.

 

[indushek]

Yes a great deal of "If" and "buts" what I do find curious is that all of these are expressed by one side, don't you think that curious?

But of course sir, the one side is sitting at a little 'up' so wants more leverage by making the game look more meatier. Morally this might not be what one calls best attitude but when did morality dictate diplomacy ??