Imagine that Bangladesh, in the interest of upgrading its security, decides to forge a strategic alliance with Pakistan centered on the training of a hundred thousand new troops which it believes are needed to safeguard its internal and external security. What would be the reaction in India? Let us discount the fact that India does not face any insurgency from Bangladesh-based saboteurs, that Bangladesh, a militarily insignificant country, would never be a match to the awesome Indian military power, that the government of Sheikh Hasina enjoys the closest of relations with India, yet it is easy to foresee the reaction of the Indian media, establishment and the political class to such an alliance. Without exception it would be depicted as a devious Pakistani plot backed by China to encircle that country. A gigantic diplomatic effort, punctuated with military threats, would be mounted to dissuade Bangladesh from pursuing this course.
If the Pakistanis, with the Durand Line still under question from the Afghan side, a thousand mile long porous border impossible to control, nearly 30000 killed in wanton acts of urban terror inside Pakistan, a raging insurgency in Balochistan allegedly fuelled from outside, interpret the Indo-Afghan strategic alliance in similar terms, are they to blame? That Pakistan needs to recognise the peculiar demographic tapestry of Afghanistan in defining its interests is a valid point. The return of a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan strategically tied to Pakistan is no longer a viable proposition. In that event the massive Western investment in that country would be seen to have been wasted which even a superpower in retreat will not countenance. Also, the anti-Taliban coalition is in a far stronger position than in 1996. Other regional states have their own reservations about the restitution of the pre-2001 political dispensation in Afghanistan.
Equally untenable is the goal of installing a government in Afghanistan which is beholden to India for its security. From the Pakistani perspective it would be considered an undisguised, if not a crude attempt, to bequeath Afghanistan to the Northern Alliance underpinned by India’s military power. Essentially, Pakistan, the most directly affected party in this whole episode, is being invited to accept India as the regional hegemon and to adjust its policies and interests accordingly. Two questions arise: is this going to work and secondly and more crucially, is this the best way to clean up the mess in Afghanistan? The United States is spending $12 billion a year to train the Afghan security forces. According to the Washington Post of September 4 the attrition rate in the Afghan National Army during 2010 was 32% which means that one in three soldiers deserted. During the first half of this year, 24000 Afghan soldiers walked away. By the end of 2011 the attrition is expected to touch 24% for the year ie, one in four soldiers. At this rate not much of the Afghan National Army would be left for India to train.
The current state of war readiness of Afghan security forces reflects poorly on a decade of efforts by the finest military in the world and expenditure of tens of billions of dollars. The Indo-Afghan strategic alliance assumes that the Indian trainers will succeed where the Americans did not. It is well understood that Mr Karzai does not have much by way of independent decision making but one would have credited him with some common sense. How did it occur to him that a nation, which for centuries has rejected the hegemony of three great empires, the British, the Soviet and now the Americans, will suddenly agree to become an Indian protectorate?
By making this move Karzai has succeeded in losing whatever little credibility he was left with in Pakistan. The latter’s doubts over the Afghan President’s commitment to a negotiated settlement now stand confirmed.
These shortsighted maneuvers will make matters more difficult for all stakeholders who would do well to listen to the advice of the man who knows Afghanistan better than most. Writing in the Telegraph recently Sherard Cowper-Coles, Britain’s Afghan envoy from 2007 to 2010, while ridiculing NATO’s claims of victory in Afghanistan, described the current strategy of replacing western soldiers in the forward operating bases with Tajiks as pure “fantasy” since they would be as alien to the southern Pushtun tribes as the Americans and the British. There was still time, the envoy enjoined, to correct the errors of the past ten years but that would require “a Herculean effort of American-led diplomacy, to bring together all the internal parties to the conflict – not just the various brands of Taliban – and, so as to apply outside in pressure for peace, all the regional powers.”
Therein lies the path for peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan. For Karzai to look for protection from India against a sizeable segment of his own people is not the way to put closure to a particularly unfortunate chapter in that country’s troubled history. Whether the British envoy’s authoritative voice is heeded would be known during the forthcoming international conference in Istanbul.
The writer is Pakistan’s former Ambassador to the United Nations and European Union. He can be contacted at [email protected]
Shaukat maybe pakis can train them to become terrorist than a soldier
Current status: In serial production and deployment. Also, recruted Hnbl. Sir Shaukat Umer as chief of sales.
Anon,
And you as Chief of Nonsense and a cheap-shot of RAW.
Janu, The tradition started from you when you trained the Mukti Bahni thugs. Do you think we have so short memories. As you will do……….
READ HISTORY ABOUT EAST PAKISTAN/ BANGLADESH FROM OTHER THAN YOUR COUNTRY SOURCE. THEN COME TO COMMENT ON MUKTI BAHNI.
Son! I have read history way more than you, and for your information from a University which may be beyond your imagination. Go and run the election campaign of Modi you bloody RSS.
Israel has taught her student India that a war is to be fought in enemy's territory. Further, return to enemy using same weapon as enemy has used but disportionately. India may not be there yet but she is trying in that direction. It is Pakistan's India obsession which whole world acknowledges that has brought to Pakistan to her knees. Obama just said it yesterday. Taliban extremists are stuck in 14th century and Pakistan is struck in 1947. Pakistan is fully blinded from present ground realities. Politics apart, Afghan decided go to India for their security needs because professional training infrastructures exist there. Thanks to Pakistan. Pakistan created terrorism is to be condemned but it has contributed to India's economic growth. India created hundreds and thousands of security related jobs and that brought huge spending. It has brought world level security companies and technology transfer to India. India can handle whatever Pakistan throws at her. As they say: Read My Lips. The road to peace, prosperity and respect for Pakistan goes through New Delhi. It is delusional to think otherwise. Even talk shows Generals are now analyzing that.
@Kamal, there is no doubt 'true' prosperity can only come through peace, yet this applies to both countries. A conflict must be avoided to allow the economic growth – there is no doubt India would withstand an conventional war yet the region has gone Nuclear – so they've decided to go for the proxy option via the Afghan route. Remember this is a backwater which has humbled many a super-power of its day. The drain on Indian resources (granted those are vast due to the tech growth) cannot withstand a guerilla conflict with the Taliban.
Its a master move by the Yanks to put India in a position to recognise itself as a true regional power by either accepting this volatile role or walking away of a stronger western front backed by Pak's military…
India should have gone the route of China and ensured peace with its neighbours and continued its economic growth, confront the issues of Kashmir and stick to a road map of peace – take the heat out of any potential conflict.
The ISI will love to cut its teeth on this type of conflict….
I fully agree with Naeem. The only solution to South Asia conflict is by co-operation of India-Pak. The 2 army heads should meet every 3 months/trade should open.Both sides should restrain from attacking each other on International Platforms.
I do believe that PAKISTAN's worst enemy is its ARMY. India's worst enemies are its corrupt politicians . On the pretext of external threat,it controls all aspects of life in Pakistan.
Indians are not fools that they haven't learned anything from past experiences of others and their own. Choices for Pakistan are few; either live in peace with neighbors and get annihilated economically. I am sure Pakisanis will realize the value of peace and refrain from old games. Please note that the costs of dealing with Pakistan supported terrorism for India are not that high as for US. India can manage this issue for another 100 years without worrying too much. However, loss of Pakistan will be massive. Pakistan is already in a bad state and no one is willing to invest in her economy. If things continue like this, there will be massive social problems in Pakistan and nuclear weapons won't be of much help. In case of any Indo-Pak war, chances are very high that nuclear weapons might be used. No doubt, many Indian cities will be lost, but Pakistan may not survive as a nation. Pakistan can not blackmail India with nuclear threat any more. This bluff will have to be confronted sooner or later.
Relax and get your blood pressure checked. You are hyper-acting. Also drink a lot of chilled fluid. I am more concerned about your health now than India-Pakistan relations or using your vocabulary tension. If this does not work, see a psychiatrist at the earliest possible.
Hope you get better and when you do, stop reading these Pakistani newspapers and in particular op.ed pieces written by former diplomats, soldiers, or scholars. These are health hazard for you and I mean it.
Also call you mama and let he know that Rajendra bacha is very sick.
The author is not a real ambassador! He is more suited to 'juma bazaar union' type diplomacy. Look at his face! would you trust him?
Please, take this for what it is. Satirical. This guy ws known for getting drunk and chsing the maid around! pleeeze lol
Pak Embassy staff (Vienna, Austria): Shaukat's driver looks, and behaves, more ambassadorial than him! We were embarrassed that this sifarashi is undermining our work! He'd be drunk in the embassy, pay for women, and looked more like a sweeper from Ichra bazaar than any F.O employee we had! Infact, on multiple occasions his driver was mistaken to be the Pak ambassador.
Comments are closed.