India Begs US Not To Leave Afghanistan

Bharat Verma

Islamabad aims to create a caliphate with the help of the Islamic regimes running from Central Asia to West Asia and Southeast Asia. India stands in the way. Beijing desires to unravel India into multiple parts based on the pre-British model as it cannot digest the challenge to its supremacy offered in Asia by a liberal union of multi-religious and multi-ethnic States.

While China and Pakistan have joined hands against India and bide their time for the American forces to leave, New Delhi has appealed to Washington not to exit from Afghanistan

With the American declaration of an exit from Afghanistan, Beijing and Islamabad are upbeat. This leaves India in the lurch as it is ill prepared to face the threat posed by Islamic fundamentalists and the Chinese Communists argues Bharat Verma.

The creeping invasion by authoritarian regimes will engulf Asia by 2020 as democracies continue to retreat. India is unprepared and unwilling to safeguard the Asian democratic space.

The growing clout of totalitarian regimes coupled with non-State actors is set to shrink the democratic space in Asia. If the onslaught is not reversed by the end of the next decade, Islamic fundamentalist regimes, Communist dictatorships, military juntas and non-State actors will redraw the international boundaries and largely govern Asia.

The squeeze on the democratic space in India will increase once the American forces begin to exit Afghanistan in July 2011. Islamic fundamentalists with the assistance of the sympathetic Pakistan army will take over Afghanistan and Pakistan. This Taliban stronghold will operate on a ‘hub and spoke’ principle to expand influence and territory. To begin with, India will lose $1.5 billion (about Rs 6,900 crore) worth of investment in Afghanistan, as it is unwilling to defend it.

Islamic fundamentalism will sweep into Central Asia once the American wall holding the spread disappears from Afghanistan. Gradually, the resource rich area will come under the spell of the dark forces. Russia will feel threatened. Americans and the International Security Assistance Force are in many ways fighting Russia’s war.

Unlike New Delhi, Moscow is always willing to fight its way out!

Islamabad aims to create a caliphate with the help of the Islamic regimes running from Central Asia to West Asia and Southeast Asia. India stands in the way. Beijing desires to unravel India into multiple parts based on the pre-British model as it cannot digest the challenge to its supremacy offered in Asia by a liberal union of multi-religious and multi-ethnic States.

The simple truth is that Indian democratic values contradict and thereby pose a threat to the authoritarian philosophy of both, the Communists in Beijing, and the Islamic fundamentalists in Islamabad. Similarly, many regimes in Islamic West Asia feel uncomfortable with India’s ability to generate unprecedented soft power. Regression to medieval times helps keep these autocratic regimes in the saddle.

The all-pervading Indian soft power, therefore, poses a serious challenge. Hence, Pakistan is supported by the petro-dollars dished out on a Wahabbi checkbook to neutralise the threat posed by liberal India.

It is obvious that if the Indian model wins, autocratic regimes like China and Pakistan lose.

Primarily, there have been no terrorist attacks on India after Mumbai 26/11 on two counts. First, the raging civil war within has kept Pakistan preoccupied. Second, the intervention of the American forces has forced diversion of the Pakistan army and its non-State actors’s resources away from India. The stated exit of the Western forces beginning July 2010 from the Af-Pak region will render India extremely vulnerable.

The truth is that American forces in many ways are fighting India’s war too. However, New Delhi’s expectation that they will continue to fight such a war without India chipping is being naive.

While China and Pakistan have joined hands against India and bide their time for the American forces to leave, New Delhi has appealed to Washington not to exit from Afghanistan, but is unprepared and unwilling to assist. The Catch-22 is that neither the West led by America can win without Indian help nor can India prevail without a concrete alliance with the West.

New Delhi’s strategic incoherence continues to encourage Beijing and Islamabad’s designs of destabilising the Union. Militarily, India remains underprepared due to the huge equipment shortages on land, sea and air, created by the ministry of defence over the last two decades.

Shirking its primary responsibility of equipping the military leaves it ill equipped to cope with the increasing intensity of the threat once the Western forces retreat.

The stalemate in Afghanistan predominantly occurs on two counts. First, superior technology in a guerrilla war where motivational level of the adversary is very high, unless combined with adequate boots on the ground cannot deliver victory.

The West does not have a large reservoir of manpower to mitigate the situation. Thus, the under-manned war for past nine years has produced difficult-to-reverse battle fatigue despite the most modern technology on display.

The result is the resurgent Taliban and Al Qaeda in the region. To win, a fair share of the soldiery needs to be drawn from Asian stock with equally high motivation and equipped with Western technology to surmount the challenge posed by Islamic fundamentalists.

Second, to defend Afghanistan, the war machinery should focus on Pakistan. However, the American strategy in Afghanistan is similar to the Indian fortress mentality.

Despite multiple attacks and infiltrations by the terrorists, New Delhi continues to fortify itself internally in futile attempts to repulse the attacks. Washington’s approach is similar in Kabul for the past nine years.

The Americans and the allied forces keep defending against the irregular guerrilla forces launched in to Afghanistan from Pakistan, clandestinely trained by the Pakistan army and its Inter Services Intelligence. The ghost forces from Pakistan, when attacked, disappear almost unscathed. They reappear in Kabul at will.

Washington and New Delhi cannot win since both refuse to face the fact that Pakistan is the problem.

To lend stability to Afghanistan, the threat from Pakistan covertly backed by China must be neutralised. Similarly to secure India, the joint threat from Pakistan and China needs to be resolved. In both, Pakistan is the common factor.

Beijing’s Communists back the Islamic fundamentalists in Islamabad to expel the American influence and subdue the Indians, even as Pakistan draws oxygen for sustenance from the economic bailouts from the West.

Logic dictates that to defend Kabul, with the intention of expanding influence of democracies in Asia, the focus must shift to Islamabad. However, an exit by the American forces set for July 2011 from Afghanistan will herald the process of colouring Asia in a dark hue.

With the declaration of the exit time frame, Beijing and Islamabad are once again upbeat.

This leaves India in lurch, as it is ill prepared to face the threat jointly posed by Islamic fundamentalists that includes the Pakistan army and the ISI, and the Chinese Communists. Both support the Maoists in Nepal and the non-State actors including the Maoists in India.

New Delhi therefore faces a simultaneous three-dimensional threat, — the external war on two fronts, worsening internal front aided by external actors, and lack of governance.


Hindu Terrorism Exposed in Alex Jones Show


Gen. Kapoor’s statement outlandish says Gen. Tariq

Chairman Joint Chief of Staff Committee General Tariq Majid on Saturday rubbished the Indian media report which states that the Indian Armed Forces are preparing to fight China and Pakistan.

“Leave alone China, General Deepak Kapoor knows very well what the Indian Armed Forces can not and what the Pakistan Armed Forces can pull off militarily,” said General Tariq Majid.

He was responding to a question on the Indian Army Chief’s jingoistic pronouncement of Indian military preparations to fight China and Pakistan simultaneously.

General Majid said he doubted the veracity of the Indian media report attributed to General Kapoor, saying that “he (Kapoor) could not be so outlandish in strategic postulations to fix India on a self destruct mechanism.”

General Majid further said that if the news report is correct, then the statements of Indian Army Chief are uncalled for and only “display a lack of strategic acumen.”


US behind attacks on Pakistani civilians: Ex-ISI chief

Former ISI chief Asad Durrani says private US contractors such as Xe (formerly known as Blackwater) and other intelligence agents may be behind the assassination of civilians across Pakistan.

In an exclusive interview with Press TV, Durrani said on Friday that the local militants led by Hakimullah Mehsud primarily target the government and military instillations.

Arguing against the local militants involvements in civilian assassinations, Durrani added that the militants consider Islamabad as a close ally of the US in the so-called ‘war on terror’ and that they have been launching retaliatory attacks against the government targets, particularly since the Pakistani army launched a major offensive against their stronghold in South Waziristan.

Durrani said that he doubted the notorious militants groups were behind a recent surge in attacks on civilian targets across the country.

The former head of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) claimed that certain theories were circulating among Pakistani intellectuals suggesting that the foreign agents or private US contractors could have been orchestrating assassinations on the civilian targets in the nuclear-armed country.

According to Durrani, these attacks were being carried out to encourage Islamabad to be more involved in war against the militants.

Pakistan has experienced a wave of violence over the past two years. Nearly 3,000 people have been killed in bomb attacks and other terrorist operations across the country.


RAW operates against Pakistan using Mukti Bahni model

India today is trying to blindly follow the policies of her military Guru Chankiya, where she is frantically driving for fulfillment of her eventual trance of Greater India and emergence of a sole regional power of South East Asia. India has long-standing policies and strategies to make and keep Pakistan as a lame duck and now taking advantage of the current situation she wants to destabilize a sole nuke Muslim power. Perception is there that India in collaborations with USA and Israel is imposing pressure and polices on Pakistan. Manomohan Singh is visiting USA now. Thus, Obama if serious in fighting war against terror has to chain his Asian watchdog (India). He should ask Indian Prime Minister to stop interfering in Pakistan’s domestic affairs.

Following the same motive of “Greater India” RAW has gone all out in destabilizing Pakistan. A Multi pronged strategy is executed through planned combination of overt and covert inventiveness thus shifting the battlefield to Pakistan from Afghanistan. RAW is operating both from Afghanistan and Iran to encircle Pakistan.

A major objective of India in Afghanistan is to use Afghanistan as launching pad to attack Pakistanis by sponsoring dissident / militants. It is on record that India has spent immense amounts over the years to make the Northern Alliance into its stooges. There is the Indian strategy of the encirclement of Pakistan by making Afghanistan into a vocal anti-Pakistan client state, with five very active Indian consulates there. Unfortunately the crooked Afghan government has also fallen pray to RAW policies by providing shelter to Brahamdag Bugti and allowing RAW to operate in Balochistan in collaboration with newly established Afghan intelligence agency RAAM (earlier name KHAD). RAW has organized a network of training schools/ Centres throughout Afghanistan. Some of these training centres are operating in Kabul, Jalalabad, Khawaja Ghar (Takhar Province), Khost, Paktia, Urgun, Khandar, Spin Boldak and Dranj (Badakhshan Province).

All these training centres are being used for indoctrinating minds of innocent people of FATA and Balochistan to work against Pakistan. Refugee camps for Balochistan dissidents have been established in bordering towns of Kandahar, Spin, Bodlak, Helmond and Nirmoz where RAW has been given free access to interact for spotting / cultivating them. Raw with the help of local Officials is providing financial support to Brahamdagh Bughti for undertaking terrorist’s activities in Balochistan. Some weeks ago Barahamdag reportedly met Amarullah Saleh and asked for additional money to undertake sabotage activities in Pakistan. He was promised a handsome amount and Commander Raziq Achakzai of Spin Boldak was made instrumental. Funds and explosives have been supplied by a man namely Abdul Sattar. The money is even transferred to such elements in Pakistan through Afghan based militant leaders/”Hawala Business. A number of Afghan officials are facilitating Indian agents in crossing the border. Earlier this year, two border police personnel and one political figure were arrested while crossing the border without documents. Spin Boldak is said to be the main hub of anti-Pakistan activities and the town is being used as a launching pad. RAW-RAAM used to providing weapons via Bajaur, Dir, Pewchar (ex-headquarters for Fazlullah). In order to subvert loyalties of Young Generation, Young Baloch Students are spotted / cultivated through senior Balochistan Student Orginastion (BSO) hardliners, taken to Kabul for indoctrination, issued with Afghan passports and selected individuals then dispatched to training centres in various countries.

According to resources, financial assistance is provided by RAW for publication of propaganda material against Pakistan in Balochi Language, which is later distributed in Quetta, Khuzdar, Turbat, Gawader and Dera Bugti.

In this context, Premier Gillani handed over these proofs to his Indian counterpart in Sharm el-Sheikh and provided pictures of Brahamdag and other terrorists showing them meeting with Indian agents in Afghanistan as well as in India. This was the proof of Indian involvement in recruiting, training, financing and arming terrorists being infiltrated into Pakistan.

It is worth mentioning here that Indians are also operating in Iran through their embassy at Tehran and two consulates at Zahidan and Bandar Abbas. The interesting point to note is the establishment of Indian consulate at Zahidan where Indian population is limited to only few houses (21 x Sikh families).Obviously it is the proximity of Zahidan to Pak-Iran border that is of interest to the Indians. The consulate is a special RAW outpost and is always headed by a RAW officer and is operating freely against Pakistan. RAW is using every possible means to gain her objectives by exploiting Pakistan- Iran border population ethnic, cultural and sectarian bond.

Indian propaganda which has a connected strategy of stating, again and again, that Pakistan is a terrorist state and needs to be rebuked by USA rather than promoting it . India’s clients in Afghanistan and some in Pakistan, USA and elsewhere also echo these “sentiments”. Moreover, New Delhi while staying all along eastern and western border is almost controlling the terror activities in Pakistan. New Delhi must realize this fact that there are a lot of ethnic, linguistic, religious and territorial separatist movements inside India, instead of destabilizing her neighbouring countries. She must focus her attention in resolving her internal turbulence. By terrorizing the neighboring country neither she can hide her weakness nor can she gain any advantages. So my advice to Indian’s top brass is to refrain from using terrorism as a state tool and come on the table and work for establishing permanent regional peace. Obama must convince Manomohan Singh to stop Indian terrorism in Pakistan. it is the only way that the world can be successful in war against terrorism.


Obama must address Pakistan’s concerns: Top experts

WASHINGTON, Dec 21 (APP): President Barack Obama must complement his Afghan security strategy with political plan and address Pakistan’s concerns, particularly vis-a-vis India, both in the immediate and the post-US troop pullout perspectives, top experts said discussing imperatives of an effective way forward.Sharing their evaluation of the new U.S. plan with the Council on Foreign Relations, analysts also cautioned against any unilateral moves that may spell further difficulties for Islamabad as it grapples with consequences of the eight-year old Afghan war.

Under the revamped strategy Obama unveiled early this month, Afghanistan will see a surge of 30,000 American and 7000 NATO troops in the coming months to contain Taliban insurgency and al-Qaeda threat. The summer of 2011 has been set as the milestone when the international forces will start handing over control to Afghan forces and begin the process of withdrawal.

Maleeha Lodhi, current scholar at Woodrow Wilson Center and former ambassador to the United States, observed that reliance on military means in Obama’s plan is accompanied by near silence on a political strategy.

“This assumes that a military solution can be successfully applied to Afghanistan, without addressing the political causes of the growing insurgency, especially Pashtun alienation.

“Military escalation in Afghanistan and the expansion of aerial strikes in Pakistan is dangerous for Pakistan, which is already confronted with mounting security challenges, a consequence, not a cause, of the insurgency in Afghanistan,” Dr Lodhi said.

She was referring to a wave of retaliatory bombings Pakistan is facing in the wake of its two major anti-militant operations in tribal areas this year. Obama has offered Pakistan economic and strategic partnership but wants Islamabad to spread anti-militant campaign to North Waziristan tribal area along the Afghan border.

In her remarks, Lodhi also feared a spillover effect of the Afghan escalation on Pakistan as militants and refugees could escape into Pakistan from across the porous border.

For their part, senior Obama Administration have visited Pakistan in recent weeks and pledged coordination in operations along the Afghan border to stem the possibility of Taliban and al-Qaeda flow into Pakistani tribal areas.

But so far, little has been pledged publicly about addressing Pakistan’s security concerns with regard to Indian role on the Afghan soil, particulalry in the post-U.S. Afghanistan. Pakistan says India

stokes violence in its southwestern Balochistan province from across the Afghan border. Experts also point to Pakistani fears that New Delhi seeks to encircle Pakistan by advancing its agenda from the Afghan soil.

“President Obama has described the partnership with Pakistan as being “inextricably linked” to success in Afghanistan. Unless this critical partner’s doubts and concerns about the new plan are allayed and Washington is prepared to modify its strategy accordingly, the relationship will only run into more problems,” Dr Lodhi cautioned.

Ahmed Rashid, a noted author and journalist stressed that “the United States needs to articulate a political strategy that draws India and Pakistan in with its plans and, despite Indian objections, puts pressure on New Delhi to be more accommodating toward Pakistan.”

At the same time, the United States should bolster support for the elected government in Pakistan, he added.

Hasan Askari Rizvi, a leading political analyst, remarked that “Pakistan’s concern pertains to the situation the day after the United States quits Afghanistan, perhaps the region.”

“If Afghanistan’s internal situation remains perturbed, should Pakistan seek friends from among the competing players in and around Afghanistan?” he questioned.

Islamabad, he said, will also be monitoring closely the U.S. efforts for building up governance capacity of the Kabul government and the enhancement of professional capacity of the Afghanistan National Army and the police. This also calls for overcoming sharp ethnic imbalance in the Afghan army, especially in the higher echelons, he noted.

Shuja Nawaz, Director South Asian at Washington’s Atlantic Council, opined that Pakistan could play a key role in helping fracture the Afghan Taliban alliance by persuading the Haqqani group to join the government in Kabul or send surrogates instead. Gulbuddin Hekmatyar has already been reported willing to strike a deal with Karzai. That would isolate Mullah Omar and make it harder for him to go it alone against the allies, Nawaz argued.

“Today, the allies need to build the willing support of Pakistan and other regional players to help Afghanistan stand on its own feet. If they do not complete the job they began in Afghanistan, the world will be left less safe than it was when they went into the region in 2001.

“Hasan Abbas, scholar and fellow at Asia Society, also noted concerns arising out of a plan sans political strategy.

Pakistan, he said, was expecting a deal that includes guarantees that India’s security-related role in Afghanistan will be reduced.

“Unless there is some behind-the- scene understanding on this count, Pakistan may not be able to live up to Obama’s expectations. Ideally, India and Pakistan should join hands to stabilize Afghanistan, but someone needs to facilitate that kind of an arrangement. Obama has the stature, potential, and vision to play that role.”


Indian parliament attack — A case study

The attack on the Indian parliament on Dec 13, 2001. by five unidentified gunmen turned out to be a watershed in the tumultuous course of Indo-Pak relations. Closely following the 9/11 trauma it provided India with a much sought opportunity to present itself as victim of terrorism, qualifying her to jump onboard US-led anti-terror bandwagon with full legitimacy. The Indian spin doctors, in wake of the incident, coined the “cross-border-terrorism” sound-byte which was to become the mantra of the Indian government and media; not for weeks or months but for years to come. Without any proof of her involvement, Indian propaganda machinery went into an overdrive, charging Pakistan with official sponsorship of terrorism without a shred of evidence. The attack presented India with an opportunity bearing tremendous potential to tap and it was seized upon with a ruthless resolve. There were reports then that it was a planned charade using Taliban prisoners drawn from the Shibberghan Jail administered by Northern Alliance warlords to provide India with a casus belli. Within days Indian armed forces were fully mobilized for Operation Parakram, taking the two countries closer ever to the brink of a full-fledged war with nuclear overtones.

Parakram petered out in Oct 2002, making way for the initiation of composite dialogue process in Jan 2004 but the Indian obsession with presenting herself as victim of terrorism maintained its groove. The effort has proved rewarding; the carefully crafted ‘victim of terror’ syndrome, assiduously built in the post Parliament attack period has shaped into an effective tool for India to regulate the ebb and flow of the bilateral dialogue with Pakistan with telling effect. But even a well-fabricated farce has a life span; Parliament attack case being no exception. Notwithstanding a desire to exploit its terror thesis to the full there are indicators galore that this brilliantly conceived propaganda ploy has finally run its course. It goes to the effectiveness of Indian propaganda churning mills that they could dupe the world opinion for such a long time. Some points in this context merit consideration. Despite the fact that attack on the Indian parliament was treated by India as an act of war and the case is not fully closed, (the only convicted culprit Afzal Guru is awaiting the confirmation or otherwise of his appeal for mercy against a verdict of death by hanging), in India there is a conspiracy of silence to keep the judicial run of the case far away from the media focus.

Inexplicably the Indian government has refused to make public the evidence concerning an act of terror that prompted her within days of its occurrence to start mobilizing troops to borders. Even more perplexing is the fact that despite Indian parliament being the objective of the attack, no mainstream political party, no group and none of the influential print or visual media has ever raised the question of an inquiry. Lower rungs of Indian Judicial System too joined hands with government in suppressing the truth. It took the third judicial pronouncement on the case, by the Supreme Court of India in Aug 2004 that threw aside the charges involving Pakistan in the attack. It is a shame though that judicial pronouncement has elicited no response from the Indian media as well as political establishment; only the propaganda tirade, in total incongruity with the truth as bared by the pinnacle court, gained in momentum building up a body of opinion hostile to any prospects of dialog with Pakistan.

All the five attackers of the Parliament attack were killed in the ensuing encounter and four persons; Mohammad Afzal, a former JKLF militant who had surrendered in 1994, his cousin Shaukat Husain Guru, Shaukat’s wife Afsan Guru and SAR Gilani, a lecturer of Arabic at Delhi University, were arrested by the Delhi Police on charges of conspiracy within hours of the incident. After a year of trial a POTA court found all four guilty; the three men were given death and life imprisonment sentences while Afsan was given 5 years’ rigorous imprisonment. On appeal, the Delhi High Court, on 29 October 2003, acquitted Professor SAR Gilani and Afsan Guru for lack of any implicating evidence, while upholding the death sentence on the remaining two. Afzal and Shaukat appealed to the Supreme Court, which gave its verdict on 3 August 2004; Shaukat’s death sentence was lifted, leaving him with an imprisonment of ten years while Afzal’s death sentence was confirmed. The tragic figure of Afzal, a renegade, with his longstanding association with India’s Special Task Force, emerges as the ultimate fall guy of parliament attack case, who awaits the hangman’s noose. A fact that has largely gone un-noticed is the verdict by the Indian Supreme Court (SC), which has sounded the death knell of the India’s “cross-border-terrorism” thesis, coined in the wake of the attack. As pointed out by the Supreme Court, charges of a ‘Pakistani connection’, based solely on confessional statement of Afzal obtained by police under POTA, were simply untenable; “All these lapses and violations of procedural safeguards guaranteed in the statute itself impel us to hold that it is not safe to act on the alleged confessional statement of Afzal and place reliance on this item of evidence on which the prosecution places heavy reliance.” With Afzal’s confession set aside on legal ground, the SC verdict essentially establishes that five unidentified armed men, killed in the process, attacked Indian parliament and that Afzal participated in the conspiracy allegedly hatched for the attack. The court verdict effectively annuls the Indian prosecution’s story, repeated ad nauseam by the Indian police, argued for by the prosecution, propagated repeatedly in full colors by the print and the visual media and ratified by two courts of law viz Special Court and the Indian High Court. It is a pity though that the Indian government has taken the repudiation of its stance by its own SC in stride refusing to scale down its propaganda against Pak.

The Indian “cross border terrorism” thesis, fabricated in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and imaginatively exploited ever since has served country’s strategic ends commendably well. Through its exploitation India was able to push Kashmir issue to the back burner, degrading the indigenous Kashmiri struggle for the internationally sanctioned right of self-determination to the level of a terrorist activity. In an era marked by the US “hang them high” attitude India unleashed a reign of terror of its own in IHK, unencumbered by the human rights constraints. It consolidated its hold in Afghanistan and the wave of violence ripping across Pakistan has undeniable links with Indian presence across Pak-Afghan borders and in Fata. The Indian exploitation of the attack on the Indian parliament, remains a classic example of how an incident can be stage managed to the level of a casus belli for holding an opponent to ransom. By all measures that is no mean achievement.