Pakistan reaching to Ghani

[Bengal_Tiger]

Bengal-Tiger, you are right in saying that there is a lot of social development that has occurred in Afghanistan and Taleban's political credibility and popularity is at the lowest level. But they are still problematic and can hinder security and political consolidation in certain areas.

But all this is fragile until Afghans play their cards carefully to free themselves of the dependence-trap.

I am of the firm belief that Taleban would not be laid off and those that want to correct the behavior of Afghan govt should it go out of control would continue to keep the terrorist infrastructure one form or another. They can be valuable asset in Afghanistan as well as in Central Asia and China western border region.

As for China, it is playing kind of auxiliary role. The talks are taking place in Qatar and we know about Qatar what is its role in the overall game. Qatar link also shows who is defining the larger framework for the talks.

Manana for the reply.

1. Yes, the Americans like to use radical "Islamists" as leverage against Muslim governments and also non-Muslim rivals e.g. Russia, China.

In Bangladesh the US has always supported Jamaat e "Islami" and tried to portray them as a legitimate organization rather than what they are which is the Bangladeshi equivalent of the Nazi party, i.e. a party of war crimes, genocide and hatred.


2. On another forum (military one), a relatively well informed Indian said that the US wants to keep Afghanistan unstable and make it the "new Pakistan" i.e. severe terrorism problem.

He said India wants to make it stable.

I am sure the Chinese want a stable Afghanistan and one which they can trade with to feed the 1 billion + mouths in the PRC.

Russia obviously wants a peaceful Afghanistan too.

US power is slowly but steadily declining, China, Russia and India are all working together to weaken US power and create a more stable multi-polar global order.

All 3 states want a stable Afghanistan so will support the Kabul government, and all 3 (unlike the pro-"Islamist" American regime) are opposed to "Islamic" fundamentalists e.g. the Taliban.

So though the Chinese role could be argued as secondary now, with time it will grow more and more.


3. The other issue is the state of Pakistan itself.

Pakistan is essentially a military state run for the benefit of the Punjabi military (mainly from central, northern Punjab) and they will bomb Pashtuns to make dollars and oppress and massacre civilians.

The question is how long can Pakistan survive?

It is a very resilient state and a few years ago the security situation was far worse than it is now. Most Pashtuns in Pakistan are pro-Pakistan. No one cares about Baloch suffering.

So it seems like Pakistan (a US surrogate) will continue, but if it doesn't and it breaks up then automatically by default Afghanistan becomes a much more powerful country with more influence.

The Pakistani backing of the Taliban ends as there is no Pakistan.


Point 3 might not even be worthy of discussing as it is quite hypothetical.

[Toramana]

Manana for the reply.

1. Yes, the Americans like to use radical "Islamists" as leverage against Muslim governments and also non-Muslim rivals e.g. Russia, China.

In Bangladesh the US has always supported Jamaat e "Islami" and tried to portray them as a legitimate organization rather than what they are which is the Bangladeshi equivalent of the Nazi party, i.e. a party of war crimes, genocide and hatred.


2. On another forum (military one), a relatively well informed Indian said that the US wants to keep Afghanistan unstable and make it the "new Pakistan" i.e. severe terrorism problem.

He said India wants to make it stable.

I am sure the Chinese want a stable Afghanistan and one which they can trade with to feed the 1 billion + mouths in the PRC.

Russia obviously wants a peaceful Afghanistan too.

US power is slowly but steadily declining, China, Russia and India are all working together to weaken US power and create a more stable multi-polar global order.

All 3 states want a stable Afghanistan so will support the Kabul government, and all 3 (unlike the pro-"Islamist" American regime) are opposed to "Islamic" fundamentalists e.g. the Taliban.

So though the Chinese role could be argued as secondary now, with time it will grow more and more.


3. The other issue is the state of Pakistan itself.

Pakistan is essentially a military state run for the benefit of the Punjabi military (mainly from central, northern Punjab) and they will bomb Pashtuns to make dollars and oppress and massacre civilians.

The question is how long can Pakistan survive?

It is a very resilient state and a few years ago the security situation was far worse than it is now. Most Pashtuns in Pakistan are pro-Pakistan. No one cares about Baloch suffering.

So it seems like Pakistan (a US surrogate) will continue, but if it doesn't and it breaks up then automatically by default Afghanistan becomes a much more powerful country with more influence.

The Pakistani backing of the Taliban ends as there is no Pakistan.


Point 3 might not even be worthy of discussing as it is quite hypothetical.

Bengal-Tiger, just listen to this report by Al-Jazeera. That vindicates my point above i.e., end justifies the mean and that today's terrorists could be tomorrow's friends.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/02/spy-cables-expose-approach-hamas-guardian-hamas-israel-mossad-cia-obama-goldstone-pa-150219190914146.html

[Bengal_Tiger]

Bengal-Tiger, just listen to this report by Al-Jazeera. That vindicates my point above i.e., end justifies the mean and that today's terrorists could be tomorrow's friends.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/0...190914146.html

Toramana, read this article:

http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/three-fronts-for-russia-how-washington.html

In the future I may post it on the forum and discuss it, however to summarize it says this:

- The US wants to maintain its dominance.

- It believes to do that it needs to weaken/ruin its rivals e.g. Russia (also China, India etc).

- It is planning to destabilize central Asia using so-called "Islamists".

In other words if the US has its way it is planning to make central Asia look like the middle east (particularly Syria + Iraq) in a few years with ISIS or an ISIS type group devastating the America and devastating Russia and China.

Afghanistan/Pakistan i.e. Pakhtunkhwa is a big part of this American project.

[Khostai]

Indeed, but taking for sake of talking will be meaningless--just as it was for past 13 years---ever wonder with Karzai is so bitter? Moreover the war between Afghanistan and Pakistan is that of intelligence war(cold war) and the strategic pact with US of A is a deterrent of hot war—so having or not having militarily power doesn’t matter.

Cold war also needs money and recources and skilled people. Afghan has non of them. Afghanistan is a backward country with a backward culture and people. If you have a culture where people are ashamed of their women to get an education because some guy can see their face is doomed to be poor and unstable and backward, especialy if you have natural recouscess that you only can use if you have a educated middel class.

God try to teach a lesson to Afghans but they are not learning it. Look now with the current goverment, taliban power is declining but somehow ISIS is on the rise, I hear they made quite an uproar in some provincess, before you know the 90 will be all over again but this time the taliban will have the roll what mudjhahids had and the ISIS will be the new taliban and you will have the same shi.t all over again.

I think Afghanistan is a lost cause. The whole country will just fall aparth in a decade, Ghani is incompetent, he can not even apoint proper ministers, let alone rule the whole country.

[marwat]

What is you guys think about Ghani and Pakistani's peace initiative? raheel sharif and ISI dir has been to Kabul more than 4 times ever since ghani came to office, do you think Ghani can trust pakis?

things are not going the paki ways, if the recent ongoing zarb e zab operation in pakistan did not bring peace in the country, even the so called burger boys will start pointing at the credibility of army. further international policies are changing and pakistan is fast loosing it's image, pakistan is on a high contrast of civil war.punjabi taliban is the biggest stake holder of pakistan second after army, look into the case of Maulana abdul azai who openaly suport TTP and ISIS and naming army every day, calling army murtad while sitting in islamabad enjoying government salary but pathetic government and army can't dare to arrest him even FIR is already on this name. this is the condition here.
on the other hand if Ghani can balance relation with india and paksitan and giving a peace a chance then it is a positive step, but trusting paki at the cost of india should be avoided.

[Toramana]

Cold war also needs money and recources and skilled people. Afghan has non of them. Afghanistan is a backward country with a backward culture and people. If you have a culture where people are ashamed of their women to get an education because some guy can see their face is doomed to be poor and unstable and backward, especialy if you have natural recouscess that you only can use if you have a educated middel class.

God try to teach a lesson to Afghans but they are not learning it. Look now with the current goverment, taliban power is declining but somehow ISIS is on the rise, I hear they made quite an uproar in some provincess, before you know the 90 will be all over again but this time the taliban will have the roll what mudjhahids had and the ISIS will be the new taliban and you will have the same shi.t all over again.

I think Afghanistan is a lost cause. The whole country will just fall aparth in a decade, Ghani is incompetent, he can not even apoint proper ministers, let alone rule the whole country.

I agree. This Ashraf Ghani guy is neither trust-worthy nor competent. Most of the Afghans I have talked to have called him an agent.

[Azmal]

Azmal, my friend I know that royalists always have sought foreign patrons in order to win back power lost to competitors, I hope you have the level of selflessness to see the bigger picture. No power would like to allow its client regime to be self-sufficient and would always support alternate groups in order to maintain pressure on the regime that is dependent on it.

That is why the central afghan govt was weakened through Abdullah-Ghani compromise.

That is why talks with Taleban are taking place in the puppet state of Qatar with backing from Pakistan. That simply means one thing; Pakistan's position on Afghanistan has been given space to. The strategy is simple; use Taleban and Pakistan against afghans should they defy orders.

So you have Pakistan+Taleban on one side and Afghans on the other; and the patronizing power is sitting on top of both. Divide and rule.

As for Ghani, many afghans after the emotional flow of elections are now considering ghani to be an agent that has come to power to fulfill an agenda; although, I may not believe this, his whole family except for his wife is still living abroad.

Actually it was the “competitors” that effetely f-ed the country when they ***** themselves to Roskies! Yet we never see you even mention that— all your comrade PDPA were agent of soviets---read here http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publicat...gb-afghanistan
I don’t know why we Afghans never learn any lesson from our history---take for example the non-violence Red shirts---imagine if Ghafar khan had deal with British for Afghan interest we would have not been in miseries we are today…but no Afghan hen has one legs. Lol

[Azmal]

Cold war also needs money and recources and skilled people. Afghan has non of them. Afghanistan is a backward country with a backward culture and people. If you have a culture where people are ashamed of their women to get an education because some guy can see their face is doomed to be poor and unstable and backward, especialy if you have natural recouscess that you only can use if you have a educated middel class.

God try to teach a lesson to Afghans but they are not learning it. Look now with the current goverment, taliban power is declining but somehow ISIS is on the rise, I hear they made quite an uproar in some provincess, before you know the 90 will be all over again but this time the taliban will have the roll what mudjhahids had and the ISIS will be the new taliban and you will have the same shi.t all over again.

I think Afghanistan is a lost cause. The whole country will just fall aparth in a decade, Ghani is incompetent, he can not even apoint proper ministers, let alone rule the whole country.

You sound more Paki--are you sure you are Khostiwal not Lahourwal?

[Azmal]

Manana for the reply.

1. Yes, the Americans like to use radical "Islamists" as leverage against Muslim governments and also non-Muslim rivals e.g. Russia, China.

In Bangladesh the US has always supported Jamaat e "Islami" and tried to portray them as a legitimate organization rather than what they are which is the Bangladeshi equivalent of the Nazi party, i.e. a party of war crimes, genocide and hatred.


2. On another forum (military one), a relatively well informed Indian said that the US wants to keep Afghanistan unstable and make it the "new Pakistan" i.e. severe terrorism problem.

He said India wants to make it stable.

I am sure the Chinese want a stable Afghanistan and one which they can trade with to feed the 1 billion + mouths in the PRC.

Russia obviously wants a peaceful Afghanistan too.

US power is slowly but steadily declining, China, Russia and India are all working together to weaken US power and create a more stable multi-polar global order.

All 3 states want a stable Afghanistan so will support the Kabul government, and all 3 (unlike the pro-"Islamist" American regime) are opposed to "Islamic" fundamentalists e.g. the Taliban.

So though the Chinese role could be argued as secondary now, with time it will grow more and more.


3. The other issue is the state of Pakistan itself.

Pakistan is essentially a military state run for the benefit of the Punjabi military (mainly from central, northern Punjab) and they will bomb Pashtuns to make dollars and oppress and massacre civilians.

The question is how long can Pakistan survive?

It is a very resilient state and a few years ago the security situation was far worse than it is now. Most Pashtuns in Pakistan are pro-Pakistan. No one cares about Baloch suffering.

So it seems like Pakistan (a US surrogate) will continue, but if it doesn't and it breaks up then automatically by default Afghanistan becomes a much more powerful country with more influence.

The Pakistani backing of the Taliban ends as there is no Pakistan.


Point 3 might not even be worthy of discussing as it is quite hypothetical.

India on one hand wants US to stay in Afghanistan for long time—to keep terrorist in check, on other hand wish to damage Pakistan using the same islamist proxies. In other words---India wants to continue the war in Afghanistan/Pashtons region to server her end.
You are quite right that recent ISIS surge in Afghanistan is meant to be exported to central Asia---great games at it once again---thus Afghan leaders must make a choice---continue to be ground for dog fight of powers—which means the job to manage islamist once again will go to Punjos—bala bala Hareepaa--- or actively take side and rip the benefit—just as Punjos been doing in past 40 years.

[Al-Afghani]

Pakistan has two cards now they can play: Taliban and "Afghan president" Ghani.

Pervez Musharraf sees role for Taliban in Afghanistan

“Ashraf Ghani is a balanced man,” he said. “I think he’s a great hope. And Pakistan and India both must stay away, and not to have this kind of a proxy war going on there.”

“We have to get the Pashtuns on board,” said Musharraf. “If there are Taliban who are for peace and they want to join President Ashraf Ghani in sharing power and having a system which is workable in Afghanistan, by all means they should be included.”

[Khostai]

You sound more Paki--are you sure you are Khostiwal not Lahourwal?

No I am just really angry and dissapointed at Afghans, especially pashtuns.

[Toramana]

The following shows what tactics and pressure are used to bring disobeying clients into submission.

"The single largest event that made observers begin questioning whether Turkey was contemplating a pivot to Eurasia was the US’ failed attempt at using Kurdish nationalism to pressure Ankara into invading Syria. Truth be told, this is exactly what Turkey itself had spoken of doing in the past, but under its own conditions and with unquestionable guarantees from NATO and the GCC that they would support it in this endeavor. Washington, however, had other plans, and fanned the flames of Kurdish nationalism with the intent that this would scare Turkey enough into commencing a ‘humanitarian intervention’ in Syria’s Ayn al-Arab (Kobani in Kurdish), which would open the way for a more formal invasion of the country than had been stealthily proceeding for the past four years."

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/columnists/20...#ixzz3SlaVmt5P

[Azmal]

Pakistan has two cards now they can play: Taliban and "Afghan president" Ghani.

Pervez Musharraf sees role for Taliban in Afghanistan

Here you go...the fact is flat headed Amu jumpers Tazi and Pakistan are two face of same coin...both wants weaken of pashton. You want total power--that will last in killing of every single pashton don't you Amu Jumper?

[Azmal]

No I am just really angry and dissapointed at Afghans, especially pashtuns.

I hear you!

[Azmal]

What you think Afghanistan demands can be from Pakistan?

1. allowed easy access to the sea through the ports of Karachi and Gwadar and allow Afghanistan to create a free transit from Afghanistan to these ports.
2. The allocation of land required to Afghanistan in Karrachi and Gwadar facilitate import and export of goods, and all domestic and foreign industrial and agricultural product.
3. To abstain from any interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan.
4. Prevent subversive activities from inside Pakistan against Kabul government.
5. Delivery insurgents, criminal offenders, drug traffickers, Mafia gangs Afghan citizens that reside/escapes to Pakistan
6. Create a line or corridor transit and free access and authorized dealers Afghanistan in exportation and importation of agricultural products and industrial goods through Pakistan to India.
7. The signing of bilateral economic, cultural, political and security ties to all these areas with maximum transparency.

Pakistan demands of Afghanistan:

1. Recognize the Durand Line as the border between the two countries.
2. Reduce close ties with New Delhi.
3. Allow transit line and access to energy resources and markets of Central Asia via Afghanistan.
4. Ensuring access to shared water resources of Afghanistan—Konar dam proposed by China on behalf of Pakistan.
5. Permitted to participate in Afghanistan's reconstruction and market.