Kissinger wants China’s participation in Afghan peace efforts

[Albani_Rahmat_Kabulzada]

RAWALPINDI: Former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, has said peace efforts in Afghanistan without China’s participation would be futile. He has predicted an increased probability of a war between India and Pakistan.

Henry Kissinger expressed these views in an interview published in Financial Times on May 20. “Without China’s active participation, any attempts to immunise Afghanistan against terrorism would be futile. This may be a tall order, since the Russians and the Chinese are getting a “free ride” on US engagement, which contains the jihadism which in central Asia and Xinjiang threatens their own security,” Kissinger said. He continued: “So was it, in retrospect, a good idea for Barack Obama to have announced that this coming July will see the beginning of a military drawdown? The question triggers a Vietnam flashback. I know from personal experience that once you start a drawdown, the road from there is inexorable. We found ourselves in a position where to maintain a free choice for the population in South Vietnam we had to keep withdrawing troops, thereby reducing the incentive for the very negotiations in which I was engaged. We will find the same challenge in Afghanistan.”

Kissinger further said, “I wrote a memorandum to Nixon which said that in the beginning of the withdrawal it will be like salted peanuts; the more you eat, the more you want.” According to Kissinger, the prospects for Afghanistan are grimmer than anything anyone has yet imagined, where the presence or absence of al-Qaeda will be the least of its problems. What might happen, he says, is a de facto partition, with India and Russia reconstituting the Northern Alliance, and Pakistan hooked to Taliban as a backstop against their own encirclement.

“Suddenly, spring goes chilly. The prospect looms of a centennial commemoration of the First World War through a half-awake re-enactment. Not Belgium but Sarajevo. Think proxy half-states; the paranoia of encirclement; the bristling arsenals, in this case nuclear; the nervous, beleaguered Pakistanis lashing out in passive-aggressive insecurity. And an India-Pakistan war becomes more probable, eventually,” says Kissinger, his voice a deep pond of calm.

He believes that “some kind of international process in which these issues are discussed might generate enough restraints so that Pakistan does not feel itself encircled by India and doesn’t see a strategic reserve in the Taliban. Is it possible to do this? I don’t know. But I know if we let matters drift this could become the Balkans of the next world war.”
Kissinger wants China

Now, China succed what it always wanted. Beeing a major player in the region.

[Toramana]

Thanks Kabulzada for this article. A war between Pakistan and India is the only logical consequence of a drawdown without the pacification of militancy by NATO/US. I had written a post here saying the same thing in a thread started by brother Nick.

[Toramana]

Actually, Kissenger wants to emphasize that Chia shares the responsibility to fight extremism and doesn't put the entire burden on US while reaping the benefits.

[Albani_Rahmat_Kabulzada]

Thanks Kabulzada for this article. A war between Pakistan and India is the only logical consequence of a drawdown without the pacification of militancy by NATO/US. I had written a post here saying the same thing in a thread started by brother Nick.

You are thousand times welcomed Toramana brother. A war between PAK/IND would be maybe good for us but not for the two states. Ok, Pakistan would lose it´s major role in the region even with the support of China because India is known not to playing with it´s enemies. But that just would causes more refugees in that region. There are already 27 Mio refugees and many more refugees the country Pakistan can not deal with. Where should they go? To Afghanistan or India or to China? No of these countries will be able to host them all. Such a war can be very dangerous for the entire region. Both or all three countries, China included, are A-powers. Just imagine what will happen when these Pakistani freaks in Islamabad would decide to use one of their rockets.

[Albani_Rahmat_Kabulzada]

Btw, have you heard that Hillary Clinton just said Pakistan did not knw anything about OBL presence in Pakistan? That is just a dirty political game. Even the claim they will withdraw could be a lie. They just claim that furthermore for the American people who are tired of this war. We will see.

[Toramana]

Kabalzada, below is my post that I mentioned.

Amore realistic scenario

2011-2020 NATO-US leaves Afghanistan --- Taleban resurgents emboldened by the victory and backed by ISI and Punjab's army try to overrun Kabul after efforts at political settlements with Northetn Alliance fail...Northern Alliance declares independent Khurasan...Russia, Iran, India, US, Europe, Central Asian countries, etc. are quick to recognize Khurassan as an independent state...Taleban try to take it over but UN security council intervenes and declares Khurassan to be a "zone of peace" and authorizes member states e.g. NATO US to send contengents to defend it...

ISI backs up and Taleban are unsuccessful in taking Khurassan. Afghanistan splits into Khurassan and southern Afghanistan. There is a degree of Pashtun backlash against the disintegration of Afghanistan but Taleban with support from ISI and Punjab's army suppresses it.

With UN backing Kabul is given to Khurassan along with Hirat. Pashtuns are able to retain Kandahar and Jalabad. With international backing, Hazaras are able to take parts of Ghazni.

A clash (with ISI mechanation) between Haqqanis, Gulbuddin, and Mullah Ummar arises over control of territory and share in power in the truncated Afghanistan. ISI intervenes and divides the rest of the southern Afghanistan into three parts with north-eastern provinces of Kunar, Laghman, Nooristan, Nangarhar, etc. togethor with parts of Kabul province given to Gulbuddin, ...central provinces e.g. Piktiya, Paktika, Khost, Ghaznai, etc. given to Haqqanis, ....and Kandahar, Zabul, etc. handed over to Mullah Omar. This suits their purpose to pre-empt any chance of Pashtun unity and nationalistic backlash.

ISI plan is successful and the three warlords eventually declare union with Pakistan. Haqqanis are the first to do so followed by Gulbuddin followed by Mullah Omar.

During this time southern Afghanistan again becomes a hub of Jehadis around the world including Uzbaks, Chechens, Yughur, Arabs, Kashmiris, with mecenaries and suicide bombers trained and sent for Jehadi missions from Kandahar and other Jehadi centers. Pashtuns of Afghanistan and Waziristan form a significant contingent of such mercenaries.

As the Haqqanis, Gubuddin, etc. strengthen foothold, they back Jummath-i-Islami, TTP elements, and other terrorists in Khyber Pukhtunkhwa to slaughter ANP and PMAP cadres and leadership with tacit support from ISI.

2017 to 2025 Punjab's army and ISI emboldened by its success in Afghanistan reactivate insurgency in Kashmir with suicide bombers and mercenaries from Kandahar and the rest of Pashtun part of Afghanistan recruited by ISI and sent to Kashmir. Gulbuddin, Haqqanis, etc. eagerly support and contribute to the Kashmir liberation movement launched by ISI.

Kashmiri terrorists are also encouraged by the victory of Taleban in Afghanistan and dream to score such kind of victory against India. Pakistani ruling classes go for this option because of their obcession with Kashmir and the hard economic conditions and failing state system which requires an external problem to draw the attention of masses towards and to re-consolidate the dwindling national sense in them. This is also necessitated by the possibility of Jehadis turning on Pakistani state itself if there is no Jehad to fight on foreign lands.

India tries to incite an insurgency in Baluchistan but fails. Pakistan tries to reactivate Khalistan along with other insurgencies in the north eastern provinces of India with clandestine backing from China. As the Jehadis in Kashmir make gains, India warns Pakistan to end support for Jehadis and cross-border infiltration. When that doesn't happen, India attacks Pakistan on the Lahore sector. China mobalises army along Tibet-Sikham border to pressure India. US and NATO send warships to the Indian ocean and warn China not to intervene.

Almost on the verge of defeat, Pakistan uses nuclear bomb on military contonments inside Indian border. Punjabis of Lahore and Faisal Abad fearing nuclear reprisal from India ask UN to intervene.

US, NATO forces, Russia etc. attack the nuclear installations of Pakistan and destroy them. With that the process of disintegration of Pakistan reaches its logical conclusion with Baluchistan, Karachi, etc. going their own way and declaring Free Baluchistan and Jannahpur.

Pashtuns are clueless as what to do but gradually rally around Mahmood Khan and Asfandiyar or their political descendents. The sense of loss enrages them and they turn on Haqqanis, Mullah Omars, Gulbuddins, etc. and the rest of parastic religious families e.g. Mian, Mullah, Sayeds, both in KPK and Afghanistan (who sided with Mullah Omar and Pakistani army etc.) and slaughter them.

2022-2030 Pakistan disappears. Small autonomous states of Baluchistan, Greater Punjab as a dominion of India, Jannahpur, Sindhu Desh, Pashtunistan emerge instead. Khurassan ultimately disintegrates with Hirat, Ghor, and Bamyan declaring union with Iran and Uzbaks union with Uzbakistan. Tajaks reluctantly unite with Tajakistan. This process is completed by 2030.

[Toramana]

http://pkpolitics.com/2011/05/26/cro...e-26-may-2011/

[Toramana]

Interview with Vyacheslav Belokrenitsky, Deputy Director of the Institute for Oriental Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow, Russia.
We still do not know whether it was Mullah Omar or not who was killed, but theoretically just how his killing might influence the prospects of the American forces leaving Afghanistan and also the prospects of some peaceful process in that country?
The issue of killing Mullah Omar is more complicated than the issue of killing Osama bin Laden, because Osama bin Laden was the number one terrorist in the United States and his killing produced certain impacts on the American public opinion. In some way it accelerated the process of American forces leaving out Afghanistan; the American public opinion is now more united in saying that the United States should leave Afghanistan as soon as possible; probably sooner than the president’s administration of the US has previously planned to do. So, the killing of Osama bin Laden produced certain and definite impact and influence on this issue. As for Mullah Omar, it is something different, because he was never such a person for the United States as Osama bin Laden, he was not fighting with the United States, his crime was that he did not give up Osama bin Laden to the Americans, he did not betray him, he was concealing him, so it was his fault. We cannot say that he was considered as an enemy of the United States. The liquidation of Mullah Omar by the Americans is very doubtful, I do not think that they were responsible for it; even if he was killed then probably it was not done by their initiative. At least it seems that they do not have any interest in killing Mullah Omar, especially because they have some kind of talks with the Taliban. Of course, Mullah Omar is not a figure with whom they can speak and whom they can trust, so, to a certain point, his liquidation can open a door to some other leaders in the Taliban movement who can be more compromising, it can open a way to the better prospects or certain issues in Afghanistan. From this point of view, Mullah Omar’s killing would have been useful for the American plans in Afghanistan, but this is very doubtful that they precisely did something to liquidate him. There is one more replication to that which is the American-Pakistani relationship: if it would come out that the Americans did this killing than the American-Pakistani relations would become tenser, and neither Pakistan, nor the Unites States is interested in it.
Could you explain to our listeners why that would complicate the relations between Washington and Islamabad?
Islamabad was always behind the Taliban. We can say that the Taliban was created with the help of the Pakistani authorities and they maintained the diplomatic relationship with the Taliban government in 1996-2001, therefore Pakistan always had an opinion that it could deal with the Taliban, and actually they have good relations with the former leadership of the Taliban. In perspective Pakistan can see them as its allies in the region; therefore Pakistan is not neutral towards Taliban, which could strain the relationship between Islamabad and Washington.
How consolidated is the Taliban leadership?
I think this leadership is rather consolidated. The Taliban leadership is just tasking itself, and I would not say that it is easy to find some rifts in its ranks. I think that to a certain extent they are united; there can be some tactical, strategic and ideological differences, but they are very much united.
How true is the assessment that Taliban is closely involved in the local business?
First of all, they are involved in the narcotraffic business, their capability and the resources they have much depend on this kind of business. The illegal narcotics and the illegal transfer of weapons - these are the two major forces of their income, and for the Taliban it is very important.
The reason I am asking is that I have seen a book of one of the Pakistani analysts, and the book actually focuses on business interests of the Pakistani special services and army in general.
Of course, these are speculations. I have some opinion about this interest they do have but I cannot prove or not prove this point. The Taliban, of course, they have their interest, but as for the Pakistani government, it needs to be investigated, I do not know anything about it.
Just to sum it up, what about the negotiation process between the Americans and the Taliban?
It is going on. They are trying to come to terms; they are trying to find their way out of it.
Has there been much progress lately?
Of course, there is no much progress, it is difficult to have this progress, but they are trying to succeed.

http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/05/25/50790494.html

[Toramana]

President Obama’s "Middle East" speech last week ignited fresh controversy with Israel for proposing to form a new Israel-Palestine partition congruent to the pre-1967 border demarcation. Perhaps Obama intends the message to be an extension of an "olive branch" to the rest of the Arab world in order to diffuse further rebellion and anti-American sentiment there. Or perhaps he’s finally realized that the United States’ fiscal quandary is going to force the reduction, if not outright ending, of foreign and military aid in the region and the speech is an attempt to initiate domestic dialogue about that inevitability.

This is wishful thinking. But with Mr. Obama temporarily finding himself in the mood to encourage border-realignment for a country, he should look no further than Afghanistan…especially as the means to a broader U.S. exit strategy from the country. Such a strategy would most certainly address international "olive branch" and domestic fiscal initiatives if that is what he is ostensibly intending to address.

Following a U.S. withdrawal, Afghanistan’s various tribes would have a myriad of political options, with border realignment being but one possible course of action. But the United States at least owes it to the country’s suffering people to propose the possibility of realignment. The fact is, Afghanistan has never been a nation state in the modern sense, but rather an amalgamation of many ethnicities occupying a large land mass arbitrarily placed within border confines drawn up by Western colonial powers, and which few of its inhabitants happen to recognize. Our recent attempt at imposing a central governing body to rule over this large and diverse land territory has only further exacerbated Western distortions upon the land and its people.

Withdrawing would put an end to such distortions (at least for the moment). And encouraging border demarcation would send the truly humane message of not wishing any future bloodshed upon the territory’s people. For if it was truly up to the land’s inhabitants, the borders across the Afghanistan land territory would unequivocally have emerged different from today’s Western-imposed borders.

In fact, many of the patronage and power structures necessary to facilitate such partitioning have been in place for some time. As a matter of fact, much of this "encouragement" would actually transpire back in the West, specifically by having its respective ivory tower planners swallowing their pride and acknowledging, and thereby formalizing, these existing power structures. Some groups might simply merge their lands with those of the adjacent country that already largely consists of their respective tribe/nationality, as is likely to be the case with Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and possibly Tajikistan.

The ivory tower planners will not go quietly, for they will most certainly try to incite fear over the Taliban reemerging. But the odds of such a reoccurrence are profoundly minute. In fact, most of what has been propagandized as Taliban activity in the U.S. media has actually amounted to petty score settling between neighbors, such as shepherds and farmers, regarding "who cheated who" in a negotiated transaction. As another glaring example of Western distortions in this society, the eventual "winners" of these transactions are those quickest to file the "Taliban" accusation with the local military PRT (provincial reconstruction team).

Other supposed "Taliban" members are simply aggrieved, desperate shepherds and farmers whose livelihoods have been decimated from the fighting and whose families are starving as a consequence (When people lose everything and have nothing to lose…). Further, with the very small "real Taliban" element having always been a militant arm of the Pashtun tribe, a new demarcation would confine them to the Pashtun territories instead of being the Afghanistan-wide cancer that it has been. It is a Pashtun issue, not everyone else’s.

The only real problem would be the fate of the Hazaras, who possess a significant population disadvantage relative to the Pashtuns. Given the extreme antipathy between them, this is a potentially grave problem. They would likely find it most convenient to merge with the Tajiks to the north given their common language, Northern Alliance kinship, and common enemy in the Pashtuns. Whatever they decide, the West must respect the decision for it is not up to ivory tower planners in distant capitals around the world to decide their fate.

Others might question the rationale of bringing our troops home during the present economic maelstrom, fearing that thousands of returning troops will only exacerbate unemployment problems. But few politicians truly realize the financial burdens these conflicts have placed upon American citizens and the self-inflicted economic stagnation as consequence. Not having to pay for these conflicts will inevitably lower present and future government expenditure, thereby reducing the need for as many taxes. The increased individual wealth would in turn be spent and invested on more productive endeavors. Returning the troops home and the accompanying decreased war expenditure would inevitably result in an enormous boon for the domestic economy.

The United States’ 10+ years of imposing a central governing body to rule over the large and diverse land territory of Afghanistan is the latest chapter in a Western-imposed distortion upon the land and its people. It was always fated to be a fool’s errand. And our troops know it, as evidenced by their continually plummeting morale. But with President Obama’s newfound inclination to propose border-realignments, the case can surely be made for doing so in Afghanistan, especially so we can bring our troops home and rebuild the domestic economy.

http://original.antiwar.com/josef-st...lking-borders/

[Albani_Rahmat_Kabulzada]

The process could be possible but not the scenario in it´s framework. It´s more like a hollywood script than reality. Everything will end when the evil is killed . I will tell you why. The US or NATO will never allow any element to interrupt their interests in the region. The first step that these would take would be to cut off their money funds to Pakistan (they already know ISI and the army are supporting terrorism and the ISI self is called by the CIA as a ''governmental terrornetwork''http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0809/S00233.htm ) which will weak the country a lot after several warnings to Pakistan (it´s own people will turn themsel from the state or rebel against the state which will cause a huge civil problem civil war within Pakistan). And before Pakistan can do anything or sent it´s satanic holy warriors to Afghanistan NATO and US will step back to the northern parts of Afghanistan, letting the southern and eastern parts to the Taliban and Pakistan and the local Pashtun administration. In the north they will reorganize themself with the support of leading nations like Germany, draw a new for the moment imagine border that ANA, US, UK, Canada, the new established and modernized Northern Alliance and Germany will protect. Since Moscau agreed to intervene and step into Afghanistan if Taliban could find roots or dominate the political stage in northern Afghanistan they will soon step defending the borders between southern and northern Afghanistan. The US will use it drones and bombers and possibly send some tanks but at the same time reduce the number of it´s troups to ca. 50% to 60%. The germans will use their Haubitz 2000s and destoy the enemies lands, positions and districts within view minutes and turn them into dust. The Russians will send their SpezNaz commandos to the border regions and their world-known spotter. The border is maybe now a bit longer than the original national border but much easier to control. Local people such as former Mujaheddin fighters will support them (Laghman, Paghman, Logar will join ''Khorasan'', as well large parts of Ghazni and the capital self and by non-Pashtuns populated regions of Nangahar, Jalalabad and Khowst (Pashais, Paryas, Parachi, Nuristanis, Sayids, Pirs, Khwajas...)). In addition, support will arrive from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan, all allies of Moscau, China or US. Meanwhile, the Taliban will establish themself in the south and eastern Afghanistan. Calling for a new era and install the Sharia and tyrrany as weapon against sins and a sin-lead life. That would be their only succes, at least having those parts under control where mostly Pashtuns reside. But that won´t keep them from calling another Jihaad on ''Afghan land'' against the infidels and those who support the infidels. Pakistan will surely play it´s card. It will turn to all sites. Trying to support Taliban as much as possible and at the same time to weak India on it´s own territory by sending terrorists like those of Mumbai Attack and in Kashmir. Recognizing a Taliban government in southern and eastern Afghanistan, giving every fraction of thugs (Gulbuddin, Haqqani, Mullah Omar ...) their parts and keep them united. Of course, their play will be easy. The Pashtuns in Pakistan are mostly pro-Pakistan and anti-India and anti-US and they will without any question offer themself for Pakistan´s political Jihaad in Afghanistan, against India and in Kashmir. In Afghanistan, many Pashtuns hate the foreigners and will feel duty to stand up against them and of course to re-claim back on the northern and western parts of Afghanistan which would be impossible. Taking weapons will make them targets of air strikes. The war between India and Pakistan will destroy Pakistan. Before Pakistan can use it´s A-weapons, NATO or US had already destroyed Pakistan´s nuclear facilities and their electricity sources. At the same time NATO, US and Russia warns China not to intervene. China have no power to mess with all of these powers so it will try either to work for Pakistan in secret or work as a mediator between Paki and all non-Paks. In all these struggles we must not forget the role of Iran. Iran, a criminal government with it´s own interests in the region and highly anti-US and anti-NATO will also support Taliban but as double-face as they are they will at the same time try to support the Hazaras and the western population of Afganistan and Baluchs. They can manifest their interests in Afghanistan and maybe US and Iran will step eachother a bit closer to nearly a new friendship but they won´t be able to do anything to harm US or NATO. The end of Pakistan will come with it´s destruction of infrastructre, army, ISI, the entire government, it´s military arsenal and it´s industry. After Pakistan´s blame the region will get apart. India, US, Saudi-Arabia, UAE and NATO along with Russia, China and many NGOs will try to support the region by rebuilding it, providing foot and water, mobile clinics, medicines, tents ... The Panjab will get it´s own administration such as Sindh and Baluchistan. Meanwhile, Gulbuddin and it´s allies will try to infiltrate the region eastward of the Hindukush and annex Pashtunistan and Baluchistan. They will be able to annex Pashtunistan since the people would welcome a unification (majority or not) but Baluchs would defend their country with NATO against them. The Northernerss in Afghanistan will indeed establish their whatever, be it Khorasan, Hazaraistan, Unay Turkistan, and join eachother as federal states. Farsiwans either join their brothers in Tajikistan or they will for the first stay independant to make some experiences. That won´t take more than 10 years. 2030 is to far away. In one day, 20 000 000 people get homeless because of water floods. So no need to wait 20 years or much longer. It is enough to have a war and there will be a lot of destruction, refugee, misery etc. Kashmir will either join India or establish itself as a new state allied with India and Panjab? Since Kashmir was only an issue because of Pakistan and it´s geo-political threat to India. But since Pakistan does not exist more it is no more an issue. However, southern Afghanistan will face a new era under the Taliban. At the same time moderate people could weaken Taliban by asking for schools and promoting their culture and language. One day, the mentality of Talibanism will be erased and evry little Pashtun child will taste the taste of freedom, harmony, peace, stability and beeing pride belonging to one of the great communities in the region. Pashtuns could adopt and learn from their neighbours how to manage a country succesfully without any foreigners who can push their puppets on million of people. But their tribal affairs will remain. Possibly, non-Pashtuns from north will exchange Pashtuns from north to Tajiks from south and eastern Afghanistan. Baluch people will have their own country, at least on former Pakistani state and the south-western part of Afghanistan could go to them, too. The region is rich of resources and with a bit help of the international community they will soon be able to administrate their country independant. If everything go fine it could be possible that we establish in the entire region the same sytem of communication, trading, crossing eachother´s country, a common currency, common interests and common agreements like the EU and even one step further like the UN. We would be a great power in the region, even powerfuller than Iran, India and China. We have already the sources there. We just need to take them.

[graveyardofempires]

what the hell has kissinger got to do with this.

do you guys know him?

[ComradePashtun]

I literally bursted in to laugh and started jumping on my bed.. I could not help but giggle and at time burst in to laugh reading through both Toramanas post - and while Kadozada labled Toramana's post as a commic film - he was steaming on even more exterme form of commedy.

Weldone guys, I had a good laugh after two somewhat boring days. Thank you.

In Toramana's case at the end his Asfandyar slaughters Mullah Omar and Gulbadin IN 2030 and takes it all, goooosssshhhh!

What can I say about Kadozada, he will remain to a be a Kado, he thinks that entire world cares about his Bacha baz aas and another apoclyptic war would start so this bacha berish - the best thing that has ever happened to humanity - could be saved. His food, culture, bacha bazi/bacha berishi as the apotheosis of human accomplishment, should be rescued under any circumstances. If this Mantu-eating bacha berish-dancing Kadozada decays under Taliban then humanity, the world and man kind would face existential dilemmas.. hence every one else is dispensible, even at the price of a 3rd WW!

[ComradePashtun]

Kadozada,

How important do you think you are to NATO/U.S?