Sohail Speaks Yasir's Blog Fazeer's Focus

User Tag List

Results 1 to 28 of 28
  1. #1
    Debut
    Oct 2016
    Runs
    6,805
    Mentioned
    384 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    India elbowed out of Afghanistan peace talks

    Pakistan joined the US, Russia and China over the weekend to craft a peace agreement with the Taliban, a move that shows how Islamabad has moved to the centerstage of Afghan peace process

    Despite having vital security interests, India's participation or voice has been negligible in the evolving situation

    Pakistan joined the US, Russia and China over the weekend to craft a peace agreement with the Taliban, a development that shows how Islamabad has moved to the centerstage of the Afghan peace process, and how India has been dealt out of the future of Afghanistan. India's participation or voice has been negligible in the evolving situation, while Pakistan has used the opportunity to manoeuvre itself to centerstage of the region's geopolitics.

    Shaida Abdali, former Afghan ambassador to India and a presidential candidate, told TOI here last week, "India's 18-year-old effort to strengthen ties with Afghanistan should not be lost at this juncture. India's indifference to the evolving situation in Afghanistan will likely cost it in the long run."

    India is nowhere in the peace negotiations, nor have India's concerns really found any traction.

    In the latest blow to India, US ambassador to Afghanistan, John Bass, on Thursday said that Afghanistan's presidential elections, scheduled for September 28, could be postponed, until the peace process with the Taliban was completed.

    India is opposed to this - during US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo's visit to New Delhi , NSA Ajit Doval repeatedly stressed the importance of holding elections in Afghanistan on schedule even if the peace process was on. India also opposed the proposal to have an interim government in Afghanistan, both with US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad and with Russia. None of India's concerns cut much ice with any of the principal stakeholders in Afghanistan.

    Last week, the US and the Taliban hammered out a provisional 8-point agreement (although in the Pashto version it includes 10 points). Despite Khalilzad saying the US won't "cut and run" and that it was "not a withdrawal agreement but a peace agreement" the Taliban and others have interpreted the agreement as the former. The process has gathered momentum, despite almost daily terror attacks by the Taliban.

    India's 18-year investment in Afghanistan has been largely with the government of the day. India remains the most popular country in Afghanistan with the people. Amar Sinha, former Indian ambassador to Afghanistan and member, NSAB said, "India should be more proactive. It is in a good place as far as the nationalist Afghans are concerned. India should bring them together at this time, so they can speak unitedly. We're distressed to see the level of disunity among the political leaders in Afghanistan."

    Abdali said, "One of the most critical gains post 2001 is our democratic process -- which must not be affected without full international guarantees that Afghanistan will not reverse to pre-2001 dark era. It is necessary that India remain engaged … as a trusted country versus a disruptive one. In this uncertainty, with no viable solution in sight, India must stay engaged."

    The US has succeeded in bringing Russia and China on the same page, and last week they included Pakistan, Taliban's principal sponsor. Pakistan is playing a crucial role of bringing the Taliban to the table and keeping them there. On July 12, the four countries met in Beijing to issue a 'four-party joint statement on the Afghan peace process.

    The statement "welcomed recent positive progress as the crucial parties concerned have advanced their talks and increased contacts with each other. All sides also welcomed intra-Afghan meetings held in Moscow and Doha. … The four sides encouraged all parties to take steps to reduce violence leading to a comprehensive and permanent ceasefire that starts with intra-Afghan negotiations."

    The Doha agreement of July 7-8 between the US and Taliban includes the agreements reached in Moscow, thereby taking care of Russia's interests. China and Pakistan look out for each other. India is out of the picture, despite having vital security interests. Interestingly, former Afghan president Hamid Karzai, believed to be close to India, became a facilitator of the Taliban talks both in Moscow and in Beijing.

    Meanwhile, Afghanistan's elected government has been under concerted pressure. First, the Taliban has refused to countenance them as a credible party, to the extent that the "intra-Afghan" talks included people from the government in their personal capacities. Second, Taliban attacks in the past weeks and months have been relentless. Third, neither US, Russia, China or Pakistan have given the government any place at the talks. Fourth, with no certainty of elections, the government is looking at extinction. Fifth, Pakistan's airspace ban has cut off Afghanistan from India, imposing economic costs, and making a political point of the indispensability of Pakistan.

    Khalilzad declared he has achieved progress on four fronts: assurances from the Taliban that Afghanistan will not become a staging ground again for militant groups like al-Qaida or the Islamic State; withdrawal of US troops; all-Afghan dialogue to reach agreement on a peaceful future; and a permanent ceasefire. The US goal is to complete peace talks with the Taliban by September 1, which would begin the withdrawal of US and Nato troops. In five months after that, the Taliban and other Afghans are expected to come to an agreement.

    Pakistan finds itself in a much happier position. Having proved their indispensability, Pakistan has been a recipient of aid from US's principal allies Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar, as well as an IMF bailout. China remains Pakistan's principal ally and benefactor, but the US, despite Trump's mean tweets about Pakistan, is getting ready to fete Imran Khan in Washington next week.
    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/70219048.cms


    TalentSpotterPk: I pray PanamaLeak sink Sharif ship forever we dont want this pseudo democracy

  2. #2
    Debut
    Oct 2016
    Runs
    6,805
    Mentioned
    384 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Supa dupa power after investing too much time and money is still not getting a seat on table?


    TalentSpotterPk: I pray PanamaLeak sink Sharif ship forever we dont want this pseudo democracy

  3. #3
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    14,356
    Mentioned
    183 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Ah so peace talks are kicking off again - let’s hope they’ll be more successful than the last umpteen attempts.

    As for India well investing in infrastructure as opposed to investment in car bombs and suicide vests will eventually pay off, in fact it already has in part.

    First Karzai, now Ashraf Ghani, next probably Abdullah Abdullah. Despite the wet dreams of others the civilian leadership in Afghanistan is going nowhere anytime soon.

  4. #4
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    14,356
    Mentioned
    183 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    *isn't

  5. #5
    Debut
    Mar 2013
    Venue
    Planet Cricket
    Runs
    20,767
    Mentioned
    392 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabbar Singh View Post
    Ah so peace talks are kicking off again - let’s hope they’ll be more successful than the last umpteen attempts.

    As for India well investing in infrastructure as opposed to investment in car bombs and suicide vests will eventually pay off, in fact it already has in part.

    First Karzai, now Ashraf Ghani, next probably Abdullah Abdullah. Despite the wet dreams of others the civilian leadership in Afghanistan is going nowhere anytime soon.
    Taliban are on table to get involved in mainstream politics (asked by US) just like Hikmatyar and if they enter in Afghan Politics thn the other civil leaders of Afghanistan will go back to shadows.


    Raise your words, not voice. It's rain that grows flowers, not thunder... (Rumi)

  6. #6
    Debut
    Jan 2015
    Venue
    Karachi, Pakistan
    Runs
    40,809
    Mentioned
    1882 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Lol yeh tou IPL hogayi



    Now dont ask meaning of IPL

  7. #7
    Debut
    Aug 2013
    Venue
    Chennai
    Runs
    32,164
    Mentioned
    936 Post(s)
    Tagged
    11 Thread(s)
    Negotiating with terrorists?

    No thanks.

    Interesting how USA hypocrisy isn't being highlighted in the media these days...

  8. #8
    Debut
    Jun 2015
    Venue
    Srinagar
    Runs
    4,632
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sensible-indian-fan View Post
    Negotiating with terrorists?

    No thanks.

    Interesting how USA hypocrisy isn't being highlighted in the media these days...
    The US are far and away yhe biggest terrorists on the planet yet no one has severed contact with them so there's that araz

  9. #9
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    22,218
    Mentioned
    213 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sensible-indian-fan View Post
    Negotiating with terrorists?

    No thanks.

    Interesting how USA hypocrisy isn't being highlighted in the media these days...
    The US has always been consistently on the side of the despicable folks: be it in Syria, Afghanistan, or Libya.

    Having said that India needs to reflect on the choices it has made. It was expecting foreign policy continuity post Obama, but has been caught flat-footed by a transnational, isolationist in the white house.
    The board strokes of India foreign policy over the last decade were:
    1 - isolate Pakistan internationally (Pakistan dolts in the millitary establishment were happy to oblige)
    2 - build strong contacts with the civilia government in afghanistan
    3 - use ttp in border areas tactically every now and then
    4 - develop Chabahar port to by-pass Pakistan is Central Asia trade strategy
    5 - use access to chahbahar to fund balochi insurgents to sabotage Gwadar/CPEC
    6 - Continue to buy weapons from Russia while buying a few token weapons from US in exchange for international support (FATF, LeT, civilian Nuclear deal)
    7 - String along US with joke Quad (Australia, India, Japan, US) with hopes of containing china.
    8- Deepen trade ties with Afghanistan
    9 - A deep rooted fascination with developing ties with Israel: I am not qualified enough to reflect how that pays of in the short term.

    By and large these are solid choices, but with two major mistakes:
    1 - It was not willing to invest in blood to increase the influence of a largely irrelevant puppet government in Kabul that will collapse the day the US withdraws
    2 - It, like the rest of the world, was unprepared for what a Trump presidency means, although he made it very clear in his election: whoever has the largest trade surplus with my country is my biggest enemy.
    3 - US

    So in this new world order where obama is not helping whitewash modijis' glorious tenure in Gujrat. What are the demands from the US:

    1 - Abandon Iran and buy oil elsewhere: GoI duly obliged
    2 - Although they were not asked to abandon Chahbahar Port: GoI has reduced its development budget for the port by 2/3rds
    3 - Lost their trade access due to the surplus and the perceived barriers to US firms and tariffs imposed
    4 - Asked to buy more US weaponry. The S400 pressure might come further down the road.
    5 - BLA has been listed a terrorist entity: so we see lot of natsec journos on twitter scrubbing their past support for the supposed balochi cause.
    6 - Asked to confront china more actively
    7 - Asked to share its data on ecommerce with international players
    8 - provide greater access to its markets to US firms

    So how has India responded to this:
    They asked the US for support to list a half dead terrorist (hafiz saeed) as a known sponsor of terrorism sanctioned by the UN.

    I leave you to judge the scoreboard.

    NB. Pakistan's bout of good fortune is entirely down to Trump's elections. The challenge for us is not mess this up.

  10. #10
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    34,427
    Mentioned
    661 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabbar Singh View Post
    Ah so peace talks are kicking off again - let’s hope they’ll be more successful than the last umpteen attempts.

    As for India well investing in infrastructure as opposed to investment in car bombs and suicide vests will eventually pay off, in fact it already has in part.

    First Karzai, now Ashraf Ghani, next probably Abdullah Abdullah. Despite the wet dreams of others the civilian leadership in Afghanistan is going nowhere anytime soon.
    lol India has its own people to feed. It's investment in Afghanistan is not because India cares for the people or country but want it as an ally and base to harbour, finance and support terrorism in Pakistan.

    Pakistan has the ace card in Afghanistan and will play this very smartly to get the Indians and Americans out in the future.


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  11. #11
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    5,655
    Mentioned
    413 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sensible-indian-fan View Post
    Negotiating with terrorists?

    No thanks.

    Interesting how USA hypocrisy isn't being highlighted in the media these days...
    It is the longest war the US has engaged in, and Trump is determined to end it.

  12. #12
    Debut
    Jan 2015
    Venue
    Karachi, Pakistan
    Runs
    40,809
    Mentioned
    1882 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabbar Singh View Post
    Ah so peace talks are kicking off again - let’s hope they’ll be more successful than the last umpteen attempts.

    As for India well investing in infrastructure as opposed to investment in car bombs and suicide vests will eventually pay off, in fact it already has in part.

    First Karzai, now Ashraf Ghani, next probably Abdullah Abdullah. Despite the wet dreams of others the civilian leadership in Afghanistan is going nowhere anytime soon.
    Despite how much India tries to make a forward base out of Afghanistan, the Afghanis realize that the only way they can reach open waters is through Pakistan. So not being completely hostile to Pakistan is a matter of their own survival.

    India revealed her cards too early and lost. Now trying to save face by saying "oh we were just investing in infrastructure from the goodness of our heart"


    Mein inko rolaonga

  13. #13
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    22,218
    Mentioned
    213 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Rose View Post
    The US has always been consistently on the side of the despicable folks: be it in Syria, Afghanistan, or Libya.

    Having said that India needs to reflect on the choices it has made. It was expecting foreign policy continuity post Obama, but has been caught flat-footed by a transnational, isolationist in the white house.
    The board strokes of India foreign policy over the last decade were:
    1 - isolate Pakistan internationally (Pakistan dolts in the millitary establishment were happy to oblige)
    2 - build strong contacts with the civilia government in afghanistan
    3 - use ttp in border areas tactically every now and then
    4 - develop Chabahar port to by-pass Pakistan is Central Asia trade strategy
    5 - use access to chahbahar to fund balochi insurgents to sabotage Gwadar/CPEC
    6 - Continue to buy weapons from Russia while buying a few token weapons from US in exchange for international support (FATF, LeT, civilian Nuclear deal)
    7 - String along US with joke Quad (Australia, India, Japan, US) with hopes of containing china.
    8- Deepen trade ties with Afghanistan
    9 - A deep rooted fascination with developing ties with Israel: I am not qualified enough to reflect how that pays of in the short term.

    By and large these are solid choices, but with two major mistakes:
    1 - It was not willing to invest in blood to increase the influence of a largely irrelevant puppet government in Kabul that will collapse the day the US withdraws
    2 - It, like the rest of the world, was unprepared for what a Trump presidency means, although he made it very clear in his election: whoever has the largest trade surplus with my country is my biggest enemy.
    3 - US

    So in this new world order where obama is not helping whitewash modijis' glorious tenure in Gujrat. What are the demands from the US:

    1 - Abandon Iran and buy oil elsewhere: GoI duly obliged
    2 - Although they were not asked to abandon Chahbahar Port: GoI has reduced its development budget for the port by 2/3rds
    3 - Lost their trade access due to the surplus and the perceived barriers to US firms and tariffs imposed
    4 - Asked to buy more US weaponry. The S400 pressure might come further down the road.
    5 - BLA has been listed a terrorist entity: so we see lot of natsec journos on twitter scrubbing their past support for the supposed balochi cause.
    6 - Asked to confront china more actively
    7 - Asked to share its data on ecommerce with international players
    8 - provide greater access to its markets to US firms

    So how has India responded to this:
    They asked the US for support to list a half dead terrorist (hafiz saeed) as a known sponsor of terrorism sanctioned by the UN.

    I leave you to judge the scoreboard.

    NB. Pakistan's bout of good fortune is entirely down to Trump's elections. The challenge for us is not mess this up.
    Forgot to add third mistake:
    3 - the Indo-Afghan air corridor shut down due to Balakot tree massacre (an election, had to be won you see): Afghanistan post US will think long and hard about how tenuous its link to india is: considering the air corridor can be shut off any time.

  14. #14
    Debut
    Jan 2009
    Venue
    Behind you
    Runs
    6,264
    Mentioned
    256 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Rose View Post
    The US has always been consistently on the side of the despicable folks: be it in Syria, Afghanistan, or Libya.

    Having said that India needs to reflect on the choices it has made. It was expecting foreign policy continuity post Obama, but has been caught flat-footed by a transnational, isolationist in the white house.
    The board strokes of India foreign policy over the last decade were:
    1 - isolate Pakistan internationally (Pakistan dolts in the millitary establishment were happy to oblige)
    2 - build strong contacts with the civilia government in afghanistan
    3 - use ttp in border areas tactically every now and then
    4 - develop Chabahar port to by-pass Pakistan is Central Asia trade strategy
    5 - use access to chahbahar to fund balochi insurgents to sabotage Gwadar/CPEC
    6 - Continue to buy weapons from Russia while buying a few token weapons from US in exchange for international support (FATF, LeT, civilian Nuclear deal)
    7 - String along US with joke Quad (Australia, India, Japan, US) with hopes of containing china.
    8- Deepen trade ties with Afghanistan
    9 - A deep rooted fascination with developing ties with Israel: I am not qualified enough to reflect how that pays of in the short term.

    By and large these are solid choices, but with two major mistakes:
    1 - It was not willing to invest in blood to increase the influence of a largely irrelevant puppet government in Kabul that will collapse the day the US withdraws
    2 - It, like the rest of the world, was unprepared for what a Trump presidency means, although he made it very clear in his election: whoever has the largest trade surplus with my country is my biggest enemy.
    3 - US

    So in this new world order where obama is not helping whitewash modijis' glorious tenure in Gujrat. What are the demands from the US:

    1 - Abandon Iran and buy oil elsewhere: GoI duly obliged
    2 - Although they were not asked to abandon Chahbahar Port: GoI has reduced its development budget for the port by 2/3rds
    3 - Lost their trade access due to the surplus and the perceived barriers to US firms and tariffs imposed
    4 - Asked to buy more US weaponry. The S400 pressure might come further down the road.
    5 - BLA has been listed a terrorist entity: so we see lot of natsec journos on twitter scrubbing their past support for the supposed balochi cause.
    6 - Asked to confront china more actively
    7 - Asked to share its data on ecommerce with international players
    8 - provide greater access to its markets to US firms

    So how has India responded to this:
    They asked the US for support to list a half dead terrorist (hafiz saeed) as a known sponsor of terrorism sanctioned by the UN.

    I leave you to judge the scoreboard.

    NB. Pakistan's bout of good fortune is entirely down to Trump's elections. The challenge for us is not mess this up.
    Excellent post. And agree on all points. Modi in many ways has been an absolute God-send for us, in addition to fanning domestic racism and attacks on minorities his policies on the international stage have all backfired.

  15. #15
    Debut
    Aug 2013
    Venue
    Chennai
    Runs
    32,164
    Mentioned
    936 Post(s)
    Tagged
    11 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Adijazz1706 View Post
    The US are far and away yhe biggest terrorists on the planet yet no one has severed contact with them so there's that araz
    True.

  16. #16
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    5,655
    Mentioned
    413 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Rose View Post
    The US has always been consistently on the side of the despicable folks: be it in Syria, Afghanistan, or Libya.

    Having said that India needs to reflect on the choices it has made. It was expecting foreign policy continuity post Obama, but has been caught flat-footed by a transnational, isolationist in the white house.
    The board strokes of India foreign policy over the last decade were:
    1 - isolate Pakistan internationally (Pakistan dolts in the millitary establishment were happy to oblige)
    2 - build strong contacts with the civilia government in afghanistan
    3 - use ttp in border areas tactically every now and then
    4 - develop Chabahar port to by-pass Pakistan is Central Asia trade strategy
    5 - use access to chahbahar to fund balochi insurgents to sabotage Gwadar/CPEC
    6 - Continue to buy weapons from Russia while buying a few token weapons from US in exchange for international support (FATF, LeT, civilian Nuclear deal)
    7 - String along US with joke Quad (Australia, India, Japan, US) with hopes of containing china.
    8- Deepen trade ties with Afghanistan
    9 - A deep rooted fascination with developing ties with Israel: I am not qualified enough to reflect how that pays of in the short term.

    By and large these are solid choices, but with two major mistakes:
    1 - It was not willing to invest in blood to increase the influence of a largely irrelevant puppet government in Kabul that will collapse the day the US withdraws
    2 - It, like the rest of the world, was unprepared for what a Trump presidency means, although he made it very clear in his election: whoever has the largest trade surplus with my country is my biggest enemy.
    3 - US

    So in this new world order where obama is not helping whitewash modijis' glorious tenure in Gujrat. What are the demands from the US:

    1 - Abandon Iran and buy oil elsewhere: GoI duly obliged
    2 - Although they were not asked to abandon Chahbahar Port: GoI has reduced its development budget for the port by 2/3rds
    3 - Lost their trade access due to the surplus and the perceived barriers to US firms and tariffs imposed
    4 - Asked to buy more US weaponry. The S400 pressure might come further down the road.
    5 - BLA has been listed a terrorist entity: so we see lot of natsec journos on twitter scrubbing their past support for the supposed balochi cause.
    6 - Asked to confront china more actively
    7 - Asked to share its data on ecommerce with international players
    8 - provide greater access to its markets to US firms

    So how has India responded to this:
    They asked the US for support to list a half dead terrorist (hafiz saeed) as a known sponsor of terrorism sanctioned by the UN.

    I leave you to judge the scoreboard.

    NB. Pakistan's bout of good fortune is entirely down to Trump's elections. The challenge for us is not mess this up.
    Mostly well written though I don't agree with some of your conclusions.

    "1 - Abandon Iran and buy oil elsewhere: GoI duly obliged" Good riddance.


    "3 - Lost their trade access due to the surplus and the perceived barriers to US firms and tariffs imposed"
    Increase in tariffs on about $5 billion of relatively minor exports. India's surplus with the US is about $25 billion. The US realizes that, unlike China, we do not run a huge trade surplus with the entire world.

    "4 - Asked to buy more US weaponry. The S400 pressure might come further down the road."
    Yes, but we are not going to buy outdated weaponry like F-16s. As for S400, India's relationship with Russia goes beyond fickle politics to friendship. I do not think they will abandon Russia in its time of need.

    "6 - Asked to confront china more actively"
    We are asking them to do the same. India and China both realize they are going to lose heavily if they go to war. Hence the last time tensions flared up, the armies threw stones at each other rather than shooting. Very wise!

    "7 - Asked to share its data on ecommerce with international players"
    Not sure what this means or what the implications are.

    "8 - provide greater access to its markets to US firms"
    Ongoing struggle between the countries for a couple of decades now. Doha round of WTO has been held up due to Indian and Brazilian resistance to cutting aid to their farmers.

    "Pakistan's bout of good fortune is entirely down to Trump's elections."
    Pakistan's problem is economic, they are short by about $10 billion in forex every year at their current levels of consumption of foreign goods. Foreign countries are not going to lend them money forever, so either they have to cut back consumption or increase exports or tourism. Exports or tourism are not going to increase without foreign FDI and perceptions given Pakistan's image of harboring terrorists. So foreign consumption will have to be cut back, and cutting back on essentials like oil will put the economy into a tailspin.
    I don't think Trump's elections benefitted Pakistan when it comes to this economic issue.
    Last edited by Napa; 16th July 2019 at 21:45.

  17. #17
    Debut
    Aug 2013
    Venue
    Chennai
    Runs
    32,164
    Mentioned
    936 Post(s)
    Tagged
    11 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Rose View Post
    The US has always been consistently on the side of the despicable folks: be it in Syria, Afghanistan, or Libya.

    Having said that India needs to reflect on the choices it has made. It was expecting foreign policy continuity post Obama, but has been caught flat-footed by a transnational, isolationist in the white house.
    The board strokes of India foreign policy over the last decade were:
    1 - isolate Pakistan internationally (Pakistan dolts in the millitary establishment were happy to oblige)
    2 - build strong contacts with the civilia government in afghanistan
    3 - use ttp in border areas tactically every now and then
    4 - develop Chabahar port to by-pass Pakistan is Central Asia trade strategy
    5 - use access to chahbahar to fund balochi insurgents to sabotage Gwadar/CPEC
    6 - Continue to buy weapons from Russia while buying a few token weapons from US in exchange for international support (FATF, LeT, civilian Nuclear deal)
    7 - String along US with joke Quad (Australia, India, Japan, US) with hopes of containing china.
    8- Deepen trade ties with Afghanistan
    9 - A deep rooted fascination with developing ties with Israel: I am not qualified enough to reflect how that pays of in the short term.

    By and large these are solid choices, but with two major mistakes:
    1 - It was not willing to invest in blood to increase the influence of a largely irrelevant puppet government in Kabul that will collapse the day the US withdraws
    2 - It, like the rest of the world, was unprepared for what a Trump presidency means, although he made it very clear in his election: whoever has the largest trade surplus with my country is my biggest enemy.
    3 - US

    So in this new world order where obama is not helping whitewash modijis' glorious tenure in Gujrat. What are the demands from the US:

    1 - Abandon Iran and buy oil elsewhere: GoI duly obliged
    2 - Although they were not asked to abandon Chahbahar Port: GoI has reduced its development budget for the port by 2/3rds
    3 - Lost their trade access due to the surplus and the perceived barriers to US firms and tariffs imposed
    4 - Asked to buy more US weaponry. The S400 pressure might come further down the road.
    5 - BLA has been listed a terrorist entity: so we see lot of natsec journos on twitter scrubbing their past support for the supposed balochi cause.
    6 - Asked to confront china more actively
    7 - Asked to share its data on ecommerce with international players
    8 - provide greater access to its markets to US firms

    So how has India responded to this:
    They asked the US for support to list a half dead terrorist (hafiz saeed) as a known sponsor of terrorism sanctioned by the UN.

    I leave you to judge the scoreboard.

    NB. Pakistan's bout of good fortune is entirely down to Trump's elections. The challenge for us is not mess this up.
    A very interesting post. Great points made.

    Not sure why you thought I believe our foreign policy is any good.

    But i need to read up more on the foreign policy issues. Can't comment on it until i do that.

    In this case, don't see how India could have gained anything from talks with Taliban.

  18. #18
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    22,218
    Mentioned
    213 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Napa View Post
    Mostly well written though I don't agree with some of your conclusions.

    "1 - Abandon Iran and buy oil elsewhere: GoI duly obliged" Good riddance.


    "3 - Lost their trade access due to the surplus and the perceived barriers to US firms and tariffs imposed"
    Increase in tariffs on about $5 billion of relatively minor exports. India's surplus with the US is about $25 billion. The US realizes that, unlike China, we do not run a huge trade surplus with the entire world.

    "4 - Asked to buy more US weaponry. The S400 pressure might come further down the road."
    Yes, but we are not going to buy outdated weaponry like F-16s. As for S400, India's relationship with Russia goes beyond fickle politics to friendship. I do not think they will abandon Russia in its time of need.

    "6 - Asked to confront china more actively"
    We are asking them to do the same. India and China both realize they are going to lose heavily if they go to war. Hence the last time tensions flared up, the armies threw stones at each other rather than shooting. Very wise!

    "7 - Asked to share its data on ecommerce with international players"
    Not sure what this means or what the implications are.

    "8 - provide greater access to its markets to US firms"
    Ongoing struggle between the countries for a couple of decades now. Doha round of WTO has been held up due to Indian and Brazilian resistance to cutting aid to their farmers.

    "Pakistan's bout of good fortune is entirely down to Trump's elections."
    Pakistan's problem is economic, they are short by about $10 billion in forex every year at their current levels of consumption of foreign goods. Foreign countries are not going to lend them money forever, so either they have to cut back consumption or increase exports or tourism. Exports or tourism are not going to increase without foreign FDI and perceptions given Pakistan's image of harboring terrorists. So foreign consumption will have to be cut back, and cutting back on essentials like oil will put the economy into a tailspin.
    I don't think Trump's elections benefitted Pakistan when it comes to this economic issue.
    I should differentiate between what I see as fair vs unfair as opposed beneficial short term vs long term:
    1 - on Iran - I read that India willing to confront the US after backing down (this is basically a delicate dance where no one wants to be the first to confront the US - for sure Trump's maximalist strategy is unsustainable) I am curous why you say good riddance to Iran oil. In a post Obama world with Hillary/Normal US president India would have been a big part of Iran's gradual liberalization and would have given many sleepless nights to Pakistan's natsec establishment because of having to worry about two borders.
    3 - Because the US president is deep to senility and generally ill-informed: trade is top of mind for him. so its not necessarily about relative size. its about using everything as an example to coerce China. Not particularly difficult foe India to overcome: just give him a photo-op in midwest state for a factory opening or make a splashy announcement about a one-time import of grains, right before his re-election.
    4 - this is a fair point. There are limits to what India should buy and how willing is it to abandon Russia and vice versa.
    6 - agree with this as well. China has trade suprlus north of 50 million with India - (something India hasnt used effectively, given too much crony capitalism with local business groups of India)
    8 - read this for primer: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-...le28448617.ece
    10 - without doubt Pakistan is flirting with bankruptcy. But US pressure on Pakistan post Pulwama is strangely muted. Believe me it could have been a lot worse for Pakistan under any US president. Plus with its deep ties to Taliban, once again has found itself indispensable to the US causes (like after 9/11). So we ave breathing room to fix our economic mess. Add to this that the world is becoming largely illiberal, so you will see, ostensibly, in Paksitan a crack down on press and on opposition. Trump wont care about stuff like that. He wants his commemorative gold coin for bringing peace to Afghanistan/bringing troops back home/ending longest war in US history etc.

  19. #19
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    22,218
    Mentioned
    213 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sensible-indian-fan View Post

    In this case, don't see how India could have gained anything from talks with Taliban.
    Afghanistan is not Kabul. The majority area is controlled by Taliban.
    Ordinary Afghanistanis beyond kabul are teorrized by air-strikes, high-handed solider raids and mass casualties.
    The might not like the Taliban, but they want one side to win so that they can get on with their life.
    Pakistan for now s able to bring the folks that control larger parts of Afghanistan (i.e Taliban) to negotiation table.

  20. #20
    Debut
    Aug 2013
    Venue
    Chennai
    Runs
    32,164
    Mentioned
    936 Post(s)
    Tagged
    11 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Rose View Post
    Afghanistan is not Kabul. The majority area is controlled by Taliban.
    Ordinary Afghanistanis beyond kabul are teorrized by air-strikes, high-handed solider raids and mass casualties.
    The might not like the Taliban, but they want one side to win so that they can get on with their life.
    Pakistan for now s able to bring the folks that control larger parts of Afghanistan (i.e Taliban) to negotiation table.
    Yes, I am aware of that.

    Can totally see the practical aspect of this.

    Just doesn't take away the fact that Taliban is a terrorist outfit which has tacit support from Pak.

    India deals with the Afghanistan govt (which Taliban doesn't recognize). Taliban is the one both are against. There is nothing for India to do here with Taliban.


    I am not one of you. I never was. I am not one of them either.

  21. #21
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    22,218
    Mentioned
    213 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sensible-indian-fan View Post

    Just doesn't take away the fact that Taliban is a terrorist outfit which has tacit support from Pak.
    Terrorist is a normative/political description which loses relevance once the "terrorist" has enough power to share a place at the table.
    So , for example, Hamas will always be a terrorist organization because there is no hope rapprochement with the Israelis. LeT is also a terrorist organization since there is no question of it having a seat on any discussion related to Kashmir.
    On the other hand the Taliban are negotiating with the US special representative so they are no longer "terrorists"
    We dont get brownie points for morality, only real-politik.

  22. #22
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    5,567
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    India has no business in Afghanistan, they literally do not share a border. They should worry more about Indian fishermen being ambushed by Sri Lankan coast guards.


    "i'M sOrRy, i'M nOt sUpPosED tO teLl yoU tHiS"

  23. #23
    Debut
    Aug 2013
    Venue
    Chennai
    Runs
    32,164
    Mentioned
    936 Post(s)
    Tagged
    11 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Rose View Post
    Terrorist is a normative/political description which loses relevance once the "terrorist" has enough power to share a place at the table.
    So , for example, Hamas will always be a terrorist organization because there is no hope rapprochement with the Israelis. LeT is also a terrorist organization since there is no question of it having a seat on any discussion related to Kashmir.
    On the other hand the Taliban are negotiating with the US special representative so they are no longer "terrorists"
    We dont get brownie points for morality, only real-politik.
    Negotiating power yes.

    Importance yes.

    Not a terrorist... Not true.

    Anyways, I don't see how this will work out long term.

    USA probably needs a somewhat stable Afghanistan so they can leave with a face saver.

    But a few years down the line, how will this play out?

    I am skeptical.

  24. #24
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    22,218
    Mentioned
    213 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pakistanian View Post
    India has no business in Afghanistan, they literally do not share a border. They should worry more about Indian fishermen being ambushed by Sri Lankan coast guards.
    India has an economic and national security reason to be in Afghanistan, and so does Pakistan

  25. #25
    Debut
    Oct 2016
    Runs
    6,805
    Mentioned
    384 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I must admit i am surprised that josh wala bhai imran the spokesman of Indian Govt and BCCI haven't shown his face in this thread to give us the supa dupa power side of story.

    So disappointed!


    TalentSpotterPk: I pray PanamaLeak sink Sharif ship forever we dont want this pseudo democracy

  26. #26
    Debut
    Mar 2013
    Venue
    Planet Cricket
    Runs
    20,767
    Mentioned
    392 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)


    Raise your words, not voice. It's rain that grows flowers, not thunder... (Rumi)

  27. #27
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Venue
    Jurassic Park.
    Runs
    9,278
    Mentioned
    113 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    India has no business in Afghanistan. We must side with the Afghan Taliban to get the last Indian outta there.


    PP's own self proclaimed sharpshooter and defender of Islam and Pakistan.

  28. #28
    Debut
    Aug 2006
    Runs
    871
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Rose View Post
    Forgot to add third mistake:
    3 - the Indo-Afghan air corridor shut down due to Balakot tree massacre (an election, had to be won you see): Afghanistan post US will think long and hard about how tenuous its link to india is: considering the air corridor can be shut off any time.
    Name:  save tree.JPG
Views: 90
Size:  16.5 KB


    Pakistan Cricket: Exciting, Entertaining, Unpredictable, Dangerous and Unique.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •