Author Topic: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan  (Read 720970 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1750 on: August 17, 2021, 07:47:35 PM »
YA:

That is a terrifying meme!

URL pleaes?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: August 18, 2021, 04:25:16 AM by Crafty_Dog »

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1752 on: August 18, 2021, 04:20:41 AM »
YA:

That is a terrifying meme!

URL pleaes?
I suppose you mean this...the text is from this article https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202108/1231636.shtml

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1753 on: August 18, 2021, 04:28:58 AM »
In Reply 1746 you have a meme. 

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1754 on: August 18, 2021, 05:02:22 AM »
That meme is from the Global Times Editorial  listed "Once a cross-Straits war breaks out while the mainland seizes the island with forces, the US would have to have a much greater determination than it had for Afghanistan, Syria, and Vietnam if it wants to interfere." These pop up as "news" headlines and are very hard to track.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1756 on: August 18, 2021, 05:04:15 AM »
TY Ya.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Miley did not see anything to suggest such a rapid collapse
« Reply #1758 on: August 18, 2021, 02:58:24 PM »
Soooooooo

reassuring:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/milley-denies-intel-warned-of-rapid-collapse-says-nobody-predicted-afghan-secuirty-would-evaporate

[perhaps a few weeks or months] but not "11 days"!

Too busy reading and forcing everyone to read CRT books and providing LBTQHIV commercials

He needs to be fired
SOS "Binks" - > out the door by his collar and britches  as well



ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1759 on: August 18, 2021, 05:24:17 PM »
The Mess that is Afghanistan

Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain (Retd)

I chose this title to keep the scope of this essay open ended because the current situation in Afghanistan is too tenuous at present to get any clear cut answers. What we should be getting to look at is the trends and what we make of them. However, there are a few questions which can be clearly answered and the same will provide the clarity we are seeking.

No one can deny the fact that the entire world’s prediction about the unfolding events of a military nature in Afghanistan was wrong primarily because of a failure to understand the unique Afghan way of life. All of us relied upon western parameters of war fighting or applied our own national strategies to draw conclusions about the longevity of the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF).

We took solace in the fact that they were 350,000 strong. Many were trained in India too and some equipment was provided by us. However, we never took a realistic audit of what the effect of that training was or how the equipment was being employed. We blindly followed all that the US stated. The fact that 8000 ANSF personnel on an average were getting killed every year for the last four years was an eye opener but it hardly pushed us to investigate this more seriously.

Ours was a soft power mission in Afghanistan and we earned considerable goodwill but that did not give us the reality of the picture which could emerge. I expected that just like the battle for Mosul was fought in Northern Iraq or for Raqqa, there would be a professional fight for the built up areas, street by street. However, only a few in India knew the reality on the basis of their experience, among them some high quality diplomats who corrected my perception a few weeks ago stating that battles in Afghanistan do not take place the way they did in Syria and Iraq.

A former senior diplomat informed me that the ANSF was structured on the pattern of US forces and this was alien to them. They usually fought with cluster and not professional loyalties. Money changed hands all the time. Victories in battle were bought and sold by influential commanders. The most amazing thing was the corruption where for some years there were fake rolls of soldiers maintained and payments made to them were pocketed by corrupt officers. Money meant for logistics was swindled leaving soldiers with no food and no supplies even when they fought hard pitched battles.

Thus it was clear that a huge humbug was created by consuming 80 billion USD to set up a 350,000 strong ANSF which could only show the Taliban the way to enter the cities rather than resist it. No wonder the US assessment of ‘Kabul in 90 days’ went wrong by 87 days.

One of the most monumental intelligence failures of the current times occurred even when the US had the technological means never available before. The entire concept that the US projected was that the ground war would be fought by the Afghan forces with total intelligence, information and air support from the US. It failed to build up the right leadership to undertake responsibility without this support. The least that could have been done was air support launched from some fall back air bases in Pakistan over whom the US continues to have leverage.

In retrospect, as stated by many within a social media group, it’s the withdrawal operation of war which is the most difficult to implement. The US is learning it the hard way each time. The over dependence on the military option that Ashraf Ghani adopted was a result of poor appreciation and even worse advice.

The virtual inability of the US to meet its goals, despite what President Biden claims, is clearly sending the message to many smaller nations and organizations that the US may successfully undertake counterterrorism but in counter insurgency it clearly lacks the will, stamina and even skill.  While I agree that small wars on large scale, which is what the war against Taliban was, will not be the US forte, I do not agree that this is the end of the US military domination. That is a different domain for discussion.

When and how quickly will the Taliban restore order or will Afghanistan continue to witness anarchy. Failed state or functioning state, the UN and the international community owes it to the people of Afghanistan to prevent a humanitarian crisis developing. The problem is that the Taliban is also a house divided; it’s not a monolith, with lots of ethnic and tribal loyalties owing allegiance to cliques and sectarian trends. The relations that these separate entities may enjoy with different powers would come in the way of keeping unification.

Some external trigger seems to be provided by Russia with an initiative by the Russian Ambassador. The Pakistanis are not yet showing up visibly lest they be blamed for enabling the Taliban. However, statements emanating from Pakistan show as if Afghanistan has been actually liberated to begin a new existence under an evolved and liberal order. That Pakistan bears responsibility for much of what is happening is well known. It will also work overtime to ensure that India plays a minimum or if possible, no role in future working of the Taliban.

Further on normalcy. Taliban has placed no restrictions so far on the exit of Afghan nationals; those who worked for foreign missions or for the government. There are no running reprisals reported. But the news focus is all on Kabul at present; no news is coming out from other cities and the rural areas. Much of this attitude on part of the Taliban is obviously for greater legitimacy, a projection it seems to be putting up for tactical purposes. It does not want paralyzed government machinery without any skilled workers and educated staff. However, sooner than later its own cadres will demand their pound of flesh and that could lead to chaos.

The real issues will come to the head a few months down the line. Most influential nations of the international community have made it known that recognition and legitimacy will come after monitoring the social environment including the treatment of women and the control over reprisals. There are thousands of lethal weapons which are in the hands of the Taliban and the former ANSF. These have to be brought under control even as an official new Afghan National Army is formed. The balance weapons need to be placed under control lest they form a pipeline to other potential turbulent areas where the Taliban may have its interest.

It is quite apparent that replicating the deals that the Taliban probably made with some of the ANSF commanders over the last couple of months, similar deals were also made with many other former elements in the government machinery. Former President Hamid Karzai, former Foreign Minister Salahuddin Rabani and former Deputy President Karim Khalili are all among the influential leaders who are overseeing the transition. How much influence they will exercise remains to be seen.

Some former ANSF personnel are apparently already kept in charge of specialist equipment which has been captured / handed over. It does mean that for some time thought has been given to post victory configuration and things may start to fall in place soon if the different cliques can come together.

There are some assumptions being made that the aggregation of transnational terrorists may take place in Afghanistan. It’s not wrong to assume that under conditions of the current mess some Islamist terror groups could find it convenient to move in and establish networks. Taliban is known to have large scale contacts with terror organizations and has shown no proof of having departed from that practice. Yet, it may be an oversimplification to assume that Taliban will immediately get back to the game of terror. It may eventually depend on which factions within it dominate.

It is doubtful that the Taliban would be willing to make itself vulnerable once again by providing safe havens for terror groups. It has been opposed to the Islamic State and some of the Pakistani groups. In this area whatever happens can develop either very soon while control over activities is low, or much later after deliberations on the future strategic course the Taliban would like to follow.

China has welcomed the Taliban as was expected. It has several interests here. Firstly, along with Russia it is concerned about the vulnerability of the contiguous Muslim dominated zone to include Central Asian Republics (72 million Muslims) and the Xinjiang (22 million) area. It would not want the Taliban to undertake anything to compromise the stability and security of this vulnerable area.

Secondly this is supposed to contain some of the lucrative arms of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) which in this area has as strategic a connect as economic. It would like to extend its reach into the area now known as the zone of the New Great Game. Thirdly, the availability of minerals (un-quantified) and rare earths is a major temptation for China and will be a great source of wealth for the Taliban.

Fourthly, if the US is denied strategic presence here the Chinese would automatically consider it an advantage for themselves. It is to be seen whether the Chinese will be willing to provide financial assistance to Afghanistan. Not known for providing free lunches and development assistance the Chinese may have to provide the Taliban up to 10 billion USD until more arrangements are made through international funding if the conditions improve.

A nation which will probably emerge extremely influential is Iran. It has its strategic linkages with both Russia and China and has its interests deeply embedded in the safety and security of the Shia minorities. Tajikistan in the north too is an important nation. India must enhance its links with both nations.

There are many other issues which can be under early assessment and the temptation to assess at this stage is high. However, there are two queries put to me on a regular basis. Firstly, what effect will the Taliban takeover have over Pakistan’s strategic behavior and its relationship with India, especially concerning internal security in India and in the Union Territory of J&K in particular. Secondly, should India be engaging the Taliban in view of the fact that nothing majorly negative has emerged in the utterances of Taliban representatives so far. A brief articulation on these is necessary to round up the essay.

For Pakistan much depends on Taliban 2.0’s strategic outlook. If it wishes to consolidate and only then seek its options, Pakistan may receive short shrift to its ambitions of being one of the most influential players. If the Taliban 2.0 is a replica of the 1.0 variety, then Pakistan’s original grand strategies of an Islamized region serving the interests of the larger Ummah could materialize. This strategy was adopted for two purposes; to enhance Pakistan’s status within the Islamic world and to neutralize India’s asymmetric advantage.

It is always tempting to say that India of 1989 and 2021 are poles apart in confidence and capability. India has stabilized J&K but its internal security is yet tenuous on some counts. That is the reason why India will need to be extremely vigilant, ensuring that terror and separatist networks are not allowed to proliferate and its recent achievements in J&K are stabilized to an even greater level.

Lastly, the question is whether India should engage with Taliban 2.0 or not. We have pulled out our embassy staff including the Indian Ambassador from Kabul which is actually a message of no confidence in Taliban 2.0. Perhaps the risk to maintain an official presence in Kabul was excessive especially since there were no indications of emerging normalcy and also because we had taken no line of engagement for all these years.

Perhaps India depended far too much on the US and did not wish to displease it by reaching out to those parties the US considers as adversaries – Iran and Taliban in this context. Yet it was in India’s interests to have maintained some contact for potential future dealings.

Now with the fait accompli a fresh start will have to be made. Fortunately, the common man’s perception of India remains extremely positive and the history of soft power assistance that India has rendered could yet act as a temptation. Care will need to be taken of the fact that Pakistan will work overtime to prevent the emergence of any India-Taliban 2.0 relationship. However, the assistance of Qatar, Iran and Russia would be useful in this regard, when that juncture finally arrives.

*******

Author



Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain (Retd), PVSM, UYSM, AVSM, SM, VSM* former Commander of Indian Army’s Srinagar Corps, focuses on trans-national and internal conflicts in Asia and the Middle East with particular emphasis on issues revolving around Radical Islam.  He is the Chancellor of Central University of Kashmir and speaks extensively at Indian and international institutions on a wide variety of subjects revolving around strategic affairs and leadership.

« Last Edit: August 18, 2021, 05:28:05 PM by ya »

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1760 on: August 18, 2021, 05:29:29 PM »


ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1762 on: August 19, 2021, 06:10:59 PM »
Apart from the Talibs now owning a lot of serious weapons with high market value...what about the loss of Intellectual Property ?...am sure the Chinese are paying to get their hands on US weapons.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1763 on: August 19, 2021, 06:33:07 PM »
A sound and tragic point.

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1764 on: August 20, 2021, 04:05:09 AM »
I have been struggling to understand, why the Afghan army collapsed the way it did. Below is a fantastic interview of a retired Indian Dir.General of Military Intelligence, who worked for decades with the Northern Alliance. The accent may be unclear at times, but it is pure gold IMHO.

- Discusses a major error  made by the US (well they listened to the pakis!). A crucial point that was discussed, "Naam, Namak Nishaan" that not everyone will be fully familiar with. It forms the core ethos of the Indian army.
https://defencelover.in/importance-naam-namak-nishan-indian-army-soldier/ This was missing from the Afghan army, even though their officers were trained in India. The US never built an army, but only a counter terrorism force.

- And then lastly, anecdote on Amrullah Saleh, who now claims to be president of Afghanistan, per the constitution.

https://youtu.be/9mlGMaT918I
« Last Edit: August 20, 2021, 05:12:29 AM by ya »

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Explaining the Taliban's lightening victory
« Reply #1765 on: August 20, 2021, 05:18:23 AM »
Here's a different take on why the ANA folded https://www.ajaishukla.com/2021/08/explaining-talibans-lightning-victory.html

Explaining the Taliban’s lightning victory

The Afghan style of war involves negotiations and pay-offs, not bloody last stands


 

By Ajai Shukla

Business Standard, 17th Aug 21

 

The Taliban’s lightning victory has seen its troops sweep through Afghanistan and capture Kabul in barely a fortnight after US intelligence forecast that the Afghan National Army (ANA) could hold them off for several months.

 

Analysts are questioning the combat capability of the ANA and waxing lyrical about the warriorship of the hardy Taliban fighters. This analysis of the ANA’s rapid capitulation all across the country only illustrates the hazards of crystal gazing in an unfamiliar context.

 

Few have pointed out that audio and video coverage of the battlegrounds of Kandahar, Mazar-e-Sharif, Herat, Jalalabad and finally Kabul, show no signs of desperate last stands by the ANA; in fact, one has to strain to hear any firing at all. The reason is simple: The Afghan tradition of gaining control of areas does not necessarily involve combat. Most engagements are settled through negotiations and pay-offs before battle is joined. This style of fighting is peculiar to Afghanistan and must be viewed within this framework.

 

Principle One of warfare in Afghanistan is survival. Battlefield commanders understand well that there is no glory in fighting to the last man, or even to the point of dissipating one’s strength to the point where the next engagement is jeopardised. Centuries of hard experience has proved in Afghanistan that a defeated commander, or one whose army has suffered heavy losses, badly loses credibility. On the other hand, commanders who avoid grave attrition by withdrawing, negotiating with the enemy, or even defecting along with their troops, live to fight another day and avoid damage to their reputation.

 

The reason for this is realism, not cowardice, in a country where fighting has been almost continuous for almost half a century; and in which some two million Afghans have lost their lives. Conflict has been a reality of life and soldiering, whether part-time or full-time, has been a survival tradition for rural men. In this context, there is no glory in large numbers of fighters laying down their lives in glorious last stands.

 

Harsh circumstance has already reduced the life expectancy of Afghan men; there is no appetite for making life even shorter. Troops, therefore, expect their commanders to ensure that battlefield aims are achieved with as few casualties as possible. The preferable way to decide the outcome of a battle is to pay off the opposing forces beforehand, to withdraw before the first shot is fired. Naturally, this decides outcomes quickly and bloodlessly. If the ANA is not fighting hard against the Taliban, there are two simple reasons: They realise that the wind has shifted, and the eventual outcome of battle would be to their detriment. The second reason is that money has changed hands.

 

In November 2001, two days before the Northern Alliance attacked the Taliban and evicted them from Kabul, this reporter attended a negotiation between a Northern Alliance commander and the Taliban commander who held the picquets opposite him. It was calmly decided that, in exchange for a sizeable amount, the Taliban commander would withdraw with his men a few hours before the Northern Alliance attack began. That played out exactly as decided. The Taliban withdrew on schedule and the Northern Alliance advanced towards Kabul without much fighting. Those Taliban fighters might well be the same pragmatic militiamen who are retaking Kabul now.

 

Afghans perceive their history, not without reason, as a long saga of resisting foreigners, who have meddled in the country, and then abandoned it, often without achieving the purpose for which they had come. In popular folklore, Afghans are a brave and proud people, while foreigners are treacherous meddlers, not to be trusted on any account.

 

This distrust extends to almost every nationality ¾ Americans, Russians, British, Iranians, and the Pakistanis above all ¾ with Indians one of the few people for which there is palpable goodwill. Within this Afghan worldview, negotiating a defection with another Afghan faction is usually permissible, but capitulating to a foreigner bears the stigma of disgrace. Several feared Afghan generals, such as Rashid Dostum, have defected more than once between various Afghan factions, without loss of reputation.

 

When Afghan fighters smell victory, all bets are off. On Sunday, when the Taliban had encircled Kabul, analysts and anchors were setting store by the Taliban’s reported promise not to enter the city, “in order to ensure an orderly transfer of power”. But that restraint was short-lived. Enter they did, at the point of their guns, ostensibly to “prevent looting and anarchy.” Interestingly, this was precisely the same reason that the Northern Alliance cited in November 2001 for going back on their promise not to enter Kabul until cleared by the US.

 

If anyone believed that the Taliban would halt at the gates of Kabul, they displayed a considerable ignorance of Afghan realpolitik. The Taliban would have had little compunction in going back on such a promise, knowing that the capture of Afghanistan’s seat of power would be far more useful than a reputation for sticking to promises.

 

That said, a negotiated deal in which one side had undertaken not to fight or resist, is taken extremely seriously. A route of withdrawal is always left open for the withdrawal and it is the withdrawing commander’s responsibility to ensure that route is taken. Sometimes, it involves killing one’s own men who are inclined to fight to the finish. In 2001, after the Taliban surrender in the city of Qonduz, the victorious Northern Alliance fighters found the bodies of sixty Chechen fighters who had been shot with their hands tied behind their backs.

 

What then might have happened to the hardened ANA? Many of them would have calculated that resisting the Taliban would only delay their victory, without changing the outcome of the fighting. These soldiers would have changed out of uniform and headed back to their home villages. Others might have preferred to grow their beards and join the Taliban. Only a handful would have chosen to resist; and they would have been accounted for by the few shots that were heard on international broadcasts.




 
« Last Edit: August 20, 2021, 05:52:49 AM by Crafty_Dog »

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Masood's son
« Reply #1766 on: August 20, 2021, 05:42:58 AM »
« Last Edit: August 20, 2021, 05:53:29 AM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
McCain : Binks is bad
« Reply #1767 on: August 20, 2021, 06:08:00 AM »
https://nypost.com/2021/08/19/mccains-2014-attack-on-tony-blinken-reemerges-amid-afghan-exit-chaos/

Binks is having us retreat all over the world in Obama style appeasement , making nice to our enemies
and being weak with
nothing but
 discussions with "allies and partners "

while we lose all world street cred

who could have guessed this would happen when Biden uses exact same Obama appeasers
 :roll:


ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Taliban in Pakistan
« Reply #1768 on: August 20, 2021, 06:16:26 AM »
Below is a picture of Madarassa Jamia Hafsa in Islamabad with Taliban Flags. Taliban is in Pak, expect trouble. The second thing is that the first prisoners that the Taliban released were TTP (that is the faction of Taliban that is anti-Pak). In otherwords TTP and regular Taliban are buddies. Expect fundamentalism to increase in Pak, soon the Durrand line goes away and the baki fools are celebrating their tactical brilliance.

« Last Edit: August 20, 2021, 06:18:00 AM by Crafty_Dog »


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
George Friedman: When you are wounded on Afghanistan's plains
« Reply #1771 on: August 20, 2021, 06:38:57 AM »
A major gap in the analysis is the spectacular incompetence in getting Americans and supporters out and not leaving weaponry for the enemy.

The rest is serious analysis:

====================

When You're Wounded and Left on Afghanistan's Plains
Thoughts in and around geopolitics.
By: George Friedman
I was shocked by what happened in Afghanistan in the past week or so. Not because I didn’t expect it – President Joe Biden had in fact announced that the military would leave – but because people seemed to expect the withdrawal to be somehow orderly. The Taliban and the United States had fought a war for 20 years. The U.S. was leaving in defeat. The Taliban rapidly retook control, capturing those who collaborated with the enemy with an apparent joy that the war was over and victory was theirs. I was shocked that people didn’t understand that this is what defeat looks like.

Also shocking was America’s decision to go to war in the graveyard of empires, as were the decisions of successive presidents to stay there for two decades. Wars are not gestures. Staying in a war is the most significant decision a leader can make, and losing is a terrible outcome.

The war began before the dead and wounded on 9/11 were counted. It is remarkable that anyone 25 or younger is too young to remember. The rest of us remember that day. It was the Pearl Harbor of our time, an attack by an enemy that we did not think had the cunning to carry out such an attack. The attack, well organized and brilliantly conceived, was executed by men who were willing to calmly perform in the face of certain death. That sort of will was utterly alien to our own sense of duty, and it raised the question of how to stop people who attack like this. Such men, if they plan as carefully as they planned 9/11, could mount more unanticipated attacks.

I know many who claim they were not terrified by 9/11. They are lying to themselves. The nation as a whole was terrified, and those who actually weren’t were out of touch with reality. The worst part was that we didn’t really know what al-Qaida was, or how many more cells it had living among us. We feared that the next attack might be far worse, using chemical or nuclear weapons. If 9/11 could happen, then anything could happen.

This is how the war in Afghanistan began: in a wave of terror that gripped the country. I remember going to a meeting the day the airlines started flying again, sitting and watching my fellow passengers. They, like me, were planning what they might do if someone rose and headed for the cockpit. In those early days, we were all living lives that could not be sustained. We all wanted to do something. Since we are Americans, we went to meetings.

The people demanded action from the president, who, rightly or wrongly, had been blamed for failing to protect the country. So he did the only thing anyone could think of: He tried to capture Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaida, who was believed to be in Afghanistan. The U.S. knew a lot about Afghanistan, having worked with the mujahedeen to defeat the Soviets. It picked up bin Laden's tracks and sent in CIA operatives who had been part of the war against the Soviets, some special operations forces, and a few Marines far away from the action. There was no plan for a war, only a raid to get him, dead or alive.

The operation was never going to work. Bin Laden’s intelligence network was better than Washington’s. Warned of the operations against him, he escaped into Pakistan at Tora Bora. That told me two things. The first was that the Pakistani ISI, its intelligence service, was prepared to provide sanctuary to bin Laden. And that told me that a significant part of the Pakistani government would be prepared to influence events in Afghanistan, particularly since the geography of the Pashtun people spilled over the Afghan-Pakistani border. The United States had allied with the Pakistanis to create the mujahedeen to defeat the Soviets. Now that group, still linked to Pakistan, was moving against the United States. Whether the Pakistanis lied to the United States or drifted into opposition to the United States, Washington’s only potential ally, and a critical one at that, was not going to provide its full support.

The second thing it told me was that the U.S., having failed in its primary mission of capturing bin Laden, was not going to do the logical thing and move the fight elsewhere, but would follow its rule book of “nation building.” It worked in Germany and Japan after World War II, the leaders thought, so it would work in Afghanistan too.

When the U.S. goes off on one of these moral reform missions and fails, the logic is to leave. When it leaves, it looks like the United States was defeated – because the United States was defeated. Leaving after losing bin Laden’s trail would have been logical, but then people would be demanding to know how the president lost him, as if presidents are more than onlookers in a covert war. Still, putting the distance of time between the failure at Tora Bora and leaving, the action was transformed from a manhunt into a war of transformation and redemption – of the Afghans.

The media has condemned Biden for his supposed incompetence. Implicit in that is that there was another way to handle ending the war. The thing is, there is no competent way to end a really stupid war. One day you just end it. Ideally, the president makes a rout look like victory. Talking heads like me might marvel at how incompetent he is, without saying how we would have done it differently. In the end, the only way to have avoided the final fiasco was to continue the war. Once it was clear we were leaving, the Taliban were going to open an all-out offensive. What else would they do?

The entire national strategy was each president keeping the war going so the next president had to bite the bullet. After 20 years, the bullet was bitten, and the end looked the only way it could. The chaos of the end was hard-wired into the system. We all believe we could have done better.

The amazing thing is that having made Afghanistan as hard as possible for the Russians, we didn’t grasp that Afghanistan is not a place to devastate and nation-build. The Taliban believe in what they believe and are prepared to die for it. They do not have our moral values, not because they don’t know them, but because they have contempt for them. And beating them on their own turf won’t happen. They live there. They are not going anywhere, not in 20 years or 100. We can cite the fate of women or those who worked for us, but we lost the war, and we don’t get a vote.

Rudyard Kipling would have had fun with American policymakers and their critics. He wrote a basic truth about Afghanistan: “When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, and the women come out to cut up what remains, jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains and go to your gawd like a soldier.”

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: George Friedman: When you are wounded on Afghanistan's plains
« Reply #1772 on: August 20, 2021, 08:15:36 AM »
Rudyard Kipling would have had fun with American policymakers and their critics. He wrote a basic truth about Afghanistan: “When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, and the women come out to cut up what remains, jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains and go to your gawd like a soldier.”

Looks like Stratfor is reading your forum  :-)

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1773 on: August 20, 2021, 08:43:10 AM »
Taliban commander Sher Mohammed Stanikzai was trained at the Indian Military Academy..he is now amongst the Taliban leaders. India will likely reach out to him.

https://afghanistanpeacecampaign.org/2021/08/12/who-are-talibans-key-leaders-in-afghanistan/



ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Omar on AFghanistan
« Reply #1776 on: August 20, 2021, 04:33:46 PM »
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2021/08/18/rep-ilhan-omar-weighs-in-on-afghanistan-and-americas-role

no surprise

just blame USA
nothing about fundamentalist jihadist murderers and rapists

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1777 on: August 21, 2021, 05:23:48 AM »

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1778 on: August 21, 2021, 05:49:23 AM »
Academics!! :-D :-D
https://www.amazon.com/Fixing-Failed-States-Framework-Rebuilding/dp/0195398610

Academic career
Following his bachelor's degree, Ghani served on the faculty of Kabul University (1973–77) and Aarhus University in Denmark (1977). Following his PhD degree, he was invited to teach at University of California, Berkeley in 1983, and then at Johns Hopkins University from 1983 to 1991. He has also attended the Harvard-INSEAD and World Bank-Stanford Graduate School of Business's leadership training program. His academic research was on state-building and social transformation. In 1985, he completed a year of fieldwork researching Pakistani madrassas as a Fulbright Scholar.[14]

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1779 on: August 21, 2021, 06:20:13 AM »
This is the group lead by Amarullah Saleh and Masood's son.

Panjshir-Valley of Hope
Dr Waiel S H Awwad


It was in September 2001 in Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan where foreign journalists had gathered for almost a month during the war between the Taliban forces and the Northern Alliance. The ‘Lion of Panjshir’, Ahmad Shah Masood was assassinated on 9th September 2001 by two Al Qaeda terrorists claiming to be journalists. They had waited for two weeks till he gave them the interview and then, they assassinated him. Former Afghanistan’s ambassador to India, Masood Khalili who was sitting next to him was lucky to survive.

We were told that we could enter Afghanistan through the Tajikistan border. Therefore, we all hurried to the checkpoints and spent almost 17 hours, before we travelled into the rugged, tough terrain and poorly protected roads. Tajikistan shares a 1300-kilometre-long border with Afghanistan while Uzbekistan shares only 144 kilometres. The important strategic strip of land known as the Panjshir Valley (The valley of five lions) is situated 150 kilometres north of Kabul, near the Hindu Kush Mountain range. This is where the Northern Alliance was still holding on to just about 10 per cent of Afghanistan’s territory, resisting the onslaught of Taliban and Al-Qaeda terrorist organizations.

We reached the compound of Khosha Bahaauddin, where late Ahmad Shah Masood was assassinated. I was the only “Arab” journalist in the group working for an Arabic channel in London. I was detained in the compound, for three days. After the intervention of Abdullah Abdullah, I was allowed to carry on with my coverage of the war.

It was a guerrilla war and the Northern Alliance’s fighters showed their skills and steadfastness. The importance of Panjshir Valley is that it is close to the Salang Pass, which connects Kabul to the northern part and further to Uzbekistan. It was Ahmad Shah Masood and his father who led the war against the Soviet Union, during the occupation of Afghanistan and expelled them from the Valley between 1980-1985. The Salang Pass was considered a dangerous area then.

The region has gained attention after the first Vice President of Afghanistan Amrullah Saleh surfaced and declared his legitimacy as the caretaker president of the country after President Ashraf Ghani fled the country. Saleh called upon the army and fighters to join him in fighting the Taliban takeover of the country.

The Panjshir Valley is known for its defiance against Russia, Britain and France in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries despite these countries employing the deadliest forms of counterinsurgency tactics. They failed as it cannot be an alternative to the will and determination of the Afghani insurgents. It is the house of ethnic Tajik known for their brave hearts, tenacious fighters and defies all internal and external authorities which turned into the heart of the graveyard of invaders.

It was the US who understood the terrain and helped the Mujahedeen to defeat the Soviet Union by supplying them with Stingers to shoot down hundreds of Russian military aircraft in the valley. The strategic importance of Panjshir valley, Hindu Kush Mountain, along Salang highway and Mazar-e- Sharif, makes it the ideal ground for the guerrilla to counter the Taliban offensive.

The son of the late ‘Lion of Panjshir’, Ahmad Massoud along with the Vice President Amrullah Saleh, former Defense Minister Bismillah Khan Mohammadi and many former security forces fighters, have vowed to fight the Taliban. For sure Ahmad Massoud will lead the resurgent anti-Taliban fighters who will give the terror group a bloody nose. The motivation for the Afghani is their fighting capability with revolutionary ideas and the notion that the Taliban is a foreign enemy. Taliban is for sure not purely Afghani Pashtun.

The success of mobilization of anti-Taliban forces depends on the help of neighbouring countries, degree of military assistance and coordination among different forces and former warlords.

Taliban is trying to give the impression that they are a changed group and have become “Good Taliban”. They want to gain legitimacy among the international community who are watching cautiously another exodus of refugees to Europe. Also, most of the neighbours especially India, Russia and Iran, who wanted a stable, secure, peaceful and independent Afghanistan free of terrorism and are watching nervously and patiently the takeover. A collective stand by neighbours will ensure a smooth transition and end of foreign occupation in Afghanistan. If not, we are looking back to the nineties and the warlords era.

But can the Taliban be trusted? Will the Big Powers leave Afghanistan peacefully and not turn it again into a ground for proxy wars? Or is the cold war era back between the US and Russia-China?

The US spent more than 2.6 Trillion Dollars and lost 2448 marines and had more than 20,000 injured. The US cannot justify this sudden withdrawal. More so because it has left the natural resources of Afghanistan to an ambitious China that is cementing the Economic Corridor with Pakistan and Afghanistan as a party to its Belt and Road Initiative. China is also using its money power to keep the Uighur Islamic party fighting against the Chinese authority, away from its territory.

While Russia is playing a major role in West Asia, the US has now allowed it to fill the security vacuum in Afghanistan and therefore it will be more indulged with the new regime.

Although Pakistan is jubilant for the success of the Taliban and so is the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), it will have a negative implication on the future sovereignty and integrity of Pakistan if ethnic nationalities are activated in this part of the world.

The important part of the outcome of this war in Afghanistan would be the end of foreign occupation. Panjshir Valley remains the only hope to prevent other foreign invaders and an imminent tragedy in South Asia.

***********

Author



Dr Waiel S H Awwad is a West Asia Expert and is a winner of many international awards. Many of his writing has been published in English and Arabic in major news papers and magazines. He is fluent in Arabic, English, Hindi and Persian.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1780 on: August 21, 2021, 07:47:31 AM »
As always YA, good stuff!

Gratitude!

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1781 on: August 21, 2021, 11:15:07 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile



ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1785 on: August 21, 2021, 04:58:01 PM »
Since a lot depends on Biden and the decisions he makes...a few lines from Zero Hedge are relevant

"Let this sink in: Joe Biden has only been President for 7 months out of a 4 year term. That means he has at least 39 more months where he needs to get up every single day and make calculated, critically thought out decisions as leader of the free world.

I’d be hard pressed to believe that, at this point, Biden can make a critically thought out decision about whether or not he wants waffles or eggs from the White House chef for breakfast, let alone decisions about foreign policy, how many more trillions of worthless U.S. dollars he wants to print out of thin air and spend under the guise of fighting whatever social cause is trendy this week, or national defense."

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Not necessarily in order
« Reply #1786 on: August 21, 2021, 05:17:08 PM »
That is some seriously vicious trollery.

=====================

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/978580/kabul-skies

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/980192/danger-grows-in-kabul-with-every-passing-hour?fbclid=IwAR26feDzFhvdtpAeOYolkturp8RkWnSCvfyKPtX5J-fwcvD_qD8_OpkpKQY

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/977122/rangers-must-seize-bagram?fbclid=IwAR2wWaxPcR-j2eCC6t_wfFtouuGut9F-Bvpejq5tVag-wStnH2gc8EshUlk

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/976946/important-kabul?fbclid=IwAR3G7EyGg6Qipfq_Nj4Xwy1wyWXVJhBfTl_PXd1WC3BiWRH-w6PbFc_lo98

I think Michael Yon is probably wrong in this instance. This is because, the Taliban want the Americans gone, they are not going to do anything that would make the Americans stay a day longer. Infact, they gain diplomatic points for allowing the foreigners to get out of the country. Once the Americans  are gone, they can do what they want. Not only did we leave behind weapons, we also left behind tons of cash. They should be happy with the US...


ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1788 on: August 22, 2021, 05:44:12 AM »
In India, the police and army have "Encounters" with terrorists. Prisoners are rarely taken. Seems to work quite well. Not clear, why we hold terrorists for 20 years on a tropical island. Its a public relations nightmare, costs money and when you free them, they join the terror groups as respected Old Goats, only this time they are wiser and smarter having learnt the American ways.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
Ambassador Crocker's assessment
« Reply #1790 on: August 22, 2021, 08:57:42 AM »
Would love to have a bullet point assessment of what he gets right, gets wrong, and leaves out:

============================



Why Biden’s Lack of Strategic Patience Led to Disaster
Aug. 21, 2021

By Ryan C. Crocker

Mr. Crocker served as ambassador to Afghanistan under President Barack Obama.

As Americans, we have many strengths, but strategic patience is not among them. We have been able to summon it at critical times such as the Revolutionary War and World War II, where, for example, Congress did not threaten to defund the war effort if it wasn’t wrapped up by 1944. In Korea, nearly seven decades after an inconclusive truce, we still have about 28,000 troops. But our patience is not the norm. And it certainly has not been on display in Afghanistan as the world watched the Taliban storm into Kabul.

As the enormity of the events in Afghanistan this past week sink in, the questions start. How did this happen? How could we not have foreseen it? Why didn’t Afghan security forces put up a fight? Why didn’t we do something about corruption? The list goes on. There is one overarching answer: our lack of strategic patience at critical moments, including from President Biden. It has damaged our alliances, emboldened our adversaries and increased the risk to our own security. It has also flouted 20 years of work and sacrifice.

The United States’ objective in Afghanistan has always been clear: to ensure that Afghan soil is never again used to plan attacks against the American homeland. It was not about nation building as an end in itself, or building a new democracy, or even regime change. The message from the Bush administration to the Taliban after 9/11 made this clear: If you hand over Al Qaeda leadership, we will leave you alone. The Taliban chose to fight instead. Once the Taliban were defeated, our fundamental mission of ensuring that Afghanistan was never again the base for an attack on the United States did not change. But the means to that end became much more complex. And the development of those means would require patience.


Image
A child walking among destroyed tanks near the road to Bagram Air Base in 2002.
A child walking among destroyed tanks near the road to Bagram Air Base in 2002.Credit...Radu Sigheti/Reuters
When I arrived at Bagram Air Base in January 2002 to take charge of our reopened embassy, Afghanistan had nothing: essentially no government, no institutions, no army, no police — just a yawning vacuum, and vacuums in the greater Middle East tend to be filled by actors who do not wish us well. Hamid Karzai had arrived in Kabul just a few days before me as chairman of the Afghanistan Interim Authority. He and I spent a lot of time together in those initial weeks. He never seemed discouraged by the enormity of the task in front of him. He did not hesitate to make decisions, many good, some not so much. He had a vision of a stable and secure Afghanistan that threatened no one. It would be a long process, but he said he had the patience for it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

So did we, at least initially. Helping Afghans create a stable, open society could also be the best way to further our own national security objectives. This concept had strong bipartisan support on the Hill, as a wave of congressional visitors to Kabul would attest. The first of that wave was the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Joe Biden. We visited a girls’ school that had just opened thanks to U.S.A.I.D. Chairman Biden was a strong supporter. He understood the importance of societal change, and he understood that it takes time and requires patience. While statistics in Afghanistan have never been reliable, U.S.A.I.D. estimates that when the Taliban were defeated, there were some 900,000 children in school, all of them boys. When I left as ambassador in 2012, a decade after that first school visit, the number of students was nearly 8 million, about 37 percent girls. It is important to note that this progress was not by any means exclusively the result of U.S. or other international efforts. Afghans on their own launched private initiatives in education, especially for girls.

Dig deeper into the moment.
Special offer: Subscribe for $1 a week.
Clearly, there were also problems, chief among them corruption. Karzai, and later President Ashraf Ghani, presided over governments where corruption was rampant. When vast resources are poured into a country without established institutions and rule of law, corruption is likely to be a significant byproduct. This is not to excuse corrupt officials. It is to recognize the ubiquity of the problem and our role in it. A look at our own history is instructive. Corruption was endemic in New York, Boston and Chicago through much of the 19th and into the 20th centuries. It took us time to grow the institutions and legal structures that would eventually make corruption the exception rather than the norm.


Image
Joseph R. Biden Jr., then chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, waving as he talked to Afghan children on a visit to the Ariana primary school in Kabul in January 2002.
Joseph R. Biden Jr., then chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, waving as he talked to Afghan children on a visit to the Ariana primary school in Kabul in January 2002.Credit...Enric Marti/Associated Press
And that returns me again to the central theme: time and patience. As our own history attests, societal change is a slow process. Witness the 11 years our new country spent moving from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution. Even then, issues like slavery were papered over, only to erupt in a civil war 74 years later. Yet we seem unable to appreciate that other societies will find the challenge just as difficult and even more so if the engine of change is a foreign army.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

I recall the comment attributed to a captured Taliban fighter from a number of years ago: You Americans have the watches, but we have the time. Sadly that view proved accurate — the Taliban outlasted us and our impatience. After the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan at the hands of U.S.-trained and armed mujahedeen in 1989, training that was facilitated by Pakistan, we decided we were done. We could see the Afghan civil war coming — the only thing holding the disparate Afghan groups together was a common enemy. But that was not our problem — we were leaving. On the way out, we stopped helping Pakistan in a key way: We ended security and economic assistance because of its nuclear weapons program, something we’d exempted before. So Pakistan, in its own narrative, went from being the most allied of allies to the most sanctioned of adversaries. That is why Pakistan threw its support to the Taliban when they started gaining ground in the 1990s: It could end a dangerous conflict along Pakistan’s own unstable borders.

And that is why a decade later after 9/11, Pakistan welcomed the return of the United States — and U.S. assistance. It would work with us against Al Qaeda. But we soon learned that the Taliban were a sticky matter. I was ambassador to Pakistan from 2004 to 2007. I pushed Pakistani officials repeatedly on the need to deny the Taliban safe havens. The answer I got back over time went like this: “We know you. We know you don’t have patience for the long fight. We know the day will come when you just get tired and go home — it’s what you do. But we aren’t going anywhere — this is where we live. So if you think we are going to turn the Taliban into a mortal enemy, you are completely crazy.”

We have again validated their skepticism.

The Washington Post notes that “as the Taliban swept across neighboring Afghanistan, some Pakistanis saw it as a reason to celebrate.” Yet I doubt there are many high fives being exchanged in Islamabad today. The American disaster in Afghanistan that Mr. Biden’s impatience brought about is not a disaster just for us. It has also been a huge boost for the Taliban, whose narrative now is that the believers, clad in the armor of the one true faith, have vanquished the infidels. That is resonating around the world, and certainly next door in Pakistan where the T.T.P. — the Pakistani Taliban, which seeks the overthrow of their government — has certainly been emboldened, as have Kashmiri militant groups created by Pakistan but that threaten Pakistan itself as well as India. Mr. Biden’s strategic impatience has given a huge boost to militant Islam everywhere.

We need to be engaged with Pakistan on ways to assess and deal with this enhanced threat. The prospect of violent destabilization of a country with about 210 million people and nuclear weapons is not a pretty one. The same is true in Iran. It’s always good to see the Great Satan take a kick in the face, and it’s worth a little gloating, but the Islamic Republic and the Taliban’s Islamic Emirate almost went to war in 1998. A region is worried, and it is right to be so.

It was not only the current president showing impatience. President Donald Trump announced that peace talks would convene in Qatar between the United States and the Taliban. But those took place without the Afghan government. We had caved on a longstanding Taliban condition. We therefore delegitimized the government we had pledged to support. The Taliban did eventually allow government representatives into the room, but the talks went nowhere. As that painful process unfolded, we added injury to insult, forcing the Kabul government to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners.

That didn’t matter to Mr. Trump. He was done with patience and just wanted out, whatever the consequences. He reached an agreement with the Taliban for that complete withdrawal, but left office before he could execute it.

Enter Mr. Biden. To my shock, he embraced Mr. Trump’s Afghanistan policy. We have betrayed our promises to interpreters, women and children, and others who are now trapped in an Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban. I fear many will lose their lives because of Mr. Biden’s impatience. We had their backs. Until Mr. Biden decided we didn’t. They will pay for it.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19442
    • View Profile
Re: Not necessarily in order
« Reply #1791 on: August 22, 2021, 09:42:34 AM »
I think Michael Yon is probably wrong in this instance. This is because, the Taliban want the Americans gone, they are not going to do anything that would make the Americans stay a day longer. In fact, they gain diplomatic points for allowing the foreigners to get out of the country. Once the Americans  are gone, they can do what they want. Not only did we leave behind weapons, we also left behind tons of cash. They should be happy with the US...

Look at both sides of that: After 20 years, 2.4 trillion dollars and 2400 American lives lost, our enemy has both of these options fully available to them, trap Americans in and slaughter them, or take the diplomatic victory of letting them leave.  Our fate is totally in enemy hands.  The dictionary doesn't define failure better than that.

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1693
    • View Profile
Re: Afpakia: Afghanistan-Pakistan
« Reply #1792 on: August 22, 2021, 02:03:46 PM »
Well we still have their gold deposited in the 1930's or so and their bank accts worth hundreds of millions.


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Meltdown
« Reply #1794 on: August 22, 2021, 08:45:27 PM »


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
GPF: Chinese nationals hit in Pakistan
« Reply #1798 on: August 23, 2021, 09:00:54 AM »
Attack in Pakistan. There was another attack targeting Chinese nationals in Pakistan. The location of the suicide bombing, which also killed two Pakistani children, was particularly significant, as it took place in Gwadar port complex – a key Belt and Road Initiative project with potential military implications. Meanwhile, there’s been a surge of anti-Chinese protests around BRI projects in Pakistan.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72256
    • View Profile
A plausible source reports:
« Reply #1799 on: August 23, 2021, 09:16:08 AM »
Obviously this is RumInt:

=================
I just got this from Sam Faddis. (Former CIA)

“Folks, for those of you trying to help get people out of Afghanistan. Here is assessment based on information coming out of policy circles and from sources on the ground. Biden is hard over that we will have the last military personnel out of Kabul airport NLT 31 August. We may be gone before then. Drawdown could begin within next 72 hours.

"This is not conditions based. Biden has already disregarded all sound military advice. We can expect him to continue to do so. Anybody not out by the time the last plane leaves gets cut away.

"On the ground in Kabul all processing of Afghans has effectively stopped. Only AmCits being moved. People are finally realizing on the ground that this administration really will do things that are unthinkable.

"So to translate this into terms we use in teaching how to respond to a terrorist attack. Get off the X.

"Also assessment is that Panjshir Valley will likely be overrun. May hold for a while but not indefinitely. Any Afghan who wants out needs to get across a border.

"So to translate this into terms we use in teaching how to respond to a terrorist attack. Get off the X.

"Also assessment is that Panjshir Valley will likely be overrun. May hold for a while but not indefinitely. Any Afghan who wants out needs to get across a border.

"After we are gone the plan is apparently to take down the internet, expel foreign journalists and begin the Afghan version of the killing fields.”

"Sam is former CIA"