Indian Defence Review

The title ‘Battleground Afghanistan’ is because Afghanistan will likely remain a battleground in the foreseeable future.  And, this is not because of the presence of US and NATO forces. Pakistan’s specially trained Mujahid battalions and regular troops are fighting shoulder to shoulder with Taliban and other Pakistani proxies in covert role. China’s PLA is present in all her development projects, in addition to road construction through the Wakhan Corridor and military activity in eastern Afghanistan caught on camera – reconnaissance and salami-slicing territory that China denies. Chinese support to Taliban even before the US invasion is well known, as was its subsequent assistance to Taliban for fighting US-NATO. With the growing US-Russia and US-Iran estrangement, naturally Taliban is finding support from new quarters. While the age-old ethnic divide within Afghanistan persists, Afghan territory is also being used for geopolitical power-play in Central Asia. The Islamic State has brought in a new dimension.

US President Donald Trump’s new Af-Pak policy has ushered fresh chapter in the region albeit skeptics feel not much change is possible with additional 3,900-4000 US troops when despite having over 100,000 US troops at one time, the instability in the region has aggravated to the present state. Trump had earlier been unsure of the ‘end-state’ in Afghanistan and at one stage even talked of firing General John Nicholson, Commander of US forces in Afghanistan for not winning the war. Delay in Trump’s pronouncement perhaps was due to ousted Steve Bannon vehemently seeking US withdrawal from Afghanistan; which actually implied throwing the region open to globally hegemonic China already mining and drilling oil in Afghanistan past five years plus. However, Trump finally unveiled his new policy, highlighting: conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables, will guide future US our strategy; enemy will be kept guessing about US troop additions; US in Afghanistan is for counterterrorism, not nation-building and didn’t care if Afghanistan remained a democracy; Pakistan, sheltering terrorists, has to do more – “and that will change immediately”.

Having sensed the mood in the US, just before Trump’s televised address, Pakistan’s ISPR spokesperson Major General Asif Ghafoor released a statement saying, There are no terrorist hideouts in Pakistan. We have operated in against all terrorists, including Haqqani Network”. But this has been perpetual lie from Pakistan; Musharraf as President had even lied to the world, saying, “There is not a single terrorist on Pakistani soil”. Trump’s warning to Pakistan was most direct, as no US President has ever given.  US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson later told reports, “We are going to attack terrorists wherever they live. If you are providing safe havens to terrorists, be forewarned”, adding that US could consider sanctions on Pakistan or cut off its status as non-NATO ally if Islamabad does not crack down on the Taliban and other extremist groups. US intelligence is already aware that both the Afghan Taliban have largely coalesced and are anchored by Sirajuddin Haqqani, deputy leader od Afghan Taliban who also heads the Haqqani Network. The Islamic State, though described by US intelligence under Obama Administration as disgruntled elements of both Taliban, was actually clobbered together by Pakistan’s ISI in the region of Peshawar and has been pushed west into Afghanistan.

In addition are the other Pakistani proxies attacking Afghanistan under tutelage of the ISI. Cadres from ISIL too are migrating to the Af-Pak region.

The farce of Pakistan not supporting Taliban was exposed goes a decade back when British SAS officers killed a Pakistani SSG officer operating as Taliban Commander in Helmand, as reported by Christina Lamb in ‘The Sunday Times’ on October 12, 2008. His Pakistani military ID was recovered but the incident was kept under wraps. Switch to present day – Afsraib Khattak, former Pakistani Senator warns  in his article ‘Deepening fault lines’ in the Dawn of September 2, 2017, that Pakistan is continuing to support Taliban and that this policy and the CPEC cannot go together.  Pakistan arranging meetings with senior Afghan officials in Peshawar City and taking Russian delegations in a bid to prove Pakistan’s innocence doesn’t cut much ice. Backed by China, Pakistan is going full hog to enlarge its sub-conventional control over Afghanistan using all available proxies peppered with regular soldiers. Not that there is no backlash from the Frankenstein. Besides, there have been violent clashes in Balochistan between Pakistan backed ISIS camps and Baloch fighters. In fact the 20 odd US-designated terrorist groups in Af-Pak have merged into one rabid mass. Pakistan has been picture-painting that it is going after terrorist but that is more of a farce. In fact, now Mudassir Iqbal of SSG has admitted on tape that the 2014 terror attack that killed 141 including 132 children in a Peshawar school was the handiwork of ISI and Pakistani army. The 2010 statement by Najam Sethi that the ISI has walked into the GHQ and taken control of armed forces was obviously true.

Pakistan has a major problem in Trump wanting India to do more in Afghanistan notwithstanding the fact that India’s some $3 billion assistance to Afghanistan is for bringing up the economy. There is no doubt that India will continue assisting Afghanistan under the India-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement 2011, in accordance with what Afghanistan wants. At the same time, Pakistan continues with terrorist attacks in Afghanistan, while posturing good intentions. Khwaja Muhammad Asif, Pakistani Foreign Minister recently stated, “Pakistan’s position on Afghanistan is very clear – we want to see peace and stability in the country”. Asif was responding to the Afghan President’s message on normalization of bilateral relations through talks. But this game Pakistan has been playing for decades. Naming of Pakistani terrorist organizations in the 9th BRICS meet at Xiamen would make little difference since these very organizations were named in the UNAMA report of July 2016 with no change in Pakistan’s attitude.

China wants US-NATO out of Afghanistan while Pakistan is gripped in China’s economic stranglehold and ever eager to expand its strategic depth and install a government in Kabul subservient to Pakistan; senior Pakistani economist in an interview with ‘TNS’ on September 2, 2017 titled ‘CPEC is not a game-changer, it’s game over’ clears the air on the actual state of Pakistan’s economy and that the CPEC will turn Pakistan into an equity for China – just like Hambantota in Sri Lanka has landed in the Chinese lap for 99 years (read permanently). It is a different issue when and how Islamist radicals will start fighting China-isation of Pakistani culture and society. The spurt in North Korean nuke and missile tests on behest of China is because having militarized the East and South China Sea, China still sees itself boxed in by the US and allies. The flashpoints in Western Pacific are diversion from China consolidating on Af-Pak-Gwadar-Indian Ocean, hoping the US will keep vacillating with split opinions in Capital Hill how to deal with rogue Pakistan.   So, the question is, where do we go from here? For Afghanistan, time is overdue for having political consensus within the National Unity Government (NUG), systematically progressing economy and address unemployment. Trump’s remark that he didn’t care if Afghanistan remained a democracy should be taken as warning by the NUG.

General Nicholson recently told reporters in Kabul, “We will not fail in Afghanistan; our national security de[ends on that as well.” That underlines the resolve of President Trump. The Taliban control large tracts of Afghanistan though no major city. At the same time, they are unlikely to join the peace process. The Afghan Talban say their fight is against the Government, not people but thousands of civilians have been killed, disabled, wounded and rendered homeless because of their actions. Taliban strongholds like in Helmand and Badakshan regions came up despite large US-NATO presence due to inconsistent US policy in the past and in certain cases Pentagon and CIA operating at tangent. A focused US approach can hurt Taliban much more but the problem will remain of support from China-backed rouge Pakistan. Here what is being missed out is Afghanistan’s stand since 1949 that the Durand Line is invalid (the 1893 agreement forced upon Afghanistan by British India being ex-parte and invalid) and Pakistan is in illegal  occupation of Afghanistan Territory – Pakistan Occupied Afghanistan (PoA).

In dealing with Pakistan, the US has many options. Linking aid to action against Haqqani network and not supporting Taliban is not going to work. This must be discarded and effective sanctions placed on Pakistan. Similarly, mere Predator attacks inside Pakistan is not going to work anymore. General Nicholson recently said that Washington is aware of the Afghan Taliban leadership’s presence in Peshawar and Quetta. While terrorist leaders need to be taken out, the US needs to ‘help’ it’s non-NATO ally Pakistan by targeting terrorist camps and hideouts on the Pakistan side of the present day Afghanistan-Pakistan border, similar to President Putin using cruise missiles in Syria. Pakistan should be grateful for such US overture in helping it getting rid of terrorism, which anyway will be perfectly legal US action in PoA while supporting Afghanistan.  Any sizeable surge in US-NATO forces in Afghanistan would require maintenance by land; through Pakistan involving large payments, stolen containers, convoy attacks etc. Chahabar provides alternative but deteriorating US-Iran relations and Taliban control of Helmand pose problems unless collusive diplomacy works and maintenance can be undertaken through Chahabar via International North-South Transport Corridor to Heart in Western Afghanistan. At the same time, there is every reason for the US to pressure Pakistan in providing safe land route between India and Afghanistan through Pakistan. This would alleviate Afghan economy and security to great extent, besides benefiting US-NATO presence in the region.