So I gather... but what exactly was it then, and what exactly is it now? Vague reference to unspecific threats are unhelpful: what exactly do Indian strategists fear would happen to India if the US withdrew from Afghanistan and the Taliban took over again?
From the article you cited:
I understand the concern over terrorism emanating from Pakistan, but what has that to do with Afghanistan? How would Pakistan-based terrorists pose a greater threat if Afghanistan were under Taliban control? Would that threat be severe and immediate enough to justify the enormous expense, and the potential for war with Pakistan, implicit in an Indian attempt to deny Afghanistan to the Taliban?Quote:
Although actively discouraging India from assuming a higher profile in Afghanistan, for fear of offending Pakistan, the United States has failed to persuade Pakistan into taking Indian concerns regarding terrorism from Pakistani soil more seriously. So long as Afghan territory is not being used to launch attacks onto U.S. soil, the United States may have no vital interest in
determining who actually governs in Afghanistan, but it is important to India. If Washington were to abandon the goals of establishing a functioning Afghan state and seeing a moderate Pakistan emerge, that would put greater pressure on Indian security.
I'm not sure "the goals of establishing a functioning Afghan state and seeing a moderate Pakistan emerge" really mean much, since neither the US nor India has the capacity to achieve those goals.
Can't discuss success and failure until you know what the goal is. What would be the purpose of an Indian operation in Afghanistan, other than denying Pakistani or Taliban control. We know what India doesn't want, but what would they try to install in its place?
Using aid projects and scholarships as bribes is actually a very American approach. It's not universally successful.
If y'all want to take the job over, I say go for it. Not like there's anything in it for us. I suspect you might find it less congenial and more complicated than you seem to expect!
No country will go into Afghanistan except to advance their own interests... would those interests be compatible with India's? Would their approaches be compatible with India"s? You know what they say about too many cooks spoiling the soup... and I don't think too many powers would want to be involved in Afghanistan in any event. It's not the sort of place people want to get involved, and there's not much there that anyone wants.
Of course, but that's of limited relevance to Afghanistan. The US presence in Afghanistan is a recruiting tool and a propaganda weapon for the jihadis, and really doesn't constrain them that much. Another 9/11 is as likely to be planned in Yemen or the Netherlands as on the Af/Pak frontier.
Any discussion of potential "day after" involvement by India in Afghanistan would have to involve specific assessment of the following, all of which were markedly absent from the discussion linked to:
1. What would be the goal? What end state would India seek to achieve in Afghanistan, and by what means and with what probability of success?
2. What would be the costs and risks? Given that supply of forces in Afghanistan would require use of Pakistani airspace (yeah, right) or a very complex arrangement with the Iranians, whose goals may be quite different from India's, there's a lot of potential for trouble, up to and including the possibility of war with Pakistan.
3. What would be the benefits? Exactly what would India gain, and exactly what threat would be averted?
Also from the article you cited:
This also struck me, in the same piece:Quote:
sections of the Indian government have suggested that India’s participation in the gas pipeline deal might not be strategically advantageous to India, given the very low quantity (30 million standard cubic meters per day) of gas involved. Moreover, it appears that the Iranian gas is not the lowest-priced option for India today.
That concern would of course also apply to TAPI... given the state of relations between India and Pakistan there would have to be significant risk to India in embracing any pipeline project that would have to pass through Pakistan, and given the instability and potential for security problems in both Iran and Afghanistan, neither would be a desirable source or conduit for energy supplies.Quote:
The Indian strategic community has never been in favor of the pipeline proposal anyway, as in their opinion, it gives Pakistan too much leverage over India’s energy security.
The article also has a good discussion of how Indian-Iranian relations are constrained not only by American dislike for Iran, but with India's rapidly evolving ties with the GCC, which are very real (as opposed to the rather hypothetical nature of discussions of projects involving Iran and Afghanistan) and involve very large energy and investment deals. he GCC and the Iranians are of course not the best of friends.