Supply routes to Afghanistan

**davidbfpo** · 11-14-2007

A few weeks ago I commented on the overland supply routes used by ISAF / NATO and USA via Pakistan, found just:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071114/...15GzQeG1Cs0NUE

The interesting part I quote:

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said the supply lines are "very real areas of concern" because about 75 percent of the supplies, including 40 percent of vehicle fuel supplies, either go through or over Pakistan.

"We hope it doesn't come to this," Morrell told reporters. "Right now we've seen no indications that any of our supply lines have been impacted."

davidbfpo

**Ray** · 04-07-2012

China goes beyond Pak, will build rail line to Iran

This weekend, Beijing will unveil plans to build a new rail corridor that will eventually link China to the Mediterranean Sea through Central Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran.

Liu Zhijun, China’s railway minister, is landing in Iran on Sunday to clinch an agreement on one important segment of this new Silk Road between the Far East and the Mediterranean, according to news reports from Beijing and Tehran.

Liu is expected to sign an agreement with Iranian transport minister, Hamid Behbahani, on building a rail line between Tehran and Khosravi on the border with Iraq.

China goes beyond Pak, will build rail line to Iran - Indian Express

Note: Very noble intentions of the Chinese.

But they will build where it helps her to further her hegemonic aims.

The remainder is to throw the world off the scent!

**omarali50** · 06-05-2012

A theory about why supplies are still stuck.
http://www.brownpundits.com/why-is-p...nato-supplies/

What do you think?

**carl** · 06-05-2012

Omar:

You put point three in there for comic relief right? Other than that it sounds quite good to me, especially the money part.

**davidbfpo** · 06-05-2012

Well it seems that ISAF has made a decision, from the BBC:

Nato has signed deals with Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan to use their territory for evacuating vehicles and military equipment from Afghanistan. The agreement will allow the military alliance to bypass Pakistan, which has blocked Nato from using its territory in a disagreement over drone strikes. Nato Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen... "These agreements will give us a range of new options and the robust and flexible transport network we need."

Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18326970

I imagine Russia is chuckling at the prospect of a significant profit on moving items by train to the Baltic ports. One wonders how much each state will charge for a container and if GPS is fitted to those cargoes that have a propensity to go AWOL.

**omarali50** · 06-05-2012

Carl, Point 3 was meant as "some people say...". Some people do say that. I find it hard to believe because I dont think US policy is ever that clever. Personally, I tend to assume that what you see is what you get, with the caveat that there must be many small conspiracies and overclever schemes below the surface, but they probably cancel each other out. Something like that.

David, the price gouging in the North is going to be insane, which is why Pakistan still has hope for its 5000 dollar demand. But just "a case", not a done deal. They may haggle themselves out of it...

**davidbfpo** · 06-05-2012

I have a vague recollection after Op Desert Storm non-lethal supplies were buried, notably medical equipment. Once the logistical and financial calculations are made I expect the Afghans will be digging for years to come.