What next
: To Mull over:
The inhospitable Afghan terrain, and consequentially, the ferocity of the
inhabitants, is very well known to all of us. In past, any incursion, save for
those, with a purpose to propagate religion, resulted in failures. Even those
who went as missionaries, whether Hindus, or Buddhists, had to mould themselves
to the local tribal customs, and virtually spend lifetimes to accomplish their
objectives.
Birds of passage, such as Alexander, Brits, Russians, all met with their
waterloo, in this region, and Americans have much shorter patience levels.
Then, there is the question of the classical tribal pride, which would not allow
Talibs, to hand over Osama, to those, who are their prime enemies, whatever may
be the consequences.
This gets compounded, by an earthy, but logical situation for those, who want a
pan Islamic Nation,”Dar-ul-Islam”, and they would rather prefer to have Osama,
martyred, than surrendering him, like cowards, and hazard, the very existence of
Islam.
Osama, therefore, would not be available to the Americans. But, they may succeed
in making him a fugitive, and his network ineffective, provided, they are able
to rein in their own arms manufacturing industry captains.
Americans possibly know, from their Iraq, and Vietnam debacles, that their
soldiers, are not cut to take on these human beasts.
Even,when Pakis, pretend to extend full cooperation to US, they ought to know,
that their support shall remain under cloud of suspicion,being an arrangement of
convenience, and therefore unreliable.
I have tried to draw three scenes, as follows
Scene- I
- U.S. accepts all conditions put forthh by PAKIs
Scene- II
- U. S. partially accepts conditions puut forth by PAKIs:
Scene- III:
- U. S. refuses to accept any conditionns by PAKIs:
Scene – I:
Repercussions:
i) U. S. may or may not get Osama.:
ii) U. S. would not be able to shut down / annihilate terror camps.:
iii) U. S. would not receive any support from India, Russia, and even China.:
iv) Paki’s and Talibs win and U. S. of A loses their pre-eminent position as
Super power. Pan Islamic reign, becomes a posisbility.:
Likely hood : 10%.:
Terror camp fight is not immediate but prolonged and no one in US is
saying otherwise. Real question is: will the built-up coalition last before
falling apart over individual co-goals which will undoubtly be played!
Scene – II
Concessions likely to be granted as a barter deal:
i) US$ 30 bn as aid money:
ii) Intervention to settle Kashmir issue.:
iii) Lifting up of economic sanctions on Pak.:
Repercussions
:
i) Talibs go for a conflict, and hit PAKI administration even for a show.:
ii) U. S. may not get Osama.:
iii) U. S. would not be able to shut down / annihilate terror camps.:
iv) U. S. would not receive any support from India, Russia, and even China:
v) Paki’s and Talibs win and U. S. of A loses their pre-eminent position as
Super power. Pan Islamic reign, becomes a possibility:
Likely hood : 5%:
One can not give or Pakis want $30 billion up front! Any long term deals
easily squelched by US congress. Paki's can't win but the down payment!
Scene – III
- Repercussions (PAK is an enemy State)):
i) U. S. still does not get Osama.:
ii) U. S. receives active support from India, and a neutral stand from Russia
and China.:
iii) Using logistical inputs from U. S., India provides ground support, in the
name of liquidating terror camps in PAK, and only some in Afghanistan:
Step- I neutralize nuke stations in PAK (Israel comes to aid).
Step- II Ground forces move in PAK, majority being Indians, under U.S./ U. N./
NATO flags to curb terrorism (Remember Mukli Bahini of Seventies).
Step- III Neutralize Pak army and their strategic establishments.
Step- IV Truncate PAK in three federations, run by Sovereign Governments,
Autonomy to ethnic groups, saving democratic values, and related bull shit for
International consumption, and Image building. Sindh, Baluchistan, and Punjab
being three federations. You have in plenty, those who would love to play
monarch, Mohazirs, Benazirs, Mian Sahib, and others would be the protectors of
democracies.
Federations as part of SARC to be protected and allowed to live as free States
by US of A; with physical garrison presence (Remember NATO). Kashmir, of course,
would be the fourth State looked after by India, as a united & independent State
(Part of the barter deal).
iv) India, in the final analysis would get following as a mixed bag: -
a) Relatively peaceful neighbourhood .
b) Menace of U. S. garrison presence in immediate neighbourhood.
c) Loss of Kashmir Valley overtly but gain of PK covertly.
d) Severe loss of military manpower.
e) Opportunity to liquidate the inland insurgency and unrest and severe cases of
human rights violations.
f) Economy upsurging.
Likely hood – 90%
Look at following premises-
i) The task can not be accomplished without ground action and terrain
intelligence.
ii) U. S. Army, as a policy, abhors placing their soldiers on ground who are
sitting ducks, when matched with Afghanis, or Pakis.
Pointless truisms apply-to-all
iii) No other Country would commit ground operation support other than India.
false. NATO, even Britain would.
iv) Indian Army, too, is very itchy to get even with PAKIs, after Kargil.:
Indian involvement therefore, is a must and Americans know about it.
False. No "must" about it.
What of Afghanistan
- Bombing and remote warfare would not yield any results. Gaddafi, Saddam, are
still kicking and alive, and so would OSAMA.:
Both Gaddafi and Sadam became very quiet. Why should US policy be
considered a success only if the enemy is killed?
Even British Empire, decided to win over this wretched land but could not do a
damn about them, so they simply drew the Durand line and turned their eyes.
Who cares about wretched Afganistan? Idea is to neutralize Osama
and prevent more actions, not necessarily punishment for past! Both the Brits
and Russians, like US in vietnam, could not subdue the enemy without
significantly crossing the cost threshold ie it was not worth it. It is stupid
to conclude weakness of the protagonists or ascribe fierceness to the resisters.
It has to do with maintainance of organization in face of casualty count. Both
Germany and Japan in WW-2 required huge counts before giving up. Sadam surprised
US by surviving despite the continuous counts. Note the pathology of moral
argument in face of half a million kids who died in Iraq while US and Sadam
would not budge.
Even
U.S. would have to do the same and keep Afghan land under quarantine
- Make sure that they do not get suppliies for as long as possible and there
again U. S. would need Indians to watch over.
In the end, no body would really “Win”.