LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteWhats PRC's current UN contribution? Think more of it, China has a vested interest to maintain peace in Afghanistan and it has a strong reason not to antagonize the Afghans.....Uighers.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/...ina-Troops.php
Britain: China could help Afghanistan mission
WASHINGTON: British Prime Minister Gordon Brown says that Chinese forces could in future join the military coalition in Afghanistan.
The British leader said on Friday that he believes nations not currently involved in fighting will likely join the mission.
Brown told New York's Council on Foreign Relations on Friday that China sending troops is a possibility.
All nations "see this as the front line" in the battle against terrorism, Brown says.
A total of 41 nations currently have forces under NATO command in Afghanistan
Britain has 8,000 troops in Afghanistan, mainly in the violent southern province Helmand. The U.S. has a total of around 32,000 troops there.
NATO has called for additional forces, a demand supported by U.S. President-elect Barack Obama.
Chimo
Whats PRC's current UN contribution? Think more of it, China has a vested interest to maintain peace in Afghanistan and it has a strong reason not to antagonize the Afghans.....Uighers.
A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!
This is a fishing expedition. The number of available friends willing to take up the job is dangerously low, now seeking antagonists to help with the job. India and Pakistan is not stepping up. Obviously, they're looking now towards Russia and China.
Chimo
I don't see it will happen.
One Another note, a high ranking Bundeswehr General recently said in a interview that they expect to send a "considerable sized" amount of extra troops into souther or eastern Afghanistan somewhen after Obama gets sworn in.
If it is true then this is not going to happen until after the general election fall 2009 (every deployment requires a mandat by our parlament, and nobody wants to do this while a campaign is going on). I.E. The German deployment could become bigger and more serious from 2010 on.
uh I might be wrong
It would be helpful to have more troops over there (put lightly), unfortunately these fishing probes will probably amount to nothing. Of course if for whatever reason they did send troops it may well allow us to have a chance to see how some of their equipment preforms in combat.
Nulli Secundus
People always talk of dying for their country, and never of making the other bastard die for his
Not Russia. Russia could have proven pivotal to solving the biggest problem in the Afghan campaign by offering a secure logistical line from Europe to Afghanistan; a line that didn't depend on Pakistan. But the events of this summer in Georgia means it is not going to happen. The allied forces just have to figure out another way of coping and winning - or its alternative. The question of India or Pakistan stepping up is a non-issue: Bringing in Indian troops is a surer means of endangering the supply lines than even raiding Islamabad for 'bunnies. The Paks obviously are not able to handle problems in their own AoR, it is foolish to expect that they can help anywhere else.Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
PRChina still cannot solve the resupply problem, but its involvement on the Allied may be just enough to scare the Paks into coming in line if they feel all their allies lined up against their covert interests.
Gee, Captain, what a way to encourage them to join your enterprise!But seriously, is there much in way of equipment performance that can be meaningfully seen from a low-intensity conflict like this one? For me it has more been an insight into how people from different cultures and backgrounds think and act, rather than a gadget review. Of course, I may be looking for the wrong things... Anyway, I would like people's opinion on it.
Come to think of it,has China ever done any far shore deployment(UN or any other)?
far shore? not that I remember, but Afghanistan has a (small, anbout 75km long) border with west china, and they certainly had "deployment" in their neighbour countries in the past. (korea war for example).
uh I might be wrong
Could this "invitation" by UK be a process to create a alternate supply lines from China in to Afghanistan? an aknowledgement that Pakistan "may not" support the supply lines in future.
Last edited by n21; 17 Nov 08, at 17:12.
So it looks like the Chinese haven't fired in anger for a long time.
I was actually wondering if there were international deployment by the Chinese, where their performance could have been guaged.It would be really interesting to have the Chinese in Afghanistan and observe their tactics in CI & combined arms warfare.
uhm I jsut took korea as the best know example but they did have plenty of other crashes (india & vietnam for example)
uh I might be wrong
At battalion strength?
Cambodia, Congo, and now Lebanon.
Chimo
And the obvious noNow, the question is. What was Brown thinking? These kind of things are usually done in backrooms as to not embarrass yourself.China is Not Going to Send Troops to Afghanistan - Ministry
Monday, November 17, 2008 7:58 PM
(Source: Daily News Bulletin; Moscow - English)trackingBEIJING. Nov 17 (Interfax) - China will not send military contingents to assist the international forces in Afghanistan, Chinese Foreign Ministry's spokesman Qin Gang said on Monday.
"The issue of China's sending a military contingent to take part in the united international forces in Afghanistan is not on the agenda," Qin said in comments on a recent statement by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown that China could make such a move.
"China's position on Afghanistan has remained invariable," the spokesman said.
"China never sends its soldiers to foreign countries, except in cases when this deals with peacekeeping actions in line with a decision of the UN Security Council," he said.
"The Chinese government consistently backs the efforts of the Afghan people and government aimed at maintaining stability, economic development and peaceful building," Qin said.
(c) 2008 Daily News Bulletin; Moscow - English. Provided by ProQuest LLC. All rights Reserved.
A service of YellowBrix, Inc.
Chimo
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: