We're losing in Afghanistan too

S2 · 21 Sep 07,, 17:29

"Was the comment of any use( or at least understandable)?"

I appreciate your comments. They were thoughtful and offered some excellent insights. Thanks, Tarek.

S2 · 21 Sep 07,, 21:16

"Hence, there was no other option but to duel out the major tank battles in Punjab, it was not due to any political reasons, only strategic."

A poor turn of phrase on my part. "Strategic" serves my purpose quite nicely, though.

As such, the Punjab seems primed to remain, as I initially contended, a "bone of contention" between Pakistan and India.

"No, but it would surely change Pak borders and whatever little authority that Pakistan claims in that area now..."

Perhaps so. Then again, perhaps the borders WOULDN'T change as a function of any conference, treaty, etc. Or the DURAND LINE might shift further WEST, not east. As for claimed authority, you seem to feel that sufficient authority exists within these areas now to provide Pakistan's gov't with training bases for Kashmiri irhabists.

"...And after loosing the tribal areas, ISI would have to shift training camps further within their borders making it hard to keep them operating secretly without the Pak government's visible footprint."

Most Indians seem to think that Pakistan's "footprint" via the ISI is significant in any case. Besides, they're not hiding much. I bet there's plenty of room for these camps up in the Chitral area or down near Baluchistan.

**Officer of Engineers** · 21 Sep 07,, 22:28

Originally Posted by Tarek Morgen

Was the comment of any use( or at least understandable)?

Very much so. It's nice to know what you can do and what you cannot do.

**Tarek Morgen** · 21 Sep 07,, 23:19

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Very much so. It's nice to know what you can do and what you cannot do.

Thanks, but I did some furhter digging and it appears that some of what I said was outdated. It seems that the W9er are being "phased" out out of the uh.."intervention forces" (Eingreifkräfte) to make them more "battle ready" for mission abroads (like a combat role in Afghanistan) and apparantly since the spring of this year the units are mostly "free" of W9er, or they are only used for non-combat roles. So it appears that they are much closer of being ready to being deployed than I thought earlier. The most prominent members of the EK would be the 1. Panzerdivision (about 12.000 men), the Luftlandebrigade 26 (uhm I think you would call it Airborne, but please dont nail me on that. ) with about 3.000 men, and further the Franco-German Brigade with about 5.000 men. After what I am told the FGB would be best suited since it is considiered as one of our best units (yes even the french half), but due being a multinational unit I think it uses would be rather unlikly. The 26. Airborne would also fit, but parts of it did just reccently return from Kongo, and it has only 3000 men, so rotating men would be pretty difficult if you want any combat unit that than should have a reasonable size. So I would bet my money on parts of the 1. Panzerdivision ..but since I am far from being an 3expert my guess would be very likly wrong. And after all first there has to be the decesion to send any unit, which is still more than doubtful.

**Tronic** · 21 Sep 07,, 23:41

Originally Posted by S-2

A poor turn of phrase on my part. "Strategic" serves my purpose quite nicely, though.

As such, the Punjab seems primed to remain, as I initially contended, a "bone of contention" between Pakistan and India.

I'm still not sitting well with Punjab being a "bone of contention"; with such a term, it is making out Punjab to be some disputed area between India and Pak which it is most certainly not. It might have been an ideal place for tank warfare in the past but then again, with Indian Navy's advances in landing amphibious troops, the next "bone of contention" could said to be Karachi, or wherever the troops land. Anyways, I hope you see what I mean, it was basically the usage of the term which I think you were implying something but it was turning out to be something ele.

Perhaps so. Then again, perhaps the borders WOULDN'T change as a function of any conference, treaty, etc. Or the DURAND LINE might shift further WEST, not east.

Well, that can only be said when Afghanistan becomes a stable nation and starts to look after its own soveirgnty. And well, what makes you think that Pakistan wants to hold conferences on the Durand Line? The more unstable Afghanistan remains, the longer Pakistan can hold off any major discussions about the Durand Line.

As for claimed authority, you seem to feel that sufficient authority exists within these areas now to provide Pakistan's gov't with training bases for Kashmiri irhabists.

Yes and no. I do not feel that the Pakistani government itself has full authority but I do believe that a good part of the ISI is still very active with the militants. As of now, i'm sure they are more occupied with attacks against NATO and ISAF across the border, but when or if ISAF withdraws, it will be back to supplying militants for Kashmir.

Most Indians seem to think that Pakistan's "footprint" via the ISI is significant in any case. Besides, they're not hiding much. I bet there's plenty of room for these camps up in the Chitral area or down near Baluchistan.

ISI does already have terrorist camps in Chitral area which are directed solely towards Kashmir. As for having camps in Balochistan, the Balochi people are rebelling against the Pak government with Pak army shelling Balochi villages now and then. Pak government will have a hard time finding loyal sympathizers to join these camps as Balochis in that area seem to be attacking the Pak army themselves.

**Maggot** · 31 Oct 07,, 02:03

In Afghanistan you have a tapestry with everyone pulling at the threads and running with them. There seemed to be a genuine interest in replacing the Taliban theocracy with a democracy, but a lot of work by other agencies undermined that effort. It’s a completely different situation than Iraq, because they actually didn’t have any choice in building a national army from scratch.

Having the warlords getting guns and cash from the CIA and other US entities isn’t the way to breed a democracy, unless you want it to extend no further than Kabul. These are the same US institutions, which until 9-11 were giving millions to the Taliban, to police the poppy crops. Until the power of the warlords is broken, there will be no effective national government in Afghanistan. Currently, you’re looking at a bunch of warlords in parliament. It would be the equivalent in the US of having the Crypts and the Skulls having political parties that were in control of Congress. The rush job to democracy, before dealing with the fundamental problems of the drug trade, the Taliban, and the warlords, are a recipe for disaster. Giving paramilitary units of the Warlords guns and cash to hunt Bin Laden is a dead end. If you want him caught you’re going to have to do it yourself. The people in the region where he’s believed to be hiding are either too sympathetic towards him or don’t care for the West enough to help.

The nations actually participating in the nation building exercise of Afghanistan all have different visions of how to get the job done. The Taliban were clients of Pakistan’s military and it’s not a relationship that they’re comfortable giving up. Pakistan is only moving into the wild border regions with some reluctance. The border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is way too open, considering that there is an ongoing crisis. We’re going to have to wait until after the election and possibly a lot longer to figure out the direction Pakistan is headed.

A lot of the NATO nations are in Afghanistan grudgingly and all have their own ideas on how the mission should proceed. In Canada we’re dealing with a backlash from a lot of the civilian populace who don’t want to think of our soldiers as anything other than peacekeepers. They have this fantasy world vision that Canadian soldiers don’t actually train to fight wars. Even when NATO nations do actively work together operationally against the Taliban, they have to plan the operations with the consideration that the troops of each nation have their own policy for when they can fire their weapons. To make things even better, in the last few weeks there have been reports of Chinese weapons. This includes HN-5 SAM’s, recently made in Chinese factories, with the serial numbers removed have found themselves into Taliban hands. Some are saying that these weapons are being indirectly acquired from China, via Iran. The Iran explanation might make more sense. China might want to keep the US from establishing influence in Afghanistan, but they probably have even less interest in bolstering Islamic militants that they might have to deal with back at home.

India is worried about Islamic fighters, from Afghanistan, infiltrating the Kashmir region. In early 2001, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan were all under threat of Taliban expansion, which would have put a whole lot of oil fields under threat. There was a lot of talk then about intervention in Afghanistan, with Russia among those considering the use of military force to push back the Taliban.

**Ray** · 31 Oct 07,, 03:22

Originally Posted by S-2

Thanks for your reply.

"Why Punjab?"

You tell me. For whatever political reasons, though, weren't major battles fought in the Punjab during 1965 and 1971?

In any case, I never suggested that Indian politics, "alone", would resolve Afghanistan's problems. It takes two to tango, as the saying goes. Further, I'd guess that America, Britain, Russia, Iran, and who knows who else are going to want to toss their two-cents into the pot.

The Durand Line provides a convenience to the Pakistani gov't to execute it's policy intent-strategic depth against India through de-stabilization of Afghanistan. To suggest Pakistan's accumulated history with Afghanistan is a paranoic or just insecure reaction to an ill-defined border through a historically contentious and uncontrollable area is wrong. Would a formalized Durand Line border with Afghanistan REALLY change the cultural bent of this neighborhood?

From the Brigadier's article-

"It is important to realise that Islamabad's strategy to counter India is not driven by religious and fundamentalist rhetoric but by cold military logic."

Well, that's what I've been suggesting. The undefined nature of the Durand Line is a facilitator of Pakistan's strategic intent. By itself, it's meaningless as nobody functionally controls that turf except the Pashtun tribes and/or Taliban.

Tronic, fear not. I can't imagine anything short of a nuclear war solving the issues between Pakistan and India. Y'all just seem bent on having at each other in a big way sooner or later.

S2,

You remember Punjab in the wars between India and Pakistan.

Do you remember the hundreds of acres captured by India in deserts? No.

That is why battles happen in the Punjab. It has political brownie points and captures the imagination!

Because 9/11 happened in NY and not in the Nevada deserts, it caught the world's imagination of the horror perpetuated.

That is the rationale.

Durand Line is also important to Pakistan since it snuffs out the concept of Pakhtoonistan. Read the stuff I have posted in the 'Staff College' sub forum in continuation of your CSIS article on Pakhtoonistan.

On Pakistan, Islam, Pakistan's identity crisis and India phobia, read the posts in the South Asian defence about Pakistan being more dangerous than Iraq (Newsweek).

It is not cold military logic alone (notwithstanding the opinion expressed in the article). It is a political survival as a nation, wracked by serious identity crisis, instinct.

**Cactus** · 31 Oct 07,, 15:24

Hey S-2,

Since this thread has sprung back to life, I will just put in an update from this end. Certain developments over last couple of weeks and some thing I have read since have changed lots of opinions I have expressed here. ITs still kind of fuzzy, but definitely changing. I will hash it out when I feel more confident.

S2 · 01 Nov 07,, 03:40

Brigadier,

Thanks for the articles in the staff college.

They are superb. I'm laboring through them while trying to seize advantage of some unusually fine fall weather to close out this year's trout season in Oregon. A lovely day to which you guys and thoughts finished a distant second.

Sir, I'm old enough (nine at the time) to remember you lads bouncing about the Punjab desert in 1965, much less 1971. Somebody on this thread seemed to dispute my notions about it's value but, Brigadier, you seem to reaffirm it's import. It seems a logically continued bone of contention between India and Pakistan. As for the Durand Line, I still believe that border disputes arising between Afghanistan and Pakistan are a convenience to the GoP.

Cactus,

I'll look forward to your amended/revised perspectives. Things ARE changing rapidly and we may all have reason to re-evaluate our positions.

**Archer** · 01 Nov 07,, 20:28

Sir, I'm old enough (nine at the time) to remember you lads bouncing about the Punjab desert in 1965, much less 1971. Somebody on this thread seemed to dispute my notions about it's value but, Brigadier, you seem to reaffirm it's import. It seems a logically continued bone of contention between India and Pakistan. As for the Durand Line, I still believe that border disputes arising between Afghanistan and Pakistan are a convenience to the GoP.

S-2 thats just because Lahore is one of the seats of political power in Pakistan, and seizing Lahore would bisect Pakistan in a manner of speaking. Similarly, Indian Punjab has high population density as well, and several cities are a few tens of km from the border. The point is that *politics* dictates that Punjab is a good area to fight..

But both sides have such DCB defenses in Punjab that a future war will only see slashing attacks with armour/infantry in the Desert.

Punjab will be more of a stalemate with the kind of defenses in place.

**Ray** · 02 Nov 07,, 09:19

But then you have to bounce the DCBs and that is the hard part!

**Ray** · 15 Nov 07,, 09:33

British forces to capitalise on Taliban 'split'

By Tom Coghlan in Sangin, Helmand province
Last Updated: 2:08am GMT 14/11/2007

British commanders have pushed an armoured column deep into Taliban-held territory in southern Afghanistan, threatening the stronghold of Musa Qala as commanders seek to capitalise on a rift within enemy ranks.

# Frontline: Our soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan

Senior British officers told The Daily Telegraph that the convoy of more than 50 armoured vehicles from the Scots Guards is designed to "disrupt and confuse" the Taliban.

The operation in northern Helmand province comes with the Taliban apparently facing internal splits.

One of the four senior Taliban commanders in the area, Mullah Abdul Salaam, has been in negotiations with the Afghan government and indicated that he wishes to defect with up to a third of the forces defending Musa Qala.

Intelligence reports suggest that the Taliban are anticipating an imminent full-scale assault on the town by British forces, who refused to speculate on whether such an attack is planned.

More at:
www.telegraph.co.uk/ne...ban113.xml

Who says that the ISAF is losing.

The fact that the Swat Valley in Pakistan is burning is that the Taliban has realised that it is against a wall in Afghanistan and so they are redirecting their bile on Musharraf, who they feel is the main cause of the problem! Islam fighting Islam!

**Tarek Morgen** · 15 Nov 07,, 13:44

The Taliban are currently trying to spread the fighting into other regions of Afghanistan, so far every (which I have heart of) went pretty badly for them. In the last ones there were not even any casulties on Allied side (whoch includes ANA which had the biggest burden in those fights).

edit: Ah and the German Parlamant just agreed (453 yes 145 no) to aso continue the OIF mandate.