From: Lindy Greene <lindygreene@roadrunner.com>
Date: Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 11:06 PM
Subject: [bangla-vision] RE: Why We Fight - Control of Natural Resources
To: Lindy Greene <lindygreene@roadrunner.com>
I don't totally understand this article. But here, in a nutshell, is what I get from it: "These natural resources don't belong to the U.S. - but, dag-nab-it, they should! And we're gonna take 'em!"
By Don Bacon, Lt Col, US Army (Ret), Vietnam & Smedley Butler Society: http://www.warisaracket.org/
President Obama, March 27, 2009: "to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future."
And on December 1, 2009: "We must deny al Qaeda a safe haven. We must reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government."
The December 2010 assessment stated: "And in Afghanistan, the momentum achieved by the Taliban in recent years has been arrested in much of the country and reversed in some key areas, although these gains remain fragile and reversible."
And: "This review also underscores the importance of a sustained long-term commitment to the region – in Pakistan, by way of our growing strategic partnership . . .Progress in our relationship with Pakistan over the last year has been substantial, but also uneven. We worked jointly in the last year to disrupt the threat posed by al-Qa'ida, and Pakistan has made progress against extremist safe havens, taking action in six of seven agencies of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas."
Ooops -- an "uneven" partnership with Pakistan.
"However, better balance and integration of the various components of our strategy will be required to reach our objectives. For instance, the denial of extremist safe havens will require greater cooperation with Pakistan along the border with Afghanistan."
Better balance and integration. What to do?
"In 2011, we must strengthen our dialogue with both Pakistan and Afghanistan on regional stability."
A strengthened dialogue -- that's it! That'll bring better balance and integration.
Who writes this stuff that gets people killed?
In the meantime, US troops are being killed and injured by elements including the Taliban which are supported by Pakistan.
As General McChrystal assessed in 2009: "Afghanistan's insurgency is clearly supported from Pakistan. . .and are reportedly aided by some elements of Pakistan's ISI (Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence)."
That accounts for the "uneven" partnership with Pakistan.
But why is Pakistan supporting elements who are killing US troops?
General McChrystal again: "Indian political and economic influence is increasing in Afghanistan, including significant efforts and financial investment. In addition, the current Afghan government is perceived by Islamabad to be pro-Indian. While Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India."
That accounts for it.
Pakistan's arch-enemy India's influence is increasing in Afghanistan, and Pakistan doesn't like it.
Pakistan doesn't want a government allied with India -- like the present government of Afghanistan -- on its western border. India is much larger and stronger than Pakistan as it is, and if Pakistan were surrounded its security would be in great danger.
This explains why the US relationship with Pakistan is "uneven," and why the US partner Pakistan is supporting the killing of US troops.
Well, send in the Marines!
We did.
The Marines are now in Delaram, located in rural southwest Afghanistan.
Are the Marines involved in counter-insurgency nation-building? No. The Marines are securing a highway junction.
The US Marines are in far-off Delaram, because the town sits at one end of a new road connecting Afghanistan's main highway to Zaranj near the Iranian border.
The Zaranj-Delaram road, which has been built by India's Border Roads Organization, is part of a larger Indo-Iranian project that will connect Kandahar and Herat to Iran's Chahbahar Port on the Persian Gulf.
The project will provide Afghanistan a supply route to lucrative markets while reducing the country's utter dependence on Pakistan (and the new route is 434 miles shorter than the route through Pakistan). The road/rail project is also a vital supply line for Indian troops operating in Afghanistan.
Reducing the country's utter dependence on Pakistan! That's good! Good for India, but bad for Pakistan.
There were about 4,000 Indians engaged in such projects -- being implemented as part of India's development assistance to the tune of $1.3 billion to Afghanistan. This is being done with the support of the US.
What the United States wants is to establish India as a great power in the region to counterbalance China, and at the same time try to beat Pakistan into an obedient lesser partner. The overall goal is to continue instability, thus favoring a continuing military presence.
Dr Maria Sultan, head of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad, said in an interview in Jang:
"The United States wants to assign more roles to India in Afghanistan. However, instead of proving helpful, the Indian role has become a cause in further deepening the crisis. The terrorism spread by the Indian intelligence agency, Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) in Pakistan through Afghanistan continues in the name of India-US co-operation in the war on terror."
George Perkovitch:
"Pakistan is willing to fight until the last Taliban or coalition foot soldier falls in order to pursue its interests in Afghanistan, while India is willing to fight to the last American to keep Pakistan from exerting indirect control over a future Afghan government. Neither position serves American interests."
Nicholas Burns, US State Department: "India has a major role to play in Afghanistan... I think the Indian role in helping Afghan villagers and helping the Afghan government has been very positive. I don't think we (can) say India cannot participate in the rebuilding of Afghanistan because of differences with Pakistan."
"US Ambassador Holbrooke assured (India FM) Rao that he is in favor of Indian assistance programs in Afghanistan and is not influenced by what he hears in Islamabad." -- WikiLeaks
President Hamid Karzai has said Kabul would continue to build on the relations with New Delhi which were in the interest of the war-ravaged country. Stating that Afghanistan is a sovereign state, he added that his government has the right to decide what is in the best national interest of the country and no one can and none so far have been able to dictate those terms to its people.
So, welcome to Afghanistan, GI, and play your part in big-power chess.
Remember: "Neither position serves American interests."
Another factor is the TAPI gas pipeline. On December 13, 2010 the presidents of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan - along with India's petroleum minister - signed an inter-governmental agreement pledging to construct a 1,735-kilometer natural gas pipeline connecting all four states.
The Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline would supply 33 billion cubic meters of Turkmen gas a year from the Dauletabad gas fields to Pakistan and India via Afghanistan's volatile southern provinces, according to the semi-official Turkmenistan.ru website. In doing so, Kabul could reap billions.
The TAPI Turkmenistan-India pipeline, by the way, will parallel the Herat - Kandahar highway which goes through Delaram, where the US Marines have a new base! How thoughtful. All of the area must "be controlled" for the benefit of India while elsewhere in Afghanistan US troops are mixing it up with Pakistan-supported resistance fighters.
That's why we fight, and it has nothing to do with al Qaeda which is but a minor distraction compared to the big-power strategies that involve the US, India, China, and natural gas.
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment