India Afghan policy needs to be independent of the US: Geo location the Imperative: Lalit k Kaul

India Afghan policy needs to be independent of the US: Geo location the Imperative

Lalit K Kaul

The Afghan “problem” may be as complex as mind perceives or as simple as again the mind perceives. Whatever be the problem, ultimately being on the path to its resolution unravels its complexity or simplicity. More than the resolution - or lack of it - of the problem, the critical starting point/question always remains: to venture or not to venture on to the unknown (not fully known) terrain that may lead to desirable destination. Some quotable quotes from Sri Henry Kissinger may help in taking a decision on such a dilemma.   

Quote 1: “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests”

History is the witness to this quotable quote. In the context of Afghan situation under Taliban rule the interests of America – post withdrawal – may not/cannot have anything in common to those of Indian interests. If the emergent situation in Afghanistan is the direct outcome of the American intervention in that country twenty years ago followed by the withdrawal India has had no role in those American decisions, but on the contrary India has been busy building infrastructures in there for her people being all the time conscious of the uncertainties in a land traumatized by intra Afghan rivalries and the unwanted (by Taliban) foreign forces and “puppet governments” as designated by the Muslim Nations supportive of Taliban ideology.

Post withdrawal, America – geographically six thousand miles away from Afghanistan - has again started anticipating threat to her security from ISIS-K and Al Qaeda stationed in that war torn country, but India is in too close a proximity and has been quite successfully handling the state sponsored terrorism from across her borders as also NIA has been pro active in the last seven years to pre-empt any threat from sleeper cells and activists of terrorist organizations within and the result of that ongoing effort has been twofold: one, no bomb blasts in any part of the country and second, targeted elimination of terrorists and their commandos in the Kashmir Valley.

Therefore it would be prudent to say that given the fact of India’s success in countering terrorism by putting various agencies on the job, America - with her state of the art gadgets and proficient intelligence agencies aided by her spy networks around the world - should be able to counter the threat sitting six thousand miles away and therefore there is no plausible reason why a country as strong as America should chose to rely on India and make use of her to fight America’s threat perception against ISIS-K Al Qaeda etc.

So, if America is seeking cooperation from India in that she would like to fight terrorists from a closer proximity then the real intentions may be different from what’s poured out for public consumption. Therefore India has to be all the more careful because none would know the wind up plan of  America, having caused the damage; but India would always know who her neighbours are and therefore what are her responsibilities to suit her interests in the region.

Quote 2: “It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true.”

What was the Truth of Iraq before it was bombed to Stone Age and her President humiliated crossing all limits of indecency and what was broadcasted worldwide as the Truth were like two poles of the Earth; having made the political decision even the UN was sidetracked and the whole country traumatized based on total falsehoods only to keep the American interests intact in the West Asia. So, what is the Truth behind the much trumpeted terror threats from ISIS-K and Al Qaeda based in Afghanistan only America knows; American apprehension would make the gullible to believe that ISIS-K and Al Qaeda are present only in Afghanistan and nowhere else in the world and if that be accepted for the sake of further understanding, then it implies that all potent terrorist groups are stationed in Afghanistan and that the Taliban are going to unify them to spread terror across the Globe. It can’t be America’s thesis that the American agencies came to know about this terrible formation only after American and NATO forces withdrew from Afghanistan!

The greater question that India needs to address to, independent of her Allies/friends/business partners, is: Did Taliban capture power in Afghanistan to raise terror nurseries and export terrorism across the Globe? Even if the answer may be taken as Yes yet the question that begs an answer is: Is Taliban in a position to do so? Who is going to fund Taliban for such activities? Pakistan? China? Qatar? Who? Recent rocket attacks and bomb blasts in Afghanistan have left Taliban clueless; they have declared to fight ISIS-K and repeatedly stated that they will not allow terror nurseries on their land as much as they disallow any foreign interference. Why should Taliban be trusted for their word?

Because Taliban don’t have resources to feed Afghans they are seeking cooperation from all parts of the Globe and presently they don’t have the resources – economic, military, political – to embark on such a misadventure and therefore the kind of reputation India enjoys with Afghans and the development works carried out by her are all too well know to Taliban, she must take an independent call keeping in mind her national, security and inter Nation relationship interests in mind. India may always remain conscious of the possibility that Taliban may embark on that misadventure 30 years hence, having attained economical, political and social stability.

Quote 3: “A country that demands moral perfection in its foreign policy will achieve neither perfection nor security”

Foreign policy is not a disjoint set of internal situation – economical, military and political – in a country. Seeking moral perfection in foreign policy presupposes internal political dispensation filled with utopian moral values. If politics is the art of the possible then there is no place for morals and ethics in it as it is driven purely by a combination of national and party interests; sometimes only by self (family) and party interests. Afghanistan is a reality for India and has been so for thousands of years irrespective of the religious transformations in there and the political mind set of her rulers. Afghans ruled India and historically are known to be tyrannical rulers. If morality was ever the issue the independent India should have broken off all her ties with Afghanistan; shouldn’t have carried out development works in there when the internal situation was known to be fluid as the Americans and NATO were not going to be permanent Afghan residents.

Taliban may be whatever they may be in the perception of the locals and/or Muslim and other nations; the moot question is: Is Taliban a genuine threat to India? If so, then why? India as a nation state has always pursued a civilized and sane foreign policy with regard to all the nations; has always respected multi religious and cultural identities as also all the religions of the world. India has stood by Palestinians more than any Arab or Muslim nation has and has never harmed interests of Afghanistan. So, no Muslim country can have any venom in her against India; Pakistan being the sole exception because of the false foundations on which she was raised and is crumbling under the same congenital contradictions. Therefore, Taliban can have no nefarious plans against India and they are not going to be led by the forces inimical to the existence of India as a nation. Taliban have displayed sense of discrimination when it came to their development plans; they have offered South Korea to mine Lithium because Korea is leading manufacturer of electronic goods and appliances where lithium batteries are used and China to mine Copper; not putting all the eggs in one basket. Likewise Taliban have repeatedly requested India to participate in their development programmes while completing the ongoing ones. Morals anyway don’t govern big business and multinationals, so let India not bring in moral angle.      

Quote 4: “A diamond is a chunk of coal that did well under pressure.”

 America is a super power; can bring upon sanctions to achieve the unachievable; but America is not the only nation to do business with. If America can bulldoze the whole world just to realizes her geo political and geo economic aims, India can afford to assert herself as an independent and sovereign nation that has geopolitical and geo-economic interests which may be at variance with the super power and therefore reserves her right to follow policies that fulfil her interests without harming the interests of the others in the region and/or in the world. If America is not sure of defending her interests against the threat of terror sitting six thousand miles away and wants support to be in the vicinity of Afghanistan then where is the guarantee that America will rise in support of India and fight alongside her against her aggressors. Until very recently America never agreed with India on definition of terror and terrorism because it did not suit her interests and India has been, since decades, fighting lone battle against terrorism while the West debated on “good” and “bad” terrorist.

What’s clear is that national interests decide everything that may end up redefining “good” as “bad” and vice versa.

Time is beckoning India to be “a chunk of coal that did well under pressure” only to emerge as a “diamond” in the region and the bigger world for smaller nations to emulate for assertion of their sovereignty in pursue of their national interests.