Trump's Af-Pak policy is an opportunity for India
This is how US President Donald Trump spelt out his "roadmap" for US policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan:
(a) "The US would rather kill terrorists than construct democracies or nation-building in faraway lands."
(b) "In Afghanistan and Pakistan, America’s interests are clear: We must stop the resurgence of safe havens that enable terrorists to threaten America."
(c) Pakistan provides “safe havens to agents of chaos, violence, and terror. We can no longer be silent about Pakistan's safe-havens for terrorist organisations, the Taliban and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond".
(d) "Prevent nuclear weapons and materials from coming into the hands of terrorists and being used against us, or anywhere in the world for that matter.”
(e) Trump asked India to participate in US efforts to stabilise Afghanistan by increasing its economic assistance and development aid to Afghanistan.
“In a single speech, Trump suggested abrogating America’s relationship with Pakistan and deepening it with India,” summed up Nadia Naviwala in an article in the prestigious Pakistani newspaper Dawn.
Proposal
How can India make the best of the given opportunity? India can respond by negotiating with the US for sending a contingent of the Indian Army – in addition to the suggested economic assistance - under the auspices of the United Nations Security Council to fight terrorism in Afghanistan as part of the UN forces, or as "non-Nato" ally status (like Pakistan is) as part of overall US military strategy.
Likely reaction
Many Indians will be shocked at this proposal considering it's highly risky, suicidal and should be avoided at all costs and there is merit in their argument. Afghanistan is described as the graveyard of invading forces, has defeated one super power (USSR) and is making another (US) fight its longest duration war on its soil, with victory nowhere in sight.
Will it be militarily possible for an inadequately armed/equipped Indian military – already facing two hostile neighbours on its borders and facing terrorism for decades in Kashmir, and insurgency elsewhere in the country – to undertake such a humongous responsibility with all the attendant risks involved?
Indian investments
India has already invested heavily in Afghanistan. On April 19, 2013, the then finance minister P Chidambaram had said: "We have committed a billion dollars to the reconstruction of Afghanistan. We are building Afghanistan's Parliament. We're building roads”. India has gifted three Airbus aircrafts along with essential spares and 400 Indian-made buses, constructed a highway from Zaranj near the Iran-Afghanistan border to Delaram, connecting Kabul, Kandahar and Herat.
The Indian government and firms are funding and rebuilding the Salma Dam power project, building the new Afghan Parliament in Kabul and constructing power line to bring electricity from Uzbekistan to Kabul.
Indian firms are investing in agriculture and mining, and providing student scholarships, medical aid programmes and training to Afghan police and civil servants. An estimated 4,000-plus Indians are employed in various projects in Afghanistan.
Friendly people, hostile jihadis
“My dear friend,” tweeted Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to Narendra Modi on June 4. “Welcome to your second home. We are delighted to have you in Afghanistan.” Modi responded: “Thank you Afghanistan.”
But the ground reality is that while the Afghan people are extremely friendly to India, the Jihadi elements are not. India has been a victim of the ISI-Afghan Taliban nexus. The Taliban colluded with the hijackers of IC-184. They trained Harkat-ul-Mujahideen cadres, provided ISI thousands of volunteers for Jihad in J&K. After 9/11 Taliban- affiliated Haqqani network has attacked Indian construction crews, consulates and Indian embassy in Kabul.
On February 5, 2013, Lashkar-e-Taiba boss Hafiz Saeed is reported to have told a visiting Hurriyat delegation that the LeT will step up violence in J&K after the US pullout from Afghanistan in a year’s time.
In an Urdu interview, Pakistani political commentator Zaid Hamid (aired on TV and on the Internet on August 11, 2013) said: “I pray to Allah that the Americans withdraw from Afghanistan and leave the Indians there. It has been a long time since we massacred Hindus in Afghanistan. Historically, the mountains in Afghanistan are called "Hindu Kush". And it is believed it means a place where Hindus are to be beheaded, a place that kills Hindus.
Tough questions and decisions
It is time for some tough questions and policy decisions. Firstly, Article 21 of our Constitution guarantees protection of life and personal liberty to citizens and it becomes the government’s moral responsibility to ensure this to those deployed under its orders in Afghanistan. Are the Indian doctors, engineers and others working on projects in Afghanistan “sitting ducks” for a hostile Taliban?
Secondly, are we providing Taliban/Pakistan with easy soft target options (like Kulbhushan Jadhav) on their home turf to exert pressure for undue concessions (read blackmail) in J&K?
Thirdly, considering past attacks on Indian embassy in Afghanistan, the capability of the Afghan Armed forces to provide security is highly doubtful.
Fourthly, Taliban hanged Northern alliance commanders after coming to power in early 1990s and similar fate may await any India friendly non-Taliban government anytime.
Fifthly, will any Indian government withstand adverse 24/7 media onslaught, in case of a massacre/abduction of Indians there?
Sixthly, if continued investment in Afghanistan is “strategic necessity”, we may be forced to consider the option of inducting our troops for protection of our assets.
Lastly, Afghanistan is a land-locked country and access is either through Pakistan or Iran. Hostile Pakistan rules out as an option and Indian investment of $100 million in Iran’s Chabahar Port, located at the confluence of Indian Ocean and the Oman Sea provides direct access to Afghanistan. In April 2012, India used Chabahar to ship 1,00,000 tonnes of wheat and food aid to Afghanistan.
Strategic advantages - leverage over Pakistan and China
Soon after the 1971 war, Pakistan was shell-shocked, sandwiched between hostile India in the East and an "India-friendly" super power USSR on its West (December 1979 to February 1989), losing its traditional "strategic depth" in Afghanistan.
With our troops in Afghanistan, it will be even more stressful for Pakistan - with the combined US, NATO and Indian forces on its West and a hostile India on East – with India, and not Pakistan, gaining "strategic depth" in Afghanistan.
Indian forces, instead of being "reactive", fighting only the intruding terrorists into J&K (and in India) can proactively fight terrorism, at its roots to completely eliminate the menace, now rendered possible with US and its immense support.
This will prove to be a powerful deterrent, our biggest gain and leverage over both Pakistan and China - if the "Baloch card" is played - as CPEC runs over PoK (about 400km) as mentioned by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj in her Rajya Sabha speech.
Terrorism expertise
India’s unparalleled expertise in fighting terrorism and guerrilla warfare for decades will come handy to the US, which will have a vested interest in supporting India in its disputes with China and Pakistan.
It is worth remembering that “individuals have principles; Nations have only interests”. A good leader must have the ability to mould public opinion, and not merely to follow it.
Failing to do so may reduce us to the saying - "Some nations buy peace with blood, others barter it for peace of mind because they are too exhausted to fight anymore."