The future of Afghanistan and India’s ambiguous relations with it

2020/11/02 | Note, political, top news

Strategic Council Online—Opinion: If for any reason, the Taliban are successful, either through political means and negotiations or military action, to possess maximum power in Afghanistan, and the two other parties—the North Front and the Liberal Democrats—are consequently placed in the weakness position, India would be definitely a loser as the Taliban’s view is ideological and therefore considers groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen against India in Keshmir as its own allies. Therefore, if the Taliban are placed in the position of strength and power in Afghanistan, they would provide such groups with operational bases and India can no longer play a significant role in that country. Pirmohammad Mollazehi—Expert of the subcontinent

During the past two decades, relations between India and Afghanistan have progressed in various political, economic, military and security domains. However, the probability of the participation of the Taliban in the structure of power in Afghanistan has caused concerns in India—something which could please Pakistan in rivalry with India. Notwithstanding, it should be noted that the situation in Afghanistan remains sophisticated and chaotically complex and that country is now in a state of bewilderment. This means the destiny of the ongoing peace talks in Doha is unclear. Now such questions may arise: Will there by a power-sharing deal between the Taliban and the central government of Afghanistan or not? In case power is shared in Afghanistan, will it be balanced among the three power-hunger parties that are 1- the Taliban, 2-the North Front represented by Abdullah Abdullah and 3- the Liberal Democrats represented by Ashraf Ghani.

It should be noted that should these three parties are provided with a balanced distribution of power in Afghanistan, the status of India there shall remain untouched as the future government of Afghanistan would have to create a balance in its relations with both Pakistan and India. Notwithstanding, it would be misguiding to imagine that the Taliban is one hundred per cent in the control of Pakistan.  The Taliban is enjoying its own Pashtun national feelings and if conditions change and its dependence on Pakistan ends, the Taliban would have less regards for Islamabad even though in terms of ideology and mindset, when compared to the other two groups, the Taliban would remain dependent on Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and in the fourth level Pakistan; however, no great role should be considered for Pakistan in this respect. If for any reason, the Taliban are successful, either through political means and negotiations or military action, to possess maximum power in Afghanistan, and the two other parties—the North Front and the Liberal Democrats—are consequently placed in the weakness position, India would be definitely a loser as the Taliban’s view is ideological and therefore considers groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen against India in Keshmir as its own allies. Therefore, if the Taliban are placed in the position of strength and power in Afghanistan, they would provide such groups with operational bases and India can no longer play a significant role in that country.

This is while the Taliban have been obligated, as per the provisions of their deal with the Americans, not to exploit any radical ‘Islamic’ group in the soil of Afghanistan against the United States and its ‘allies’. And India is surely considered a US ‘ally’ here as Arab countries have no issue with the Taliban. Therefore, it seems that the Taliban has admitted a series of commitments in terms of creating a balance between India and Pakistan. If this understanding is correct, the Taliban shall employ the same policy favoured by the United States in setting a balance between India and Pakistan in Afghanistan. Furthermore, the incumbent government in Kabul which is composed of members of the two ruling wings—the Ashraf Ghani’s wing and the Abdullah Abdullah’s wing—have very close ties with India. Therefore, the future structure of power in Afghanistan, regardless of its format, cannot ignore these two wings which are united with Delhi. Therefore, it is foreseeable that India is able to continue its ties with Afghanistan not at the present level but at an acceptable level unless Afghanistan is placed totally under the control of the Taliban, even though it is highly unlikely as they have demonstrated their radical differences with two major groups: first, the Shia groups which mainly include Hazaras and the Sadat, and second, the North Front which is composed of the Tajiks and the Uzbeks. Here, if each of these two wings does not win their rights and entitlement, they would take up arms as they did in the past and in this case, a government would be formed in the north of Afghanistan under the title of Khorasan and another government in the south under the title of Pashtunistan which will not be to the benefit of Pakistan as the disintegration of Afghanistan may lead to the collapse of Pakistan; however, in this scenario, India will not lose and would maintain its influence in northern Afghanistan.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

LATEST CONTENT

Reasons Why the Netanyahu Govt Is Preventing a Ceasefire Agreement

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The last round of indirect negotiations between Hamas officials and the Zionist regime, which was conducted in Cairo with the mediation of Qatar, Egypt, and the United States, was unsuccessful due to the Zionists’ “Obstruction.”
Hamid Khoshayand, an expert on regional issues

Claims of a US Arms Embargo against Zionist Regime Reveal America’s Deception

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on international issues said that the US claims to have suspended sending weapons to the Zionist regime is a political deception to silence public opinion because this would make no difference in the nature of Washington’s support for the Zionist army and the existence of this regime.

Goals of Blinken’s Recent Trip to Saudi Arabia

Strategic Council Online—Interview: A researcher of Saudi affairs said that US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken arrived in Riyadh recently during a regional trip and had consultations with the Riyadh officials. It seems that one of the items on the agenda between Saudi Arabia and America, in addition to the Gaza war, is the process of normalizing relations between the Israeli regime and the Arab kingdom.

Dr. Kharrazi's response to the new US position on Iran's nuclear program:
It Was America That Abandoned Nuclear Diplomacy/ Iran Also Considers Diplomacy the Best Approach

Strategic Council Online: The President of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations stated: “The US State Department spokesperson, after my interview with Al Jazeera, reiterated their past remarks, stating that they won’t allow Iran to build nuclear weapons, but ultimately said diplomacy is the best approach. Yes, we too prefer diplomacy since based on the Fatwa of our Supreme Leader are not for nuclear weapons; rather, we are advocates of diplomacy to make the Middle East a nuclear-free region. But, in case the Israeli regime threatens us with nuclear weapons, we surely cannot sit idle and wait for permission from others.”

Europe’s Confusion in Securing Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Red Sea

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The strategic Strait of Bab al-Mandab and the Red Sea have recently faced serious problems and crises due to the Gaza war. This is because of the protectionist approach of the Yemeni army forces toward Palestine, which, since the beginning of the Israeli regime’s attacks on the Gaza Strip, has included attacks on ships bound for or from the origin of the regime in the Red Sea.
They said they will continue their attacks until the Israeli regime’s military aggression in the Gaza Strip ends. The United States, as the most important supporter of the Israeli regime, was the first country to respond to this policy of Yemeni army forces and tried to form a global coalition to counter these attacks under the cover of supporting freedom of navigation, which, of course, failed because of conflicts of interests of Western countries and ended in the actions of the US and British attacks on positions in Yemen. Of course, although European countries were not seriously involved in the American coalition, they have numerous and complex interests in this inflammatory, and as a result, have adopted a particular and independent approach.
Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Mazaheri – University Professor

The prospect of Possible Departure of Hamas Political Office from Qatar

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on regional issues said Qatari authorities will definitely resist Western pressure to expel Hamas leaders from their territory, and probably the United States will not move towards a zero-hundred equation in this regard because if the Hamas leaders remain in Qatar, which is an ally of the United States, is better than moving to a country outside the power of the United States to exert pressure.

Loading

Últimas publicaciones

Reasons Why the Netanyahu Govt Is Preventing a Ceasefire Agreement

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The last round of indirect negotiations between Hamas officials and the Zionist regime, which was conducted in Cairo with the mediation of Qatar, Egypt, and the United States, was unsuccessful due to the Zionists’ “Obstruction.”
Hamid Khoshayand, an expert on regional issues

Claims of a US Arms Embargo against Zionist Regime Reveal America’s Deception

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on international issues said that the US claims to have suspended sending weapons to the Zionist regime is a political deception to silence public opinion because this would make no difference in the nature of Washington’s support for the Zionist army and the existence of this regime.

Goals of Blinken’s Recent Trip to Saudi Arabia

Strategic Council Online—Interview: A researcher of Saudi affairs said that US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken arrived in Riyadh recently during a regional trip and had consultations with the Riyadh officials. It seems that one of the items on the agenda between Saudi Arabia and America, in addition to the Gaza war, is the process of normalizing relations between the Israeli regime and the Arab kingdom.

Dr. Kharrazi's response to the new US position on Iran's nuclear program:
It Was America That Abandoned Nuclear Diplomacy/ Iran Also Considers Diplomacy the Best Approach

Strategic Council Online: The President of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations stated: “The US State Department spokesperson, after my interview with Al Jazeera, reiterated their past remarks, stating that they won’t allow Iran to build nuclear weapons, but ultimately said diplomacy is the best approach. Yes, we too prefer diplomacy since based on the Fatwa of our Supreme Leader are not for nuclear weapons; rather, we are advocates of diplomacy to make the Middle East a nuclear-free region. But, in case the Israeli regime threatens us with nuclear weapons, we surely cannot sit idle and wait for permission from others.”

Europe’s Confusion in Securing Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Red Sea

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The strategic Strait of Bab al-Mandab and the Red Sea have recently faced serious problems and crises due to the Gaza war. This is because of the protectionist approach of the Yemeni army forces toward Palestine, which, since the beginning of the Israeli regime’s attacks on the Gaza Strip, has included attacks on ships bound for or from the origin of the regime in the Red Sea.
They said they will continue their attacks until the Israeli regime’s military aggression in the Gaza Strip ends. The United States, as the most important supporter of the Israeli regime, was the first country to respond to this policy of Yemeni army forces and tried to form a global coalition to counter these attacks under the cover of supporting freedom of navigation, which, of course, failed because of conflicts of interests of Western countries and ended in the actions of the US and British attacks on positions in Yemen. Of course, although European countries were not seriously involved in the American coalition, they have numerous and complex interests in this inflammatory, and as a result, have adopted a particular and independent approach.
Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Mazaheri – University Professor

The prospect of Possible Departure of Hamas Political Office from Qatar

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on regional issues said Qatari authorities will definitely resist Western pressure to expel Hamas leaders from their territory, and probably the United States will not move towards a zero-hundred equation in this regard because if the Hamas leaders remain in Qatar, which is an ally of the United States, is better than moving to a country outside the power of the United States to exert pressure.

Loading