Back in 2008, even before Barack Obama was elected, Washington pundits were urging him to adopt a new regional approach to Afghanistan and Pakistan involving Russia, India, China, Saudi Arabia and even Iran. The basic argument was that more troops alone would not solve the problems, and that the new U.S administration needed to subsume other foreign policy goals to the interests of winning a regional consensus on stabilising Afghanistan.
It would be simplistic to suggest that the Obama administration’s decision to cancel plans to build a missile-shield in eastern Europe was motivated purely — or even primarily — by a need to seek Russian help in Afghanistan. But it certainly serves as a powerful reminder about how far that need to seek a “grand bargain” on Afghanistan may be reshaping and influencing policy decisions around the world.
“Securing Afghanistan and its region will require an international presence for many years, but only a regional diplomatic initiative that creates a consensus to place stabilizing Afghanistan ahead of other objectives could make a long-term international deployment possible,” Barnett Rubin and Ahmed Rashid argued in their much-cited 2008 policy paper titled “From Great Game to Grand Bargain”. (pdf document).
Many of those arguments reappeared in a more recent report by the Asia Society (pdf document) — formerly chaired by U.S special envoy to Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke – so they are worth studying closely.
The ideas were ambitious and far-reaching, from remapping relations between Russia and the United States, prodding India and Pakistan towards a peace deal on Kashmir, seeking help from Iran and drawing in China and Saudi Arabia. Some of those ideas were blown off course by the financial crisis, by the row in Iran over its disputed election, and by last November’s attack on Mumbai which undermined U.S. attempts to steer India and Pakistan towards a peace deal.
And recently, they had been almost completely drowned by the media focus on military tactics and the merits of sending more troops to Afghanistan. With the U.S. decision to cancel the missile shield, one of those ideas — about seeking Russian help in Afghanistan — may have finally managed to break above the surface again.
In the case of Russia, the question was always about what price the United States was willing to pay to win Moscow’s help in Afghanistan, possibly through less ardent support for NATO aspirants Ukraine and Georgia and a review of the missile shield due to be set up in the Czech Republic and Poland.
Obama already moved to try to assuage fears in Moscow and elsewhere that the United States might be seeking a permanent military presence in Afghanistan, a long-standing concern in Russia wary of having U.S. troops in what it sees as its backyard. “Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there,” Obama said in his speech in Cairo in June.
But it has been unclear how much further he might be willing to compromise to win Russia’s support for what has become widely known as “Obama’s war” in Afghanistan.
As discussed in this post, the Moscow Times spelled out what it saw as the price of Russian cooperation in Afghanistan in an op-ed published before Obama’s inauguration:
“Afghanistan may well define your foreign policy legacy the way Iraq defined Bush’s,” it said. “You will need all the support you can muster, including from Iran. You will also need Russia’s support. Moscow understands that the stability of its southern flank will hugely depend on what happens on the Hindu Kush mountain range in eastern Afghanistan and northwestern Pakistan. But Moscow is torn between giving support to the West and preparing for the West’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. The latter would mean cutting deals with the Taliban locally and relying on China strategically. You can help Russia make the right choice.”
Of course, there are many other reasons for, and consequences of, the U.S. decision on the missile shield, as discussed here and here.
But if anyone wants a steer on the likely direction of U.S. foreign policy, and its implications globally, it’s probably worth rereading Barnett Rubin’s “grand bargain” proposal from last year. Diplomacy is the art of the possible, and nobody expects the recommendations to be followed to the letter. But with Obama a considerably more cerebral president than his predecessor, the old “Read my Lips” slogan probably needs to be replaced with a new one: “Read the pdf.”
(You can also find regular updates on the progress in relations between India and Pakistan – one of the key themes of that report — on “Pakistan:Now or Never”, most recently in this post)
(Reuters photos: Girl in Afghanistan; Holbrooke, Obama)
Trackback
67 comments so far
Previous | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Next
Rohit, you said:
“India should allow US/Israel/Russia to build and operate bases from India so peace loving world can be ready for a third world war possibility from rogue nations like Pakistan, Iran, leaders with nations not recognized by UN like SWAT Valley of Taliban, FATA of AlQuaeda, PoK of LeT, N Korea, Bangladesh etc. I hope world leaders read my suggestion and act accordingly. Are you listening Mr Putin, Mr Obama, Mr Peres. Would you fulfill your duty as leaders of today’s world?
- Posted by Rohit ”
–>Rohit, you are completely right. Misuse of the good religion of Islam by Pak Army for political reasons and to justify attrocities was responsible for genocides against Hindus during partition, proxy wars against India and Genocide of 3 million Bengalis.
Hypothetically, if Pakistan ever got Indian Kashmir, the Pak Army would surely continue its slaughterous genocide against millions of more hindus there, to ethnically cleanse it for muslims only. Hindus were extreminated there like cockroaches. They won’t stop there, they will continue on a rampage for all of northern India, that was Gen. Niazi, the 1971 Pak generals’s plan all along, to Genocide dozens of Millions, of Hindus to make room for muslims. Pakistan has no plan for real lasting peace with anybody.
It is not just for that reason, but for 911, Mumbai and the GLobal terrorism in all civilized western nations that Israel, Russia, U.S. and India must form a solid security pact and a unified military response plan to police and school rogue nations in proper behavior.
With regards to WWIII, I hope that never arrives. It will surely start with Pakistan. Pakistan will start WWIII and attempt to take India by surprise. Many military experts and analysts have forcasted that Pak establishment may have plans to do that at some point, given their past military history and subsequent failures. They started all past 3 wars, are still unrepentant for them, yet have the gall to want to even the score with India.
Many think a nuclear Iran is a threat to the world, perhaps it is, especially to Israel, the much bigger threat to the security of the world is Pakistan, because its establishment from the top down, cannot be trusted, as it has shown time and time against to be liars, double dealers, and following their own agenda to continually weaponize gainst India, using International Aid, Military Aid and IMF funds, while the average Pakistani starves.
On that basis, Pakistan should be put in the same category as North Korea.
The superpowers have to put their differences aside and do the right thing with regards to North Korea, Pakistan and Iran.
India is busy putting probes into the moon and Pakistan is busy wasting their energy strategizing more terrorism against India and how to fool the western powers.
- Posted by Global WatcherSammer
Pakistan is going after wrong terrorists: US
Don’t you find it amusing. Now we have right terrorist and wrong terrorist.
- Posted by RohitIndia should allow US/Israel/Russia to build and operate bases from India so peace loving world can be ready for a third world war possibility from rogue nations like Pakistan, Iran, leaders with nations not recognized by UN like SWAT Valley of Taliban, FATA of AlQuaeda, PoK of LeT, N Korea, Bangladesh etc. I hope world leaders read my suggestion and act accordingly. Are you listening Mr Putin, Mr Obama, Mr Peres. Would you fulfill your duty as leaders of today’s world?
- Posted by RohitRemarks of President Barack Obama - As Prepared for Delivery “Responsibility for our
Common Future” Address to the United Nations General Assembly
President Barack Obama
New York, NY
September 23, 2009
http://www.unausa.org/Document.Doc?id=47 1
“In Afghanistan and Pakistan, we – and many nations here – are helping those governments develop the capacity to take the lead in this effort, while working to
- Posted by Umairadvance opportunity and security for their people.”
“We will stand by our friends on the front
lines, as we and many nations will do in pledging support for the Pakistani people
tomorrow.”
Pak blogger:
“Unless we get to the root of the problem in Afghanistan there will be no solution. ”
–>The root of the problem is a repressive, expansionist Sunni Wahhabi and the double dealing lying Pak Punjabi Mafia. These two things mixed with tribal life, creates the problems we have today. But one has to remember, tribalism was always there.
The Saudi masters give money to build madrassas in pakistan and all over Europe, you Punjabi’s give training, support and weapons to build proxy armies like Taliban and Kashmir proxy armies.
Pak’s can’t keep blaming the war on communism for militantism, that war only lasted 8 years. Pakistan state agencies kept on weaponizing Jihadi armies for almost 21 years after the Soviets left, so that soviet/communism/america excuse is a hollow and useless one, and it does not wash any more.
The rest of the democratic societies want to live in peace, co-operate and pursue happiness in the manner that suites them the best in a manner that is non-religiously motivated, as this creates the greatest human harmony and peace amongst people of different races and religions.
The basic things that ALL societies enjoy today, farming methods, access to medicine and vaccines, cars, airplanes, computers and engineering and science that improve everyday life..all of these things in every country have been conceived by democratic, secular and plural societies.
- Posted by Global Watcher“Leave it to muslim nations, sent in UN peacekeepers, US minimize its presence, Pakistan be taken onboard and the situation can be turned around in Afghanistan.”
–>The entire civilized world is doomed, if we leave things to anybody other than democratic nations. Pakistan is the reason that Afghanistan has stayed so behind the Taliban, who the U.S. is fighting right now.
- Posted by Globa L Watcherkp singh said:
“So as I had mentioned earlier, reality is beginning to dawn. The telescope is turning towards Pakistan. Soon drones will be zeroing in on Pakistani targets to destroy Al Qaeda and Taliban hideouts. The US has openly agreed that these two organizations are not in Afghanistan, but Pakistan. I am hoping that they knock out LeT and JUD leaders as well in the bargain. The mighty Pakistani military will be holding the torch for the American drones to hit the targets.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32952295/ns/ world_news-south_and_central_asia/
India should request the US to help clean up the terrorist elements inside Pakistan. The US would not want these elements to slip into India and hurt its business interests.
- Posted by kp singh :
–>The civilized world hopes that the U.S smashes every inch of ground in Pakistan that houses terrorism and soil that is used for Proxy Army terrorism against India.
Let not one inch of Pak Soil be unscathed, scorched or undroned, where it be militants, their trainers, supporters and nurturers.
- Posted by G Lobal Wa tcher