The Obama administration has given a thumbs-up to India's developmental work in Afghanistan, rejecting Islamabad’s complaints that New Delhi's activities there are detrimental to Pakistan’s security.
"I don't see how helping Afghanistan develop its economy and its infrastructure could be seen as a security threat to any other country in the region," State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said on Monday when asked about Pakistan’s persistent protests on the matter.
"On the contrary, a stable and more prosperous Afghanistan is only going to contribute to regional stability," Kelly added, as Washington continued its efforts to address Pakistani fears on the issue that some experts say prevents Islamabad from fully disengaging from terrorist proxies such as Taliban and other militant elements it uses to counter India.
India has invested nearly $1.5 billion in developmental and infrastructure works in Afghanistan, including building roads, hospitals, schools, and the Afghan Parliament building. The effort, which is widely seen as a sharp contrast to Pakistan’s export to that country of Taliban and terrorism, has drawn universal praise. But Pakistan sees it as a pernicious Indian attempt to outflank it and counter its effort to gain strategic depth against India.
From all accounts, Islamabad is yet to accept US counsel that it is not India or Indian influence in Afghanistan that poses an existential threat to Pakistan, but its own terrorist proxies it has nurtured for decades to keep India off-balance. That policy has now begun to bite Pakistan, judging by the serial terrorist attacks in the country by its home-grown terrorist groups.
The Pakistani case for strategic depth in the region has also been considerably undermined, now that is accused of fostering terrorism by at least three surrounding countries – India, Afghanistan, and more recently, Iran.
But in an oblique warning to New Delhi delivered in the US earlier this month, Pakistan’s foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi insisted that Indians would ''have to justify their interest'' in Afghanistan and their ''level of engagement (in Kabul) has to be commensurate with'' the fact that ''they do not share a border with Afghanistan, whereas (Pakistan) we do.'' A second bomb attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul followed four days later.
The Obama administration has repeatedly shot down Islamabad’s claims of strategic interest in Afghanistan, including what US officials say are wildly exaggerated claims of Indian consulates and personnel on the Afghan border with Pakistan. The US pointman on Af-Pak Richard Holbrooke, among others, scoffed at Pakistani accounts of India's allegedly subversive activity from Afghanistan.
In fact, the Indian effort also came for praise in Gen.Stanley McChrystal’s report on the Af-Pak theater, although he warned of possible complications in the region because of possible Pakistani counter-measures in the face of increasing Indian influence. ''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,'' McChrystal said.
But Pakistani interpretation of the report is that McChrystal has criticized Indian presence and virtually asked New Delhi to withdraw from the Afghanistan -- a self-serving narrative that Kelly pretty much shot down on Monday. Indian officials too have told TOI that at no stage has Washington asked New Delhi to downsize or change its work profile in Afghanistan. On the contrary, there has been appreciation for the Indian policy of winning hearts and minds in Afghanistan, which the U.S is also now trying to adopt.
However, in a subtle message to New Delhi, Kelly said ''the main thing is that we all conduct this in full transparency, that any side that is contributing towards the reconstruction of Afghanistan, that we do so in a cooperative way, that we share as much information as possible.'' The sub-text – India should reassure Pakistan on the matter and take it on board if possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment