Russia better than China for making Afghan-Pakistan peace
Russian Ambassador to Pakistan Albert Khorev told TASS over the weekend that his country supports Pakistan and Afghanistan's respective counter-terrorism efforts. He then added that it encourages both of them to resolve their border tensions through bilateral or multilateral means.
This suggests a desire to mediate between them. China has already tried to do so but has struggled to achieve anything, yet Russia has a better chance of success.
Russia's grand geo-economic plan in this part of Eurasia is to pioneer parallel connectivity and energy corridors to India via Central Asia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. To that end, Russia must cultivate equally excellent relations with Afghanistan and Pakistan, help resolve their border tensions, and then do the same with Pakistan and India's.
The first step has already been achieved upon strategically partnering with the Taliban last summer and then clinching a strategic resource pact with Pakistan in December.
The second step will be much more difficult to fulfill but therein lies the purpose behind Ambassador Khorev's latest remarks regarding Russia's support for Pakistan and Afghanistan's respective counter-terrorism efforts.
On the one hand, he acknowledged his host country's problems with Afghan-emanating terrorist threats, but on the other, he shied away from blaming the Taliban for them like Islamabad does and instead offered to provide them with vague 'necessary assistance'.
The goal appears to be to empower each to in their own way, the first through political support for stopping all terrorist infiltration from Afghanistan and the second by possibly equipping them with small arms and potentially training their special forces to fight ISIS-K.
Left unsaid is any reference to Pakistan's claims that the Taliban backs the TTP ('Pakistani Taliban') and other terrorist groups, however, though commenting on this either way would ruin Russia's careful balancing act.
To be sure, China has already applied the same approach towards this issue, but it lacks the geo-economic vision that Russia does wherein the improvement of Afghan-Pakistani ties is integral to the success of its broader regional policy.
Pakistan and Afghanistan don't need to trade across one another's territory in order to do business with China since the first employs the Belt & Road Initiative's China-Pakistan Economic Corridor flagship to that end while the second has rail access to it via Central Asia.
Therefore, although China does indeed want its neighboring partners to work more closely together, this isn't required to advance its geo-economic interests. The situation is altogether different with Russia, whose grand geo-economic plan necessitates Afghanistan and Pakistan patching up their problems in order to pioneer parallel connectivity and energy corridors that could one day ideally reach India.
Those two, therefore, naturally understand that Russia has much greater stakes in mediation than China does.
Neither Afghanistan nor Pakistan would receive additional economic benefits from China upon resolving their tensions, but Pakistan could finally receive more direct overland connectivity with Russia and perhaps even energy from it with time too if that happens, both via Afghanistan.
Likewise, Afghanistan could profit from its middleman role in these corridors, especially if they ever extend to India. No such benefits stand to be reaped from China if Beijing were to successfully mediate between them.
Accordingly, it's incumbent on Russia to utilize creative means for moving this diplomatic process along to the best of its ability, which could include sharing detailed plans of its proposed connectivity and energy investments in both in Afghanistan and Pakistan should they agree to resolve their disputes.
These could include specific projects, the estimated amount that'll be invested, lending terms if required, the possibility for joint ownership of some sort, and the local labor that might be employed.
It might still not be enough for a breakthrough, but it would still be more than what China has offered to do if they make peace, which is nothing. Moreover, such a detailed proposal could later be returned to if the political and/or military situation changes and they decide to patch up their problems, in which case they'd have a mutual interest in reviving Russia's plans.
It's too early to predict what'll happen either way, just that Russia is expected to push for peace, and its efforts will be more meaningful than China's.
This article was first published on Andrew Korybko's Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become an Andrew Korybko Newsletter subscriber here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asia Times
14 hours ago
- Asia Times
Russia's war on Ukrainian children
As Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine grinds well into its fourth year, children remain among the war's most vulnerable victims. Ballistic missiles have struck homes, schools, hospitals, and playgrounds. Russia is not only targeting children with missiles, it aims to militarize Ukrainian children on the occupied territories to prepare them for a future war with the West. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has called attention to what he describes as the deliberate targeting of children. 'It is wrong and dangerous to keep silent about the fact that it is Russia that is killing children with ballistic missiles,' he said. Twelve people were killed and 90 civilians – including six children – were injured in a large-scale Russian missile and drone strike on Kyiv on April 24. US President Donald Trump even recently asked his advisers if Russian dictator Vladimir Putin 'has changed since Trump's last time in office, and expressed surprise at some of Putin's military moves, including bombing areas with children.' The attack came just weeks after a devastating April 4 strike on the city of Kryvyi Rih where a Russian cluster-armed Iskander-M ballistic missile hit the city of Kryvyi Rih killing 18 people, including nine children, and wounding over 40 others. One of the youngest victims was just three months old. The attack was a brutal reminder of Russia's continued terror tactics, such as the July 2024 strike on Kyiv's Okhmatdyt children's hospital, a facility filled with young cancer patients. Ruslan, call sign ' a commander in Ukraine's 23rd Brigade, said Russia systematically targets civilians. 'Hospitals, residential buildings, and shopping centers are struck, yet Russian media claims they're hitting military facilities.' Peter Gelpi, an American volunteer in Ukraine since 2022, said he has been targeted despite driving vehicles clearly marked as 'humanitarian' and 'volunteer.' 'Each strike was extremely accurate,' he said. 'These can't be mistakes.' Between April 1 and April 24 alone, Russian strikes killed 151 people and injured 697 others, according to the UN – a 46% increase in civilian casualties from the same period last year. Russia's war on children extends beyond missile strikes. It has forcibly deported more than 19,000 children to Russia. These actions have drawn accusations of genocide. During the 1932–1933 Holodomor (death by hunger), children were among the most vulnerable and targeted victims of the Soviet-engineered famine in Ukraine. The Soviet government starved millions of Ukrainians to death. Despite their parents' desperate efforts to protect them, millions of children starved, with historians estimating between 1.5 to 4 million child deaths. Those who survived often grew up in orphanages that functioned as death camps, and many remain unrecognized as official victims. 'The Holodomor has played a pivotal historical role in Russia's ongoing war against Ukraine. Beyond the battlefield, this war has been, in many ways, about the fight for historical narratives,' said John Vsetecka, Assistant Professor of History at Nova Southeastern University. Natalia Kuzovova, Head of the Department of History, Archeology and Teaching Methods at Kherson State University, reflected on the generational efforts of Russia to kill Ukrainians, stating, 'We talk about children who will grow up. Yet hundreds of Ukrainian children will never reach adulthood because they were killed by Russia.' She drew parallels with the Holodomor, when the status of children in society differed significantly from today. At that time, the family structure was patriarchal, survival hinged on a man's physical labor, and society was not child-centered. Family relations extended beyond the modern concept of a nuclear family, and during the Holodomor, as well as during the campaign against peasants considered wealthy, called kulaks, starting in the 1920s, entire 'households' were subjected to repression. 'Even very young children were labeled enemies of the Soviet state and deported with their families, many dying en route or becoming orphans,' said Kuzovova. Teenagers were arrested for failing to meet grain quotas and starved to death in prisons and penal colonies. Children whose parents had been arrested were often left on the streets without care, and those placed in shelters perished due to a lack of food. 'It is believed,' Kuzovova noted, 'that the most numerous victims of the Holodomor were children under the age of four, due to their mothers' loss of lactation and the absence of age-appropriate food.' 'Even very young children were labeled enemies and deported with their families,' she said. 'Children starved in shelters, prisons, and streets.' The most common victims, she noted, were children under four. The psychological toll on today's children is immense. Yuliia Matvievieva of the Volia Fund said reports show rising rates of anxiety, sleep disorders, PTSD, and depression. Displacement, broken family ties, constant danger, and emotionally unavailable caregivers are all contributing factors. 'Children retreat into the internet,' said Alina Holovko, coordinator at Dobra Sprava. 'They live under chronic stress, fear of death, and psychological overload.' She noted that schools need bomb shelters and spaces for group activities. 'In-person schooling would solve many psychological issues,' she said. Sophia Yushchenko, co-founder of Code for Ukraine, said children will face lifelong consequences. 'Education is disrupted, families are broken, and their sense of safety is gone,' she said. She divided the crisis into three groups. First, children in free territories who have suffered physically and emotionally. Second, those abroad who may never return. Third, those in occupied zones taken to reeducation camps or adopted into Russian families. The UN has hesitated to call this genocide, but Yushchenko pointed to the Genocide Convention's clause on forcibly transferring children. 'That's exactly what's happening,' she said. She added that Russian troops often bring textbooks, destroy Ukrainian literature and churches, and install pro-Russia curriculum. 'They replace identity with militarism,' she said. Since 2014, Russia has promoted 'patriotic education' in occupied Ukraine. After 2022, those efforts accelerated. Groups like Yunarmia indoctrinate children with military ideology. Some members have gone on to fight against Ukraine. On May 9, children in red berets marched through Red Square in Moscow, not to celebrate peace, but as part of Russia's growing militarized youth corps, Yunarmiya. Russia also seems to be using children's summer camps in occupied Crimea as human shields to deter Ukrainian strikes, violating international humanitarian law by placing military assets near civilian areas. During the Istanbul talks in early June, Russia's lead negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky, reportedly mocked Ukraine's demand to return deported children, dismissing it as 'a show for childless European grandmothers.' The UN reports over 2,500 Ukrainian children killed or injured since the full-scale invasion. These are not isolated tragedies, but the result of a systematic campaign to terrorize civilians and break Ukraine's resolve. It echoes the brutal tactics of the 1930s, when Moscow deliberately starved millions of Ukrainians during the Holodomor to crush their aspirations for independence. Then, as now, Russia seeks to subjugate Ukraine by targeting its most vulnerable. An associate research fellow of the London-based Henry Jackson Society think tank, David Kirichenko is a Ukrainian-American freelance journalist, activist and security engineer who, multiple times during the Ukraine War, has traveled to and worked in the areas being fought over. He can be found on the social media platform X @DVKirichenko
RTHK
a day ago
- RTHK
Russia says pushing offensive further into Ukraine
Russia says pushing offensive further into Ukraine A road sign marks the entrance to the Dnipropetrovsk region. Photo: AFP Russia said on Sunday it was pushing into Ukraine's eastern industrial Dnipropetrovsk region for the first time in its three-year offensive – a significant territorial escalation amid stalled peace talks. Moscow, which has the initiative on the battlefield, has repeatedly refused calls by Ukraine, Europe and US President Donald Trump for a full and unconditional ceasefire. At talks in Istanbul last week it demanded Kyiv pull troops back from the frontline, agree to end all Western arms support and give up on its ambitions to join the Nato military alliance. Dnipropetrovsk is not among the five Ukrainian regions over which Russia has asserted a formal territorial claim. It is an important mining and industrial hub for Ukraine and deeper Russian advances into the region could have a serious knock-on effect for Kyiv's struggling military and economy. Dnipropetrovosk was estimated to have a population of around three million people before Russia launched its offensive. Around one million people lived in the regional capital, Dnipro. Russia's defence ministry said forces from a tank unit had "reached the western border of the Donetsk People's Republic and are continuing to develop an offensive in the Dnipropetrovsk region". The advance of Russian forces into yet another region of Ukraine is both a symbolic and strategic blow to Kyiv's forces afer months of setbacks on the battlefield. There was no immediate response from Ukraine to Russia's statement. Moscow in 2022 said it was annexing the frontline Donetsk, Kherson, Lugansk and Zaporizhzhia regions, which it did not have full control over. In 2014, it seized the Crimean peninsula following a pro-EU revolution in Kyiv. In a set of peace demands issued to Ukraine at the latest talks, it demanded formal recognition that these regions were part of Russia – something Kyiv has repeatedly ruled out. (AFP)
Asia Times
a day ago
- Asia Times
Jamming could be key to dodging China's PL-15 missiles
A month ago, I wrote about India's loss of three Rafale fighter jets. I pointed out that the information was very preliminary until more was learned. At the time I wrote, we did not have information on Pakistani losses. We are still missing reliable accounts from either side. However, the most important question, assuming the initial report's validity, is the performance of China's relatively new air-to-air missile, known as the PL-15. PL-15 is a beyond visual range missile that is somewhat similar to US BVR missiles such as the AIM-120. It appears as a fast and powerful missile, flying to its target at Mach 5, which is the low end of hypersonic speed. The missile has a dual-pulse engine. The first pulse, initiated at launch, drives the missile toward its target. As the missile runs out of energy near the target, a second engine pulse helps to re-accelerate the missile. This significantly contributes to the PL-15's lethality, as speed makes evasion difficult for the target. The Russians and the Chinese have emphasized maneuverability as US warplanes, especially the F-35, mostly have not. The exception is the F-22, which is a stealth aircraft. One reason for this is that the aerodynamic design of a stealth aircraft is primarily intended to evade radar (typically X-band). Additionally, Russia's fighters feature thrust-vectoring engines, enabling the aircraft to make rapid maneuvers. The AL-41F1 in the Su-57 features thrust vectoring nozzles and integrated flight and propulsion-control systems, a technology not employed in the F-35. According to various trade press reports, the Indian Air Force (IAF), which flies both Rafale jets and Russian Su-30s, appears to have avoided the PL-15s as many as eight times. Parts of nearly complete PL-15 missiles have been recovered in India. Several countries are eager to get involved in the exploitation of the failed missiles, at least one of which never exploded. Meanwhile, questions have arisen as to why the missiles missed their targets and landed without exploding. The PL-15 is guided either by the launch aircraft's radar or by some sort of AWACS aircraft. It only uses its internal AESA radar (with a restricted field of view) for the final segment of its flight path. Alleged remains of a PL-15E AAM found on Indian soil. If the export model is equipped with a Ku-band AESA seeker, then even though the range may be reduced, there should be no loss in guidance or anti-ECM capabilities. Production date: July 2015. India has good radar-jamming equipment. The Rafale comes with its own electronic warfare system called SPECTRA. The Indian Su-30MKI features a Russian Tarang radar warning receiver and an Israel jammer pod, EL/M 8222. This jammer, made by ELTA, a division of Israel Aviation Industries, uses active phased array technology to detect threats and precisely jam them. Some history of jamming technology can be found here. No one can say how effective the jammers were during this brief clash between India and Pakistan, but it may be that Chinese air-to-air missiles, even extreme-range BVR missiles, are vulnerable to jamming. It is likely that the AESA radars and other guidance components of China's BVR air-to-air weapons, even newer ones like the PL-15, use almost identical technology. More will be learned as the grounded PL-15s are exploited and even more as the IAF back-briefs the French and the Russians. Obviously, the Russians won't tell, but France may be willing to share with the US and other NATO partners. If BVR threats can be compromised, then the future for these weapons is uncertain. For example, the Pentagon has placed its bets on BVR technology for the F-35 and other conventional fourth-plus generation jets in the US inventory. Are the same vulnerabilities possibly found in the PL-15 likely to occur in US BVR weapons? One presumes that the Pentagon should want to know this as soon as possible. Attention to jammers, and more of them, also makes good sense. Stephen Bryen is a special correspondent to Asia Times and former US deputy undersecretary of defense for policy. This article, which originally appeared on his Substack newsletter Weapons and Strategy, is republished with permission.
