Latest news with #Soviet-Afghan
Express Tribune
07-08-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
India in wrong boat — again
Listen to article In 1991, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, initiating economic liberalisation in India, geared the country away from decades-long socialist ideals to the capitalist embrace. Interestingly, this was exactly the time when the USSR had been disintegrated in the wake of its failed war in Afghanistan. Now, around 35 years later, India stands on another verge — will it keep snuggled in the US/capitalist embrace or is it time for another goodbye? When in the socialist camp, India made good benefit of the Soviet-Afghan war. It got a presence in Afghanistan under the Soviet umbrella, wherefrom it provided training, funding and in-out passage to Baloch separatist groups, with the aim of destabilising Pakistan and weakening its position in the region. The second time, when the US invaded Afghanistan, India was there again, with dozens of consulates at the Pak-Afghan border regions, again backing terror outfits that kept wreaking havoc in the country for over a decade. In both cases, India thought it was on the winning side, but twice it was proven wrong. The constant guerilla warfare of the ragtag mujahideen and Pakistan's support for them forced the global powers to shamefully retreat, and every time India, losing the plot, had to flee too. India wished to partake in the spoils of war, entrench itself in the Afghan future, get an inroad to Central Asia, and via this long cut, get a shortcut to regional hegemony. But unfortunately for India, it was in the wrong boat, each time. Both times it should have learnt the lesson that sheer hegemony and imperial lust cannot secure one a victory over a human population, but it did not. Anyways, even after India left the socialist camp, Russia always wanted to woo it back into its sphere. In the late 1990s, Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov presented a doctrine referred to as the Russia-India-China (RIC) doctrine, advocating closer cooperation between the three countries to foster a multipolar world order. But India was too haute to lend an ear to such regional integration. What India had in mind was not integration but to become the next China, the next regional power, getting ahead of all other regional entities. So, India went on closer to the US, signing strategic pacts for bases-sharing, communication and info sharing, weapons deals and more. India even joined QUAD in 2007 — a partnership specifically made to counter China. In all this wooing with the US, India got more of a narrative, and less of anything substantial. The US did not shift its industries from China to India; reportedly, manufactured goods currently account for a mere 2% of India's exports. Regarding its defence architecture, reputed Indian analyst Pravin Sawhney has stated in recent days that India has focused on building it army for conventional war, which may not occur in future conflict scenarios. On the other hand, India lacks true innovation and R&D and has no real cyber or space preparedness. The Indian side lacks 'jointness' and 'interoperability', he says. And this jointness and interoperability is something that involves network centricity, information superiority and an integrated command system, in a Sixth Generation Warfare environment. Future 6G wars will have contactless battles, aiming to destroy enemy forces on the enemy territory with precision and firepower. China, due to its R&D, has such superiorities; and Pakistan has it because of its strategic alliance with China, the right boat! In the May 2025 Indo-Pak war, Pakistan had the edge because it was using Chinese origin fighter jets and missiles, integrated with the Chinese XS-3 tactical, high-speed broadband data link, for real-time navigation and precision targeting. Deniability was also practiced by the Pakistani side by jamming India's electromagnetic environment. Pakistan had ensured jointness and interoperability, by conducting the Shaheen series of joint air exercises with the Chinese Air Force in Xinjiang and Gansu. Such effort between India and its defence partners US and Israel seem to be absent. Failure of Operation Sindoor was not only India losing a battle with Pakistan, a battle it initiated itself; rather it proved to be a double jeopardy, as it severely damaged Indo-US relations. The Indo-US partnership that had been the cornerstone of India's foreign policy got a firm blow at the hands of an additive battle, between two haute egos, Trump's and Modi's. Trump repeatedly claimed mediating the Indo-Pak ceasefire, and Modi was too proud to lose his political narrative of having the upper hand. In the frustration, Trump first slammed 25% tariff on India, and more penalties for buying Russian oil, and now he has threatened a gigantic 50% tariffs — a level where business will be impossible at all. Trump now thinks that India is enabling Russia to fight in Ukraine because it buys its oil; he thinks India's BRICS membership is anti-US; he feels India is backing off from promises to purchase billion dollars worth of weapons, including F-35s; he feels like India is not on the path to keeping its promise to increase bilateral trade from $200 billion to $500 billion by 2030. Truth is that India has been the biggest beneficiary of the Ukraine war, getting 3.4 million barrels a day of cheap Russian oil. Previously this requirement of the world's most populous country was fulfilled from Iran — another partner India pushed away to please the US. Saying no to Russia means finding another seller with such a huge capacity — one that would be hard to find at once! It seems like India has utterly failed in its core foreign policy pillar of strong US-India strategic ties. India's heartburn with China and Pakistan has also kept it alienated in the region and in the Global South. India could have been a bridge between the Global North and South, but it seems like the bridge is broke and taken down India with it. And now after Trump's threats, India is again trying to make a balancing act between the North and the South — but this time both poles want India to make one clear choice. Perhaps it was possible to be in one wrong boat at a time, but trying to keep one foot each in both two boats for a giant elephant like India may prove to be a smashing nosedive.
Time of India
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Harry Brook press conference: On Yashasvi Jaiswal DRS controversy, India bowling, getting out on 99
Putin CREATES History: Russia Becomes First Country To Recognise Afghanistan's Taliban Govt Russia has become the first country to officially recognise the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan, accepting its appointed ambassador and shifting decades of policy. The Kremlin describes the move as a step toward productive bilateral cooperation, while Taliban leaders hail it as a bold and precedent-setting decision. As the US maintains sanctions and frozen assets, Russia is taking a pragmatic approach, strengthening economic and counterterrorism ties with the regime that once opposed it during the Soviet-Afghan war. This decision is likely to influence regional diplomacy and reshape geopolitical dynamics in Central Asia.#Russia #Taliban #Afghanistan #Moscow #IslamicEmirate#Diplomacy #GlobalPolitics #FlagRaising #Geopolitics #EmbassyNews#Recognition #InternationalRelations #Kremlin #ShahadaFlag #WorldNews 11.9K views | 15 hours ago
Time of India
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Putin CREATES History: Russia Becomes First Country To Recognise Afghanistan's Taliban Govt
Russia has become the first country to officially recognise the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan, accepting its appointed ambassador and shifting decades of policy. The Kremlin describes the move as a step toward productive bilateral cooperation, while Taliban leaders hail it as a bold and precedent-setting decision. As the US maintains sanctions and frozen assets, Russia is taking a pragmatic approach, strengthening economic and counterterrorism ties with the regime that once opposed it during the Soviet-Afghan war. This decision is likely to influence regional diplomacy and reshape geopolitical dynamics in Central Asia.#Russia #Taliban #Afghanistan #Moscow #IslamicEmirate#Diplomacy #GlobalPolitics #FlagRaising #Geopolitics #EmbassyNews#Recognition #InternationalRelations #Kremlin #ShahadaFlag #WorldNews Read More
Indian Express
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
What America doesn't get about South Asia: India and Pakistan can't be equated
Written by Milinda Moragoda For decades, US foreign policy has framed India and Pakistan as parallel actors in a regional rivalry — an outdated assumption rooted in Cold War thinking. This legacy framework has become a liability. It fails to account for how dramatically the two countries have diverged — economically, politically, and strategically — and risks misaligning US interests in a multipolar world. India, the world's most populous democracy, is poised to become the third-largest economy. It is a global leader in technology and space exploration, and home to a vast and influential diaspora. Its institutions remain rooted in a democratic tradition that supports long-term growth and international engagement. India is increasingly viewed as a stabilising force in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond. It plays a leading role in the Quad, recently concluded its G20 presidency, and is deepening partnerships across Asia, Africa, and the West. Pakistan presents a sharply different picture. Born out of a hasty Partition in 1947 and fractured by civil war in 1971, Pakistan has never fully emerged from the shadow of military control. Civilian governments remain weak and often short-lived. The economy is in recurrent crisis, sustained by external bailouts. Radicalisation continues to permeate parts of the political and military establishment. Journalists, judges, and civil society actors often operate under intense pressure, while political dissent is routinely suppressed. Washington has contributed to this imbalance. During the Cold War, the US propped up Pakistan as a counterweight to India, and later relied on it as a staging ground during the Soviet-Afghan war and the War on Terror. Even as Pakistan covertly developed nuclear weapons throughout the 1980s, Washington turned a blind eye in the early stages — responding later, by which time the programme was already well advanced. These tactical decisions sidelined Pakistan's democratic institutions, empowered its military intelligence complex, and entrenched a culture of impunity that persists to this day. The fallout is stark. While India has established its credentials as an important player in a multipolar world and has staked a rightful claim to a permanent seat in the Security Council, Pakistan remains geopolitically transactional and internally unstable. Pakistan's capable citizens — entrepreneurs, academics, reformers — are constrained by a system that discourages institutional reform and relies instead on geopolitical leverage. The US withdrawal from Afghanistan has only intensified regional challenges. India is left to absorb the consequences: A collapsed Afghan state, rising extremism, and a neighbour with an increasingly fragile grip on security and economic stability. Instability in Pakistan and Afghanistan now reverberates across South Asia, threatening hard-won regional gains. Despite these realities, parts of the Washington policy establishment continue to default to 'balanced' diplomacy — treating both countries as parallel entities with equal claims on US strategic bandwidth. This misrepresents the regional equation and undermines the US's geopolitical interests and credibility as a democratic ally in Asia. Some observers argue that this policy of parity is not simply a holdover from the past, but an intentional strategy to keep a rising India in check, viewing it as a potential competitor rather than a partner. If that is true, it would be a grave miscalculation. Such thinking is counterproductive and would suggest that the US has yet to absorb the lessons of its own Cold War-era missteps in South Asia. It also risks alienating one of the world's most consequential democracies. Even though India's foreign policy may not always align with US preferences, it is fundamentally a constitutional democracy with enduring institutions and a vibrant civil society. Pakistan, by contrast, is a military-dominated state whose political cycles and economic direction are shaped more by external influences than domestic consensus. To remain effective in South Asia, US policy must reflect this asymmetry. Treating India and Pakistan as interchangeable partners sends the wrong signal to allies, undermines US credibility, and weakens regional stability. It perpetuates a flawed narrative that has outlived its strategic purpose. The time has come for Washington to adopt a more strategic approach that is based on institutional strength, democratic resilience, and long-term alignment, rather than on historical convenience. This shift is not about abandoning Pakistan, but about acknowledging the costs of maintaining a policy of false parity. In an era of multipolar complexity, where strategic clarity is essential, the US must recalibrate its approach. The stakes — for South Asia and for US influence in the Indo-Pacific — demand nothing less. The writer is a former Sri Lankan cabinet minister, High Commissioner to India, and founder of the Sri Lankan strategic affairs think tank, Pathfinder Foundation
Express Tribune
22-06-2025
- Express Tribune
Peshawar buckles under urban sprawl
Once celebrated as the "City of Flowers", Peshawar now struggles to live up to its poetic title. The air that once carried the sweet scent of blooming apricots and the gentle rustle of orchard leaves now hangs heavy with dust, smoke, and the cacophony of honking horns. A city that was once admired for its natural beauty and cultural richness has descended into chaos, a casualty of unchecked population growth, political apathy, and haphazard urban development. Peshawar's transformation began in earnest during the 1980s, when the Soviet-Afghan war sent a huge influx of refugees across the border into Pakistan. Many of them settled in and around Peshawar, altering the city's demographic landscape. In the following decades, Peshawar became the preferred refuge for internally displaced persons from the tribal belt, who were fleeing military operations, insurgency, and insecurity. Over time, the refugee camps evolved into permanent neighborhoods, and the temporary shelters turned into sprawling, unregulated settlements. The resultant population boom has been relentless. According to the 2023 Digital Census, the population of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa reached 40.8 million, up from 35.5 million in 2017: an increase of 5.3 per cent in just six years. While the majority, 34 million, still reside in rural areas, the urban population has swelled dramatically. Peshawar alone grew from 4.3 million in 2017 to 4.7 million in 2023, at an annual growth rate of 1.5 per cent. For Peshawar, the results of this rapid urbanization are visible in every corner. The roads, once adequate for a smaller population, are now choked with vehicles. According to Chief Traffic Officer Haroon Rashid, over 500,000 vehicles ply the city's roads daily. Despite the introduction of the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in 2020, locals' heavy reliance on illegal rickshaws, unregistered vehicles, and a lack of public discipline continue to worsen road congestion and deteriorate air quality. Dr Rashid Rehman, an urban infrastructure specialist at the University of Engineering and Technology (UET) Peshawar, believed the city was facing a systemic failure. "Urban development continues to expand horizontally, devouring agricultural land and pushing the city's boundaries into rural areas. The lack of long-term strategic planning and zoning regulation is responsible for the chaos. High-rise buildings, for instance, could reduce the strain on land and services, but most housing schemes continue to promote large, detached homes. Weak enforcement of building codes has led to the construction of commercial plazas and residential complexes without adequate parking, water supply, or waste disposal systems," highlighted Dr Rehman. K-P's Minister for Local Government and Rural Development, Arshad Ayub, acknowledged the city's growing pains but insisted that efforts were being made to improve conditions. "Five new flyovers are under construction and the Ring Road will be expanded to divert traffic from the city center. The upcoming provincial budget includes significant allocations for urban development in Peshawar, including the procurement of new buses for the BRT system and stricter regulations for commercial and residential construction," claimed Ayub. However, critics argued that such projects were reactive rather than proactive. Environmentalists warned that the loss of green spaces was not just a cosmetic issue but a threat to public health and ecological balance. Peshawar has lost many of its parks and orchards to unregulated construction due to which tree cover in the city has declined sharply. The sense of loss is palpable among older residents, who remember a very different city. Haji Tahir Khan, a 60-year-old shopkeeper in Saddar Bazaar, recalled a time when the city was not only cleaner but also more livable. "We had space to breathe, walk, and sit under a tree," he said. "Now, even finding a parking spot is a daily struggle. The roads are full, the air is dirty, and the water is getting scarce. Is this the progress we were promised?"
