* Afghanistan’s Uneasy Peace
* Russia’s Evolving Invasion
* Japan Seeks Major Defence
Buildup
* After Border Clash with China:
India Tests Long-Range Missile
By Shashi P.B.B. Malla
Afghanistan
Aside from poverty, hunger and the threat of ISIS’ regional branch, Taliban-ruled Afghanistan faces tensions over governing the largely Shia Hazara minority, according to Afghan expert Fazelminallah Qazizai.
Qazizai details life in the provincial capital Bamyan [where the Taliban previously destroyed the ancient and priceless giant stone statues of the Buddha] where the Taliban have up to now largely left the Hazara to adhere to local, more moderate societal practices than the strict Sharia imposed in most of the country. That is a source of dismay for the more extreme Taliban members.
“Against great odds, Bamiyan today is calm,” notes Qazizai. “Whether that calm will continue, however, remains to be seen…Only time will tell who will prevail between the moderates and ideologues inside the Taliban.”
Examining Afghanistan’s economy in a Foreign Affairs essay, Graeme Smith and Delaney Simon write that international banks are still unwilling to do business there despite easing of US sanctions.
Some international donors are even “tempted to pull the plug.”
As have other responsible analysts, Smith and Simon urge the international community to accept that it must engage with the Taliban and “forge ahead with smoothening a beleaguered country’s path to economic recovery.”
Russia’s Brutal Assault on Ukraine
Currently, Russia is waging a brutal war on Ukraine: one that includes not just strikes on electrical infrastructure and water supply.
Analysts agree that these are primarily intended to demoralize Ukrainian civilians, but also grinding ground warfare that has drawn comparisons to World War I (Fareed’s Global Briefing, Dec. 16).
The newly infamous scene of that grueling fighting style is Bakhmut, to which observers have pointed as an example of Russia hurling men into the fray.
Francis Farrell at The Kyiv Independent, describes “21st century trench warfare” over a small, strategically insignificant Ukrainian city: “Ukrainian units in the areas had reported mindless human wave assaults on their positions.”
Paradoxically, others see Russia’s war effort becoming more sophisticated.
Ukraine’s top generals told the Economist they believe the point of this grinding siege is to “fix” Ukrainian forces in Bakhmut, to prevent them from being deployed elsewhere.
Kyiv expects Russia to launch a major new offensive “as soon as January, but more likely in the spring,” backed by mobilized manpower and industry, The Economist writes that assault could come from Russian-occupied territory in Ukraine’s east or south, or from the north in Russian-friendly Belarus.
Writing at Foreign Policy, Maxim Samorukov expects subsequent Russian military-draft efforts to improve, becoming “more routine and targeted” than the messy effort this year.
In a Foreign Affairs essay, retired Australian Army Major General Mick Ryan — one of the most astute observers of battlefield dynamics in this war – envisions a kind of strategic cat-and-mouse movement, with Russia waging a more cunning campaign under Gen. Sergey Surovikin – the infamous “Butcher of Aleppo”, Syria – installed by Putin in October as Russia’s top commander in Ukraine.
Maj. Gen Ryan expects Russia’s strategy to include continued targeting of Ukrainian infrastructure and strategic feints to keep Ukrainian troops spread thinner than they need be.
“To keep succeeding, Ukraine’s military strategy will need to evolve,” Maj. Gen. Ryan writes, suggesting enhanced “surveillance of Russia’s front lines, logistics hubs, and command hubs,” sending more troops to Europe for training, and continuing to strike at Russian logistics.
Kissinger: A Vanquished Russia Threatens World Order
Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger – the key player in the US-China détente – warned in a new essay in The Spectator that if Russia was “rendered impotent” from its war in Ukraine, this could have vastly negative consequences for the entire world (Newsweek, Dec. 17).
In his essay entitled “How to Avoid Another World War”, the German-born academic and master diplomat served in the administrations of US presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford.
Kissinger, probably the world’s leading historical analyst, compares the current situation in Ukraine to World War I, which he called “a kind of cultural suicide that destroyed Europe’s eminence.”
The former secretary of state then warned that the same should not be allowed to happen in Russia, lest the balance of world order be upended.
Kissinger disagreed with the notion that the preferred outcome is a Russia made impotent by the war.
“For all its propensity to violence, Russia has made decisive contributions to the global equilibrium and to the balance of power for over half a millennium. Its historical role should not be degraded.”
The diplomat par excellence said that even with its setbacks in its invasion of Ukraine, Russia still remains a dominant nuclear power.
He added that if Moscow’s capabilities were hindered or if Russia was even dissolved, the enormous territory could become a “contested vacuum”.
Kissinger also wrote: “Its competing societies might decide to settle their disputes by violence. Other countries might seek to expand their claims by force.”
In his essay, Kissinger maintains that he sides with Ukraine in the current war while also calling for peace talks.
“I have repeatedly expressed my support for the allied military effort to thwart Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, he wrote.
“But the time is approaching to build on the strategic changes which have already been accomplished and to integrate them into a new structure towards achieving peace through negotiation.”
Japan Revises Military Strategy
In the first revision of its national defence strategy since 2013, pacifist Japan plans to double defence spending by 2027 and lifts a self-imposed restriction on its ability to strike other nations with missiles.
The shift is part of a major re-mitilitarization that reverses the pacifist orientation Japan has held since the end of World War II.
The new strategy cites heightened threats from China and North Korea and states that Japan, a staunch U.S. ally, should be more independent in its self-defence.
The plan to boost military spending foresees purchases of US-made missiles that are capable of reaching North Korea and parts of China.
Japanese Prime Minister Kishida Fumio said the new capabilities would allow Japan to “deter an attack or force an enemy to stop one.”
Major Decision & Crucial Timing
“Kishida has done a remarkable job in preparing for this warp-speed jump in Japanese military capabilities. Domestic opposition has been minor, and even the idea of doubling Japan’s defence budget has drawn remarkably little outcry in a nation where the public has long been sensitive to any changes in military policy,” writes Sheila A. Smith (Council on Foreign Relations/CFR).
“The counter-strike capability is of course important for Japan’s own defence, but it will significantly raise the costs for China if it were to attempt a change in the status quo [on Taiwan],” Keio University’s Ken Jimbo stated.
Sino-Indian Arms Race?
Besides directly on its eastern flank, China now faces a strategic challenge on its soft southern underbelly.
India test-fired a nuclear-capable missile after its troops clashed with Chinese border guards last week.
The missile’s range would allow it to target many major cities in China.
This new development could be particularly alarming for China since India is part and parcel of the US-led “Quad’, which also includes Japan and Australia.
India Tests Long-range Nuclear Capable Missile
A successful flight test of India’s long-range surface-to-surface nuclear capable ballistic missile, Agni 5 was undertaken last Thursday, December 15 (The Indian Express, Dec. 18).
The Strategic Forces Command (SFC), which operates the Agni-5, carried out the test from an island off the coast of the eastern state of Odisha.
Agni-5 was earlier tested last year in October for the first time, a few months after China had tested its hypersonic missile.
The latest test comes a few days after Chinese and Indian troops clashed at the Line of Actual Control (LAC/the de facto border) in Tawang in the disputed north-eastern state of Arunachal Pradesh.
Agni-5 can strike targets at ranges of 5,000 to 5,500 km, which puts major cities in China, including the capital Beijing, within its range.
The missile can be launched from road and rail platforms, making it easier for it to be deployed and launched at a quicker pace.
Agni-6 is also said to be under development.
India’s Nuclear Doctrine
At the time of the previous test in October 2021, the Indian Ministry of Defence in its statement had highlighted the posture of “credible minimum deterrence” and “No First Use” which are pivotal points of India’s nuclear doctrine, first announced in 2003.
This basically means India would never use nuclear weapons first in a conflict situation [also with Pakistan] but only as retaliation and the arsenal maintained is to only deter the possibility of an attack on India.
[This is the classical situation/analogy of a US-Soviet standoff during the Cold War].
Indo-Pakistani Verbal Spat
After chairing a special meeting of the UN Security Council [India is chair during December as a non-permanent member] focused on a “global counter-terrorism approach,” External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar told the media last Thursday that the world perceives Pakistan as the “epicenter of terrorism” as the country still shelters terror groups (Hindustan Times).
Jaishankar also said ‘one cannot have snakes in the backyard and expect them only to bite the neighnours.”
Responding to his Indian counterpart, Pakistan Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said: “I would like to remind Mr Jaishankar that Osama bin Laden is dead, but the butcher of Gujarat [Narendra Modi] lives” and was banned from entering the U.S.
“These are the prime minister and foreign minister of RSS, which draws inspiration from Hitler’s SS,” he added.
In a sharp response to Bhutto Zardari’s remarks, India’s external affairs ministry spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said the comments marked “a new low, even for Pakistan.”
Pointing to Pakistan’s “indisputable role in sponsoring, harbouring and actively financing terrorists and terrorist organisations,” Bagchi said Bhutto Zardari’s “uncivilized outburst seems to be a result of Pakistan’s increasing inability to use terrorists and their proxies.’
The Foreign Office of Pakistan rejected Bagchi’s statement: “The Indian government has tried to hide behind subterfuge and canard to conceal the realities of the 2002 Gujarat massacre” (Dawn).
India-Pakistan ties are currently at their lowest point and the two sides have not held any structured dialogue since the Mumbai attacks carried out by the LeT (Hindustan Times).
This has also meant that the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) has been at a deep end and Nepal stuck with the chairmanship.
The current government is neither willing or able to take any diplomatic initiatives – pointing to the poor quality of its foreign policy. It has condemned itself to a reactive instead of a proactive stance.
The foreign policy establishment can only react and complain about so-called external interference in Nepal’s internal affairs – a storm in a tea-cup!
And in today’s enmeshed world, there is no border between domestic and external affairs.
The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com
Login to add a comment