Afghanistan: Need of a Global Response Sans Military Option

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

“Let me be clear: we will be relentless in rooting out terrorism, whosoever its sponsors, external or internal. Any effort to destabilize parts of our country or to attack its territorial integrity will be responded to forcefully.”
....

"Peace and security in Afghanistan could best be achieved through a process of national reconciliation 
undertaken and led by Afghans themselves."

Analysis:

Aforementioned statements were made by Pakistan's permanent envoy to UN, Dr. Maleeha Lodhi while addressing to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The views of Pakistani ambassador reflect the geopolitical reality that for a peaceful Pakistan a peaceful Afghanistan is necessary. 

Usually it is said that Pakistan itself has intervened in Afghanistan for the longest period of time. Though true, this historical fact needs to be examined through the lens of geopolitical realities which shaped the strategic thinking within Pakistani security establishment. Fact remains that  since the last 40 years, Pakistan has been forced to intervene in Afghanistan just to ensure its own internal and external security. This intervention was the outcome of the events triggered by external forces (first Russia and now the US) and it will continue until the presence of Extra Regional Forces in Afghanistan. 

Today, Afghanistan needs help from global community to overcome the mammoth challenges BUT without any military intervention. This help must be political, financial and diplomatic and Afghans must be given a chance to workout a political solution for themselves and this can only happen after the expulsion of US/NATO military from there. 14 years of senseless war in Afghanistan has failed to make Afghanistan a secure place for world. As Pakistan has revisited its Afghan policy and has departed from its 1980's Afghan policy, it is time for the world community and dominant players in it to revisit their approaches towards Afghan situation. Pakistan has learned the harsh lesson that only a stable Afghanistan with native political model can ensure the security of Pakistan's western front and internal axis. 

Pakistan and Afghanistan are increasing their mutual cooperation in intelligence sharing, as mentioned by Dr. Lodhi as well in her speech, but the fact remains that the Afghan question is not just a bilateral one, its is a global question demanding global response where solid results would become visible only after a global realization that Afghanistan is a sovereign state not just a geostrategic battlefront!

Against this backdrop, the above mentioned statement of Ambassador Lodhi indicates in right direction but there is a lot more to be done by Pakistani foreign office and diplomats in other parts of the world. Understandably Pakistan is shaping its foreign policy towards achieving that goal but considering the prevailing bitter geopolitical realities it will be only prudent to think that this is going to be a harsh slog for Pakistan but this is a must to do task for the sake of our own security and prosperity and failure is not an option here!   

Nepal, Earthquakes and Movement of Indian Tectonic plate

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

Indian subcontinent is located on a massive tectonic plate (known as "Indian Plate). It is today part of the major Indo-Australian Plate, and includes most of South Asia – i.e., the Indian subcontinent – and a portion of the basin under the Indian Ocean, including parts of South China and Eastern Indonesia, and extending up to but not including Ladakh, Kohistan and Balochistan

Due to its lesser thickness than the other tectonic plates, the Indian plate is moving towards North much faster and is in collision with the Eursian plate causing jolts, quakes and shocks. The Indian Plate is currently moving north-east at 5 centimetres (2.0 in) per year, while the Eurasian Plate is moving north at only 2 centimetres (0.79 in) per year. This is causing the Eurasian Plate to deform, and the Indian Plate to compress at a rate of 4 millimetres (0.16 in) per year. As its collision against much heavier Eurasian tectonic plate gain more momentum, the frequency of earth quakes caused by this collision is also on the rise. with  Indian subcontinent has suffered two major and numerous earthquakes due to this collision of tectonic plates. Kashmir earthquakes (2005) and Nepal quake( 2015) have claimed lives of more than 80,000 so far. The assessment of damages Nepal quake is still being done and fear is that current number of casualties (2000) would increase considerably once the damage assessment come to end.    

The collision of Indian plate with the Eurasian Plate along the boundary between India and Nepal formed the orogenic belt that created the Tibetan Plateau and the Himalaya Mountains, as sediment bunched up like earth before a plow. This is why Nepal is such a delicate geography. No one can predict the timing of natural calamity like the 8.1 magnitude earthquake. This unpredictability is not so unpredictable considering the fact that the movement of Indian tectonic plate is a well known phenomenon by now. Doing nothing and praying that mother nature will not hurt us will not be a wise move. After recent devastation in Nepal, contemplating means to minimize the damage done by the movement and collision of tectonic plates becomes a duty to encourage providence.   

8.1 scale Nepal Earthquakes and radius of its aftershocks

Natural calamities are very hard to fight against, but with a consistent efforts and cooperation, the damages can be minimize and this is what is the focus of all these recommendations.      

Increasing frequency of such natural calamities in states located on Indian tectonic plate, particularly the Indian sub-continent, demands a revisit their disaster response strategies ASAP. These states must raise special relief corps within their National armies to carry out initial reconnaissance, damage assessment, relief, search, evacuate and rescue operations in a systematic and coordinated manner. The sheer scale of earthquake in Nepal and one that Pakistan suffered in 2005 could not be overcome by any civilian institution due to obvious operational constraints. Only military aviation and national surveillance capabilities can come in handy in the aftermaths of such natural catastrophes. 

2005 - Earthquake in Pakistan turned Azad Kashmir into pile of ruble

Apart from that, it is also highly recommended that these states also devise a national curricula for youth specifically designed for civil defense and emergency relief works. This is a must task in order to make the younger lots aware of traumatizing impact of such a natural calamity.

Last but not the least, a high level scientific multilateral commission is also required to study the tectonic movement and to suggest necessary relocation of populations from more dangerous zones located on geographical fault lines.

NATO's Response to Russian Hybrid Warfare: Is the Strategy Right?

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

"We need a collective defence where Allied forces are more ready to deploy.

And better able to reinforce each other.

Faster.

Sharper.

And more mobile.

We must be able to deter any threat, from any direction.  Including hybrid warfare, and attacks that are aimed at our infrastructure -- our economies -- and our open societies.

This requires resolve.

And resources.

We have shown the resolve.

We are fundamentally changing NATO’s defence posture. To ensure we have the right forces -- in the right place -- at the right time."

This is an excerpt from speech of NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the 51st Munich Security Conference, held from 6-8 Feb. in Munich, Germany. Complete text of his speech is available on official site on following link:

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_117320.htm?selectedLocale=en

ANALYSIS:

Now when the NATO has officially accepted that age of Hybrid Warfare is here and have announced critical steps to combat the percieved threats from Russian Hybrid strategy. There are two aspects of his speech which demand a critical analysis.

1. As a response strategy, Mr, Stoltenberg has told that NATO has prescribed the  establishment of a "spearhead Force".
2. NATO has decided to established first command and control units in six eastern Allies: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania on war footings these units are ought to provide support to rapid deployment of spearhead force along with regular NATO troops.

Ostensibly, this seems some well devised and coordinated steps in deterring Russian threats which have been classified as 'Hybrid' by NATO's secretary general. But by looking at this NATO's response strategy, which overwhelmingly is Kinetic in nature, it would be prudent to contemplate if these steps are really adequate response to Moscow's aggressive actions in Ukraine, Baltic and other parts of Eastern Europe. Hybrid tactics in their nature are complex and compounded with more focus on Non-Kinetic tactics than Kinetic means. Hybrid strategy includes implementation of multiple conventional, sub conventional. economic, psychological and political tactics simultaneously in order to create more options for own state while at the squeezing the space for opponent in all three decisive battlefields of Hybrid War, as defined by former US Army officer Col. Jack McCuen i.e.

1. Physical Conflict zone & its population; 
2. Home front (Own Population) 
3. International community. 

NATO's strategy, so far, does not cater the delicacies related to dynamics of war which affect directly local and international population. NATO nations just ended one of their longest war in Afghanistan last year and now yet another intense war is lurking around the corner. Most of the troops and member nations are still not clear why they were in Afghanistan and what this prolonged war there has achieved. It can be argued that NATO did respond with non-kinetic measures when economic sanctions were imposed over Russia but in hindsight they, evidently, not only proved ineffective but rather counter-productive.

But question, remains why NATO considers Russian threats as 'Hybrid' in the first place? Latest reference to Russian overtures being Hybrid was made by former NATO secretary general Andres Fogh Rasmussen, who warned that "Russia may use "hybrid war" methods in Baltics to test NATO solidarity" while giving an interview to a UK daily. "There is a high probability that he will intervene in the Baltics to test NATO's Article 5," Rasmussen said during the interview while referring to the solidarity clause of the North Atlantic Treaty that underpins collective security.  Interestingly, the above mentioned speech of current NATO secretary general also contains the reference to Hybrid nature of Russian threat in almost same sense. Intrinsic problem with NATO's kinetic strategy is that it is devoid of any approach to address the real target of Russian hybrid war i.e. "Solidarity" within NATO. Fear of Red Bear may work for sometime, but with a growing Euro-Zone crisis, asking for more defense funds and spending, making more aggressive military oriented strategies and inability to finish ongoing conflicts will eventually damage NATO's solidarity as Putin has in his mind.

In NATO not all the nations have luxury of spending more on defense right now and this new Kinetic strategy is certainly going to put lots of pressure on stable European economies like Germany and France. By looking at this strategy it seems that NATO perceived Russian hybrid threats posed to 'Sovereignty' of EU instead of 'Solidarity' of its defense alliance which guards European sovereignty but once its solidarity compromised, many East European nations will be 'hoping' for peace. Putin's timing of igniting Ukraine is also an intriguing aspect of this whole crisis. Prolonged economic crisis of Europe, shortness of resources due to budgetary cuts on defense in EU and psychological stress of prolonged deployment in war zones of Afghanistan and other parts are being masterly exploited by Putin and NATO's response is more military oriented that is going to exacerbate all of these nuisances within Europe and at the same time provoking Russia even more with deployment of forces in Baltics and Russian neighbors. This is not how an alliance keeps its solidarity intact, this is how an alliance prepare for a war. If NATO is doing so. Someone there must go through history to all the Western invaders who entered the Russia in the past. And this is the point when many of the European states would start to look at their own interest irrespective to what NATO wants. And this is exactly what Putin is striving for!    

Geopolitics of Pipelines and Energy Wars!

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

Many analysts around the world has been caught by surprise when, during his visit to Turkey, Russian President Putin announced to stop South Stream gas pipeline project which was to be built through Black Sea, around Ukraine, to Eastern Europe with multi billion dollar investment by major gas production and distribution firms. According to the Russian gas production giant Gazprom, major investor in the plan, the route of this planned gas pipeline was to run from Eastern Russia to Balkans through beneath the Black Sea, avoiding volatile Ukrainian territory, to Germany after passing through Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungry etc. Major Russian goal through this pipeline was to follow the strategy to diversify the gas supply routes to the Europe.

South Stream pipeline Route ( Soruce: Gazprom)

According to the Western analysts, the ambitious project became the casualty of Ukrainian crisis and its demise shows the limits of Moscow's energy bullying. This analysis stems from the perception that the construction of South Stream pipeline would have given Moscow more leverage to demand concessions from the government in Kiev, which is seeking closer ties with Europe. It is worth noticing that Gazprom was a major investor in the project investing more than 50% of total cost. This was conceived in EU as a Russian attempt to monopolize the gas supply to Eastern rim of Europe.  On the other hand, Russian sources and analysts believe that the project was doomed by EU.

“If Europe does not want to implement the project, then it won’t be implemented. We will refocus our energy resources to other parts of the world,” Putin said on Monday in the Turkish capital, Ankara, after a meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

This decision by Preisdent Putin has stirred a heated debate within EU as well. James Henderson of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, believes that countries on Eastern rim of Europe (Bulgaria, Serbia and Hungary) are pretty exposed to a energy crisis if Ukrainian conflict escalates. Putin may be trying to fracture the discussion within the EU,” Henderson says.

Andras Deak, an associate fellow at the Hungarian Institute of International Affairs, told Bloomberg News that "the scrapping of South Stream complicates the region’s energy security, making it all the more dependent on the Ukrainian pipeline. The EU and the IMF effectively will have to finance Ukraine’s gas bill now, if they want to make sure that gas keeps flowing through Ukraine to Europe.”

So how does this Russian decision is actually going to affect the regional energy security and geopolitics? Is it really a European win and a Russian lose? Or Russia is playing her cards more wisely on grand chessboard?

ANALYSIS:

This decision of abandoning the gas pipeline project seems inevitable one considering the contentious Russian-EU diplomatic ties over Ukrainian conflict. Ostensibly, it seems that the scrapping of South Stream would haunt Russian interests more than East European states (at least in short to mid term span), but a holistic analysis of this decision in context of bigger geopolitical picture demands a more closer examination of all the factors critical to the regional diplomacy.

European analysts believe that the main reason behind canceling the project is mainly economic and not political. Ruble has slided more than 22% against US Dollars during recent months causing US$90-100 Billions to the Russian economy. This explains why many Western analysts believe that Putin has caught in a perfect geopolitical storm due to its aggressive intervention in Ukraine. Coming out of this situation would not be easy for Moscow without making a compromise on Ukraine. But this Western analysis and narrative does not explains this decision in context of bigger picture of regional geopolitics.

By looking at the Western analyses, it seems that to overcome the financial shock, caused by Western sanctions, Putin is taking some immediate steps. After losing close ally like Germany, it would be difficult for Moscow to compensate the lost ground on economic front in short period of time. To make the matters worse, Russia is in no position to expand its Eurasian energy integration infrastructure towards South through Central Asian States (CAS) as the strategic sand has shifted and one of the major Cold War era Russian ally in South Asia, (India) has become the US strategic partner. Apart from that, CAS want to expand their own energy grid towards South (TAPI pipeline is vivid manifestation) and after that, India and Pakistan would be able to meet their energy demands from this pipeline.


But actually, Putin's decision was not irrational or illogical as Western analysts are trying to paint it.

Russia had already secured the huge Chinese energy market for herself before announcing the abandonment of South Stream. Earlier last month, Russia and China entered into a strategic energy partnership (worth $400 Billion). Apart from that, Russia has announced to built the gas pipeline to Balkans via a new route passing through Turkey.

Apart from that, Putin has outplayed the West on economic front by evading European and American project in Ukraine which was part of encirclement policy of Washington against Moscow. Putin rendered the plans hatched to cage the red bear in Russian mainland using Baltic States and Ukraine into quixotic dreams.

Despite the fact that till the recent deal with China and Turkey manifests into reality, the Russian economy would stay under stress there is no Soviet era like threat to Russian economy. This short term stress explains why National Bank of Russia had to cut its growth forecast for next year to zero sighting the decline in oil prices and Ruble's decline against Dollar. But believing that this stress would dent Russian economy in serious way is nothing more than a fantasy. In order to keep the Russian energy sector alive, the China-Russia deal was secured despite a heavy cost of accepting Chinese influence in Russian energy sector. Due to this deal, Russian oil & gas production company, OAO Rosneft, would sell a 10% stake in a Siberian unit to state-owned China National Petroleum Corp. One can argue that Chinese influence on the Russian policy making is increasing and this compromise by Russia is a manifestation of that. But for Russia, through this arrangement, Chinese would be providing much needed investment to the Russian energy sector. A natural strategic alliance between Beijing and Moscow is in making where former is securing its energy supplies by securing latter's economy.

Lowering the prices of oil failed to work the way it was expected. US-Saudi nexus kept the production of oil  at same oil while dropped the prices to dent the Russian economy but that hasn't work to required extent so far and in future it will not because unlike Iran, apart from oil, Russians are principle suppliers of gas to major part of Europe and the entire hoopla of ending the threat of monopolization of European gas supplies by eliminating the South Stream is a big hoax considering the fact that Russia is still biggest supplier of gas to Europe via Nord Stream pipeline which runs under the Baltic Sea from  Vyborg in the Russian Federation to Greifswald in Germany. 

Nord Stream Pipeline - Major Energy supply route to Germany and Western Europe

This makes it clear that the entire media buzz about the Russian economic and political isolation is nothing more than a well coordinated propaganda. The fact that Russian banks are buying the physical currency like Gold from all over the world which in the long run is going to support Russian currency against US dollars which is rapidly losing its value against gold.

A quiet aspect of this energy war in Eurasia is how Turkish geography would become more relevant in the regional geopolitics. If Russian plans to expand the gas pipeline to Greece via Turkey materializes smoothly, the Bulgarian resistance to South Stream would be another futile European endeavor and by looking at the recent developments, this possibility is not a distinct one!   

10 Years of War on Terror & Pakistan

Shahzad Masood Roomi

Afghanistan proved strategic black hole for British and Soviet empires in 19^th and 20^th centuries and it looks like that after the destruction of two former superpowers, the US is going to vanish in this black hole in 21^st century. But this time around the war has very distinctive and unique dynamics than any other previous attempts to capture this land lock country.

Pakistan, along with many other Muslim World countries is faced with sub-conventional security threats. The covert war is not hypothetical anymore. The objective of this imposed war is to make Pakistan a dysfunctional state first, denuclearize it in the second phase and then move towards the final balkanization and dismemberment. The threat Pakistan faces today is existential! Pakistan faces a genuine, real and close threat to its very survival in a very hostile regional environment. 





Eurasian Economic Boom & Geopolitics - China’s Land Bridge to Europe: The China-Turkey High Speed Railway

F. William Engdahl

The prospect of an unparalleled Eurasian economic boom lasting into the next Century and beyond is at hand. The first steps binding the vast economic space are being constructed with a number of little-publicized rail links connecting China, Russia, Kazakhstan and parts of Western Europe. It is becoming clear to more people in Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Eurasia including China and Russia that their natural tendency to build these markets faces only one major obstacle: NATO and the US Pentagon’s Full Spectrum Dominance obsession.  Rail infrastructure is a major key to building vast new economic markets across Eurasia. China and Turkey are in discussions to build a new high-speed railway link across Turkey. If completed it would be the country's largest railway project ever, even including the pre-World War I Berlin-Baghdad Railway link. The project was perhaps the most important agenda item, far more so than Syria during talks in Beijing between Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the Chinese leadership in early April.