C
couchcommander
Guest
a_majoor said:
Indeed Mr. Majoor, especially with the historical context.
A New Look At The Afghan-Pakistan Problem
- Thread starter tomahawk6
- Start date
Indeed Mr. Majoor, especially with the historical context.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,988
- Points
- 1,160
Malaysia was mainly agrarian with some tin and rubber at the end of WWII, mind you it escaped the full wrath of the war. It was in the 60's their PM decided that Malaysia was to be an industrial country and redirected all effort to do so.
Korea was quite worn out from war, occupation, the US played a big part in the rebuilding of SK, helped by a semi-stable government system. Thanks to the French, Vietnam was to mucked up to save, all of the capable moderates had been killed off or exiled.
Korea was quite worn out from war, occupation, the US played a big part in the rebuilding of SK, helped by a semi-stable government system. Thanks to the French, Vietnam was to mucked up to save, all of the capable moderates had been killed off or exiled.
- Reaction score
- 8,324
- Points
- 1,160
Interestingly, with respect to Malaysia and Vietnam, not to mention Indonesia and Singapore, ethnic Chinese have been heavily engaged in the local economy. This has not always been well received by the local indigenous population.
While Admirals and Emperors may have ignored the rest of the world the same can't be said of all Chinese.
Another question to ask is how much of China's foreign involvement is centrally organized. Or perhaps it is just centrally encouraged? Or maybe it is private enterprise on the part of the same companies that co-opted prisons as toy factories.
Remember that in addition to the Foreign and Colonial Offices Britain had The East India Company as well as that chap Jamieson in Rhodesia. They also had the Bank of England.
Regardless, while China may not be planning on direct military action any time soon, and it is indeed difficult to discern intentions, it does appear as if China is heavily engaged in a lot of "high risk ventures" in a lot of unstable parts of the world. Maybe they are just looking to take advantage of opportunities. Maybe all they are looking for is an opportunity to catch up to the west commercially. If they do that then other opportunities may open up.
It may be that their involvement is as innocent as GM's involvement in Ford's market place.
While Admirals and Emperors may have ignored the rest of the world the same can't be said of all Chinese.
Another question to ask is how much of China's foreign involvement is centrally organized. Or perhaps it is just centrally encouraged? Or maybe it is private enterprise on the part of the same companies that co-opted prisons as toy factories.
Remember that in addition to the Foreign and Colonial Offices Britain had The East India Company as well as that chap Jamieson in Rhodesia. They also had the Bank of England.
Regardless, while China may not be planning on direct military action any time soon, and it is indeed difficult to discern intentions, it does appear as if China is heavily engaged in a lot of "high risk ventures" in a lot of unstable parts of the world. Maybe they are just looking to take advantage of opportunities. Maybe all they are looking for is an opportunity to catch up to the west commercially. If they do that then other opportunities may open up.
It may be that their involvement is as innocent as GM's involvement in Ford's market place.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,988
- Points
- 1,160
Taking the bus from Thailand back to Malaysia in Nov 2001, I remember talking to a malay/Chinese businessman. He said that after the US invades Afghanistan he is going to Kabul to start a Chinese Restaurant, I said that I did not realize there were Chinese in Afghanistan.
He replied, there isn’t, but there will be. The Chinese are always looking for the next opportunity.
Although Malaysia is considering one of the most successful “Islamic” states, they real economic power rests with the Chinese and the Indians. The Malay government know that they are the golden goose and won’t rock the boat to much.
He replied, there isn’t, but there will be. The Chinese are always looking for the next opportunity.
Although Malaysia is considering one of the most successful “Islamic” states, they real economic power rests with the Chinese and the Indians. The Malay government know that they are the golden goose and won’t rock the boat to much.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,988
- Points
- 1,160
geo said:
The Malays like the good life and it's only in the last 20 years that radical Islam has had any impact. Yet for the most part the Malays aren't really that interested in a Jihad lifestyle. Plus their leaders take a more Asian long tern approach to government then the nutbars in Africa.
- Reaction score
- 8,324
- Points
- 1,160
a_majoor said:
From meself:
Thinking this one through a bit more.
The secret to the British Empire was free enterprise and the Bank of England backed by the Royal Navy.
The secret to American Hegemony (copyright the Communist Party of China) is free enterprise and the Treasury Board backed by the US Navy and Air Force.
The secret to Chinese influence in foreign countries has been the entrepreneurs of the Chinese diaspora, some of which are subject to direction from the homeland.
The secret to China's remarkable growth has been the encouragement of free enterprise amongst farmers, workers and Generals.
Unlike the Soviet Union (or Mao's China) China is creating banks. A lot of them. And encouraging foreign investment in China as well as having China invest overseas.
Unlike Western Banks which invest in stability Chinese Banks appear to be willing to accept higher risk investments in unstable environments. (And in environments that Western Governments are not allowed to invest in because of squeamish populations).
This suggests that instability breeds more investment opportunities for China, with higher rates of return on successful ventures, while simultaneously discouraging competition. The effect is to make the West poorer and tied to a diminishing pool of opportunities while China becomes richer with an expanding pool of opportunities. Eventually China could/will overtake the west but as a Beijing directed free-market economy.
The old Soviet Union was widely believed to have perfected the ability to destabilize regimes for political ends.
Perhaps China is employing similar tactics for commercial ends.
- Reaction score
- 8,324
- Points
- 1,160
Following on from the previous thought -
Is the counter to be found in Pearson's 0.7% of GDP for foreign aid? However instead of direct aid is it better to use it as a leverage fund to underwrite conventional loans to troubled areas by commercial banks?
That together with destabilizing the area around China itself making it a less attractive venue for foreign investment. As it stands now we are loaning China money at 5 cents on the dollar. They could comfortably rent out our money to their clients at 15 cents on the dollar and cover a lot of risk. An alternative to Lenin's dictum that the capitalist will cheerfully sell you the rope by which you can hang him.
Is the counter to be found in Pearson's 0.7% of GDP for foreign aid? However instead of direct aid is it better to use it as a leverage fund to underwrite conventional loans to troubled areas by commercial banks?
That together with destabilizing the area around China itself making it a less attractive venue for foreign investment. As it stands now we are loaning China money at 5 cents on the dollar. They could comfortably rent out our money to their clients at 15 cents on the dollar and cover a lot of risk. An alternative to Lenin's dictum that the capitalist will cheerfully sell you the rope by which you can hang him.
- Reaction score
- 8,324
- Points
- 1,160
OK
To put this back on track.....
This link takes you to a detailed UN Security assessment map of Afghanistan.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=RNWE,RNWE:2004-35,RNWE:en&q=afghanistan+UN+security+accessibility+map
One of the things that has been bothering me about the commentary about the Taliban being supported out of Pakistan and yet the places that the Canadians, Brits and Dutch are being hit from, by and large, only seem to have open desert between them and the Pakistan/Baluchistan border in the south. I would have thought that this would have been relatively easy to monitor for movement with technology.
By contrast the northern approaches are via mountain valleys.
Looking at the UN map it shows three patches/fingers of low security red. The northern one is in southern Daikundi and Northern Uruzgan where the Aussies had their discussions with the Taliban.
The middle one runs through NW Zabul, Northern Kandahar and Northern Helmand. These are the areas where the Canadians, Brits and Dutch, as well as the Americans, have been engaged. The SE one is in Southern Ghazni and Southern Paktika. With the exception of the SE one none of the areas are contiguous with Pakistan and all of them are North of Quetta.
The one thing they all do seem to share is a common geographic origin, following up the valleys, in the high security green area of Ghazni.
I went to school in Guelph, Ontario many years ago. One of the rumours of the day was that Guelph had a very low crime rate because it was supposedly a retirement home for the Mafia - nice country setting close to Toronto and Hamilton. Whether the rumour was true or not.... who knows.
It has also been speculated that one of the reasons Canada has not been hit by the Islamists is less to do with the efficacy of our security services than it is due to the fact that Canada as a hotel/aircraft carrier with proximity to the US is more valuable placid than aroused. Again whether true or not.....who knows.
However both these examples contain this germ of logic - you don't s**t on your own front doorstep.
Looking at that UN map with the geography involved: is it reasonable to suggest that the Green area of Ghazni might actually harbour the FUP for operations in the South, and perhaps more broadly?
It is accessible to Kabul on the ring road as well as the South via both the road and the mountain valleys. Eastern Ghazni is also closer to the Waziristans in Pakistan's tribal areas and there seems to be a low security red corridor to there that reaches from Ghazni to Waziristan. The corridor follows valleys and passes and straddles the ring road at a low security zone.
I am not suggesting that Quetta and the southern desert border aren't important but Ghazni and the northern mountain valleys look to be and interesting avenue as well.
Ghazni is also notable as according to Tomahawk6's map at the beginning of this thread it is in the heartland of the Pashtun area while the southern deserts are Baluchi country. Quetta, nominally the capital of Baluchistan is actually on the border of Baluchi and Pashtun areas.
To put this back on track.....
This link takes you to a detailed UN Security assessment map of Afghanistan.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=RNWE,RNWE:2004-35,RNWE:en&q=afghanistan+UN+security+accessibility+map
One of the things that has been bothering me about the commentary about the Taliban being supported out of Pakistan and yet the places that the Canadians, Brits and Dutch are being hit from, by and large, only seem to have open desert between them and the Pakistan/Baluchistan border in the south. I would have thought that this would have been relatively easy to monitor for movement with technology.
By contrast the northern approaches are via mountain valleys.
Looking at the UN map it shows three patches/fingers of low security red. The northern one is in southern Daikundi and Northern Uruzgan where the Aussies had their discussions with the Taliban.
The middle one runs through NW Zabul, Northern Kandahar and Northern Helmand. These are the areas where the Canadians, Brits and Dutch, as well as the Americans, have been engaged. The SE one is in Southern Ghazni and Southern Paktika. With the exception of the SE one none of the areas are contiguous with Pakistan and all of them are North of Quetta.
The one thing they all do seem to share is a common geographic origin, following up the valleys, in the high security green area of Ghazni.
I went to school in Guelph, Ontario many years ago. One of the rumours of the day was that Guelph had a very low crime rate because it was supposedly a retirement home for the Mafia - nice country setting close to Toronto and Hamilton. Whether the rumour was true or not.... who knows.
It has also been speculated that one of the reasons Canada has not been hit by the Islamists is less to do with the efficacy of our security services than it is due to the fact that Canada as a hotel/aircraft carrier with proximity to the US is more valuable placid than aroused. Again whether true or not.....who knows.
However both these examples contain this germ of logic - you don't s**t on your own front doorstep.
Looking at that UN map with the geography involved: is it reasonable to suggest that the Green area of Ghazni might actually harbour the FUP for operations in the South, and perhaps more broadly?
It is accessible to Kabul on the ring road as well as the South via both the road and the mountain valleys. Eastern Ghazni is also closer to the Waziristans in Pakistan's tribal areas and there seems to be a low security red corridor to there that reaches from Ghazni to Waziristan. The corridor follows valleys and passes and straddles the ring road at a low security zone.
I am not suggesting that Quetta and the southern desert border aren't important but Ghazni and the northern mountain valleys look to be and interesting avenue as well.
Ghazni is also notable as according to Tomahawk6's map at the beginning of this thread it is in the heartland of the Pashtun area while the southern deserts are Baluchi country. Quetta, nominally the capital of Baluchistan is actually on the border of Baluchi and Pashtun areas.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,988
- Points
- 1,160
It's a good question, and you are right people don't normally cause a stir in their own backyard. Just like the best spies are the ones you never suspect.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Well Pakistan is now in the fight whether they like it or not. Unfortunately the recent events have sparked huge protests and will likely cause further problems with radicals for them and NATO. Perhaps NATO will be expanding into Pakistan in the not too distant future. See link below.
http://www.recorder.ca/cp/World/061031/w103155A.html
- Reaction score
- 6,539
- Points
- 1,360
http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-11-08T061818Z_01_ISL182298_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-PAKISTAN-BLAST-COL.XML
Suicide bomber kills 35 soldiers in Pakistan
Wed Nov 8, 2006 1:18 AM EST
ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - A suicide bomber killed 35 Pakistani soldiers at an army training ground in a northwestern town on Wednesday, the Pakistani military said.
"It was a suicide attack. The bomber wrapped a chadar (cloak) around his body and came running into the training area and exploded himself where recruits had gathered for training," a military official said.
The military earlier said up to 15 soldiers had been killed.
Suicide bomber kills 35 soldiers in Pakistan
Wed Nov 8, 2006 1:18 AM EST
ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - A suicide bomber killed 35 Pakistani soldiers at an army training ground in a northwestern town on Wednesday, the Pakistani military said.
"It was a suicide attack. The bomber wrapped a chadar (cloak) around his body and came running into the training area and exploded himself where recruits had gathered for training," a military official said.
The military earlier said up to 15 soldiers had been killed.
