Such sensitivities are misplaced. They are based on a complete misperception, if not distortion, of what we are doing in Afghanistan.

Foreign Minister Dr Rangin Dadfar Spanta told me that when in Pakistan a few months ago, he was asked at a press conference whether there were 17 Indian consulates in Afghanistan and what the Indians were doing in these consulates.

We have only four consulates in Afghanistan, exactly the same number we had earlier. We have them in Herat, Mazar-e-Sharief, Jalalabad and Kandahar, the major cultural and commercial centres in the west, north, east and south of Afghanistan.

Some critics go so far in saying that Afghanistan has become a battlefield between India and Pakistan which is seeking strategic depth there. What will be your response to that?

It is a mistaken notion to imagine that in this day and age you can have or need strategic depth in another country to defend yourself. As a Nuclear-Weapons State, Pakistan doesn't need it.

India is certainly not in Afghanistan as a counter-weight to Pakistan. That's not our objective.

We are in Afghanistan to build a stable and prosperous country. We are here to ensure that the Afghan people manage their own destiny. We are trying to build the capacity of the Afghan government to govern themselves. We want a democratic and pluralistic Afghanistan.

If you persist in asking me about Pakistan's preoccupation about why India is in Afghanistan, you had better pose this question to Pakistani interlocutors. I am not able to answer it because it simply is irrational.

An MP had asked in Parliament that India spends something like $1.2 billon plus in Afghanistan. India itself is a poor country. Is it worth it? Is any kind of strategy being served?

Our strategic interest is very well served if there is peace and stability in Afghanistan. If Afghanistan has a functional government, democracy and pluralism, that return itself is good for India. Moreover, our assistance is staggered.

So far, we have spent just over half of the targeted assistance envelope. The remaining is in the pipeline. Our assistance seems actually larger than it is because of the optimal way in which we stretch our funds.

Talking of the bigger picture, I am asking this question again. Do you think whatever India is doing in Kabul is helping regional stability in view of Pakistan's consistent objections to it?

You know well, Indian leaders led by Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh have a vision of inter-linked destinies in South Asia. The sooner governments of the region realise it, the better it will be for people of South Asia. Afghanistan is very much part of South Asia as it has become the newest member of SAARC.

In the last five years, Indo-US relations have grown manifold. In Afghanistan the US troops are right there. How is our alliance reflecting this in Afghanistan? What is the level of our coordination with the US there?

You know it is not just American troops that are in Afghanistan. US troops are part of a multi-national International Security Assistance Force. The international military presence in Afghanistan is not a bilateral arrangement between these countries and the Afghan government.

In considering the US presence, or the ISAF's presence, people forget that these are mandated by the UN Security Council. Every year this mandate is reviewed and renewed. There is a parallel resolution for the UN presence in Afghanistan represented by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Afghanistan and headed by Kai Eide, a special representative of the UN secretary general. That also is based on a UN resolution.

The international community as a whole has mandated that international military forces are needed to stabilise Afghanistan. Our interaction with the US is excellent, as it is with the Afghan government, SRSG and UNAMA.

It is led by America and it is their major engagement. The UK is seemingly tired and other Western countries are reluctant to increase troops. After George W Bush one knows President Obama comes with a different vision for Afghanistan. How do you view the changing scene of the US's Afghan diplomacy?

Well, increasing attention to Afghanistan is welcome. The country has continued to suffer due to both a force and resource deficit. A resurgent Taliban has disrupted progress. The US administration has said it does not want to see a situation where Afghanistan and the contiguous areas of Pakistan continue to provide safe havens for Al Qaeda and the Taliban. This applies both to Afghanistan and Pakistan, as also to the rest of world, including India.

The situation in Afghanistan cannot be resolved on its own: It is intrinsically linked to Pakistan. There is a certain new determination to address the problem in an unified way. That itself is a positive development. The US administration is undertaking a review of its strategic options in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Responsive action resulting from the review will be even more welcome.

Image: Armed security men oversee work at the Zaranj-Dalran highway, built by India.

Also see: The Dangers in Afghanistan

Back

|

Next