Moscow's pound of flesh for allowing base & supplies to Afghanistan

Posted on 04 February 2009.

Public opinion in Pakistan wants to halt all supply routes through Pakistan to Afghanistan. The Shylocks of the Kremlin are exacting their pound of flesh for allowing the US supply chain through the arduous roads of the Central Asian Republics as well as Russian territory.

the Obama administration might have to consider alternative routes through Russia or other parts of the former Soviet Union. But the Russians were unhappy about the Bush administration’s willingness to include Ukraine and Georgia in NATO, and they will probably not want to help with American supply lines unless Mr. Obama changes that position.

In addition to our guaranteeing that NATO will not expand further, the Russians seem to want the United States to promise that NATO forces will not be based in the Baltic countries, and that the United States will not try to dominate Central Asia. In other words, Russia wants the United States to pledge that it will respect the Russian sphere of influence in the former Soviet Union. They will probably want this guarantee to be very public, as a signal to the region — and the Europeans — of Russian dominance. This is one guarantee that Mr. Obama will not want to give.

There is also no certainty that countries in the Russian sphere of influence, like Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, would agree to let the United States use these routes without Russian permission. The New York Times. Afghan Supplies, Russian Demands. By GEORGE FRIEDMAN, Published: February 3, 2009

K” is silent in Hoolbrooke’s assignment

Pakistan to Holbrooke: Here’s a list

The Russians also have the Europeans by the proverbial “Cahunas”.

Here is where Mr. Obama could use some European help. Unfortunately, that’s not likely to come soon. Many Europeans, particularly Germans, rely on Russia’s natural gas. In January, the Russians cut natural gas shipments to Ukraine. As much of the Russian natural gas that goes to Europe runs through Ukraine, the cutoff affected European supplies — in the middle of winter. Europeans can’t really afford to irritate the Russians, and it’s hard to imagine that the Germans will confront them over supply routes to Afghanistan. Pakistan, unfortunately, is hardly a reliable partner either.

So this isn’t as simple as finding another road to Kabul. There is really one that works. The other ones runs thorough an antagonistic Iran and an increasingly belligerent Pakistan. To make matters worse, the closure of the American base in Manas Kyrgistan is a major blow to the Supply Chain to Kabul.

Manas is home to a “24-hour operation” supporting the Afghanistan war, said Vikram Singh, a South Asia expert at the Center for a New American Security who served in the Pentagon during the Bush administration, hosting fuel tankers, cargo and attack aircraft and medical evacuation resources, among other materiel. “This is not a small operation,” he said, adding that the loss of Manas could lead to a reduction in the tempo of military operations. “There’s no way to quantify it, but if you’re a commander on the ground, you’ve got to think that there are several things that aren’t available to you.”

Anthony Bowyer, director of the Central Asia program at the International Foundation for Electoral Systems, a nongovernmental organization focusing on strengthening democratic governance, called the possible loss of the base a “diplomatic victory” for the Russians. “There was tremendous political pressure on President Bakiyev by the Russian Federation” to kick the United States out of Manas, as the Russians are wary of long-term U.S. intentions to host large numbers of NATO troops near its southern border. U.S. Could Lose Major Hub for War Efforts By Spencer Ackerman 2/3/09 5:59 PM. The U.S. might lose access to a crucial hub for supporting the war in Afghanistan.

How long will Americans tolerate another War President? The Obama Administration is caught between a rock and a hard place. How to manage a surge in troops while fending off an impending “insurgent” attack on Kabul.

So how can Mr. Obama reconcile the two goals of strengthening the American presence in Afghanistan while curbing Russian expansionism? The answer is to rely less on troops, and more on covert operations like the C.I.A. Covert operators are far more useful for the actual war that we are fighting (and they can carry their supplies on their backs). The primary American interest in Afghanistan, after all, is preventing terrorist groups from using it as a base for training and planning major attacks. Increasing the number of conventional troops will not help with this mission.

What we need in Afghanistan is intelligence, and special operations forces and air power that can take advantage of that intelligence. Fighting terrorists requires identifying and destroying small, dispersed targets. We would need far fewer forces for such a mission than the number that are now deployed. They would make us much less dependent on supply deliveries, which would help solve our Russian problem.

Stratfor analysts who got us in this pickle in the first place are now recommending a return to covert operations in Afghanistan.

Winding down the conventional war while increasing the covert one will demand a cultural change in Washington. The Obama administration seems to prefer the conventional route of putting more troops on the ground. That would be a feasible strategy if supply lines to Afghanistan were secure. The loss of that bridge yesterday demonstrates very clearly that they are not. George Friedman is the chief executive of Stratfor, a global intelligence company, and the author of “The Next 100 Years.” Alex Nabaum. Afghan Supplies, Russian Demands, By GEORGE FRIEDMAN Published: February 3, 2009, Washington

Obama to unveil new policy: Marshal Plan & end to bombing raids in Pakistan —————————
Peek into Obama’s brains: Bruce Reidel on Pakistan ————————–
Growing consensus in the Obama team: Much of Pakistan’s problems originate in Afghanistan ————————–
Obama advisor Weinbaum predicts total Afghan policy review: Sees focus on talks & Reconciliation —————————-
Afghanistan: Gen. Petraeus’ Pakistani advisers: Indians jittery ——————————
Obama adviser Weinbaum gives deep insights into new Afghan policy