Islamic Republic of Afghanistan : News & Discussions

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,554
8,791
India
I am not sure why Indians are getting distracted by all the noise from Afghanistan. The core problem, Taliban, is a problem with its source and roots in Pakistan. If India had the capability & most importantly the political will, we wouldn't have dragged on with the Kashmir issue, again the source of the problem is Pakistan.

The core problem is, irrespective of who is in power, they want India to be perceived as a non-aggressive nation & play votebank politics over issues of national security.
Ex. Drone attack on our airbase and what did we do? Coz there is no perceivable gain from the political stand point - no elections in the foreseeable future where this can be used to gain a political mileage.

We, are inherently weak and that is a fact. We are all very quick to jump off and strangulate Neheru for all our problems, but current GoI headed by a so called " brave " PM is screwing things equally bad.

Therefore, if Kashmir and Afghanistan issue is to be sorted, it has to be through demolition of Pak-Isi-Taliban nexus - no other damn way to get this done.

And we won't do sh*t about it!

As a nuclear power, Pakistan's gonna be a difficult nut to crack. So we have to find ways to distribute their attention to other places. Hence the need to keep the Afghan situation on the boil for as long as possible.
 

Defc0n

Well-Known member
Sep 8, 2019
675
721
India
As a nuclear power, Pakistan's gonna be a difficult nut to crack. So we have to find ways to distribute their attention to other places. Hence the need to keep the Afghan situation on the boil for as long as possible.
Do you honestly feel Pakistan is capable of nuking India? There was a time, when Pak used to use the 'N' word for every thing, almost every day. Then happened the two strikes inside Pak - have not heard them saying it since. Pak knows that going down the N road leads to total annihilation of Pak. I am pretty sure they don't want to end up in a heap of carbon.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: lcafanboy and AbRaj

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
14,520
10,493
Mumbai

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,554
8,791
India
Do you honestly feel Pakistan is capable of nuking India? There was a time, when Pak used to use the 'N' word for every thing, almost every day. Then happened the two strikes inside Pak - have not heard them saying it since. Pak knows that going down the N road leads to total annihilation of Pak. I am pretty sure they don't want to end up in a heap of carbon.

The Pakistani nuclear threats stopped after the US State Department told them to shut up about it, without mincing words. It had nothing to do with our attacks.

As long as the US protects Pakistan, there's nothing we can do to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paro

Defc0n

Well-Known member
Sep 8, 2019
675
721
India
The Pakistani nuclear threats stopped after the US State Department told them to shut up about it, without mincing words. It had nothing to do with our attacks.

As long as the US protects Pakistan, there's nothing we can do to them.

And why exactly is US shielding Pak? I agree that US has an influence on India - was quite evident after India bombed Balakote.
But now, it doesn't make sense for US to shield Pak. Moreover, why do we have to take permission from US before screwing Pak? This is where our leadership should show some spine and take independent decisions. US has no say about how we tackle our national security matters.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
14,520
10,493
Mumbai




THREAD!!

A very interesting thread on the Taliban it's ideology, hierarchy, various factions , differences between them, their strengths, aims, activities, finances etc.


@Falcon ; @Milspec ; @Ginvincible
Incidentally there's chatter among a couple of handles I follow including this one here, Christine Fair & another handle by the name of durian ( SS of his handle id enclosed. It's a protected handle which I'd strongly recommend that those interested
follow, for he provides detailed little known information in the public domain & analysis of it along with the inner dynamics of conflicts in our neighborhood namely Afghanistan, the Chittagong Hill Tracts in BD & the Western Papua / Irian Jaya problem in Indonesia - the latter 2 LIC are practically unknown in the larger world or even in it's immediate neighborhood) which suggest that the recent taking of the Badakshan province in the extreme SE of Afghanistan - something not completely achieved by the Taliban even during their last stint in Afghanistan was perhaps deliberate on account of weak defence of it by the ANA.

Christine Fair goes on to say that the US deliberately wants The present GoA to collapse for reasons not yet clear to her - something that the PA would delight in but not India or even Iran or Russia for that matter.

Incidentally this province is the only border which Afghanistan shares with China bordering it in Xinjiang on the latter's side & there in lies the rub.

Apparently ETIM which has been pretty active with the ISIS in Syria, with Turkey's blessings having had their base there have now moved into the Badakshan province practically lock stock & barrel . Another massive development little reported by the MSM is that the State Department has recently dropped ETIM's name from their list of proscribed organizations which means they're legally permitted to canvas for donations & receive funds.

You can connect the dots but one thing's for sure there are wheels within wheels within wheels in operation in Afghanistan. Apart from a massive & bloody civil war which is inevitable I'm not sure how all this is going to end except that it'd end badly not just for Afghanistan ( obviously) but for the entire immediate & extended neighborhood.

IMG_20210724_172819.jpg
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,554
8,791
India
And why exactly is US shielding Pak? I agree that US has an influence on India - was quite evident after India bombed Balakote.
But now, it doesn't make sense for US to shield Pak. Moreover, why do we have to take permission from US before screwing Pak? This is where our leadership should show some spine and take independent decisions. US has no say about how we tackle our national security matters.

The US will keep shielding Pak from India for time immemorial, until such time the US can no longer influence India in any way.

The reason is as simple as Pakistan's proximity to Central Asia and Iran. The US making enemies out of Pak would mean they will effectively get cut off from Central Asia permanently. Furthermore, Pakistan is naturally needed as a counterweight to India, it's not in their interests to see India and Pak resolving their dispute, amicably or otherwise. Has been the crux of the matter since the 60s, which is also why the US decided to get closer to Pakistan than India.

Spine and independent actions are dependent on to what extent the US will go to protect Pakistan. It's easy enough for the US to cut India off from Swift and international finance overnight. That alone is enough for us to change our minds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

Saaho

Senior member
Dec 27, 2019
1,888
1,375
Earth
As a nuclear power, Pakistan's gonna be a difficult nut to crack. So we have to find ways to distribute their attention to other places. Hence the need to keep the Afghan situation on the boil for as long as possible.
Let me put it in this way, even if Pakistan did not have nuclear weapons (which it did not till late 80s. We had a very rudimentry bomb in 80s, still deliverable by air.) We would not be able to do anything against Pakistan. Why? Because there is absolute lack of political will in India.
The US will keep shielding Pak from India for time immemorial, until such time the US can no longer influence India in any way.
First its US shielding, then it is China shielding. In future it will be Martians shielding Pakistan. Indian way of war and diplomacy is strange. And by strange I mean pathetic.
 

jetray

Well-Known member
Mar 15, 2018
1,458
945
India
The US will keep shielding Pak from India for time immemorial, until such time the US can no longer influence India in any way.

The reason is as simple as Pakistan's proximity to Central Asia and Iran. The US making enemies out of Pak would mean they will effectively get cut off from Central Asia permanently. Furthermore, Pakistan is naturally needed as a counterweight to India, it's not in their interests to see India and Pak resolving their dispute, amicably or otherwise. Has been the crux of the matter since the 60s, which is also why the US decided to get closer to Pakistan than India.

Spine and independent actions are dependent on to what extent the US will go to protect Pakistan. It's easy enough for the US to cut India off from Swift and international finance overnight. That alone is enough for us to change our minds.
central asia or artic it makes no difference. US will want to keep every power under check, even minions who are now where on political map like cuba or sierra lone. Its just a matter of maintaining its hold over the world to its dictates and preserving the status quo.

Its just we need to fight for our interests to hell & back , instead of getting bogged down. Once US sees that it will only get -ve returns for opposing India then only they will back off.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,554
8,791
India
central asia or artic it makes no difference. US will want to keep every power under check, even minions who are now where on political map like cuba or sierra lone. Its just a matter of maintaining its hold over the world to its dictates and preserving the status quo.

Its just we need to fight for our interests to hell & back , instead of getting bogged down. Once US sees that it will only get -ve returns for opposing India then only they will back off.

Right now we are scratching each other's backs when it comes to China, but it's still in America's favour, where we are dependent on them. And we do not see eye to eye when it comes to other areas like the Middle East and Central Asia.

Plus, since we don't plan on starting a war anytime soon, we need the American hold over Pakistan, like the FATF greylist, preventing direct Chinese military aid etc. So we are going to have to deal with Pakistan through America for the time being.

Basically with both China and Pakistan, in relation to India, the Americans are holding all the cards. If we are to gain cards of our own, we need to be able to contribute as well, which we cannot as of today, we are neither economically strong nor militarily.
 

Ginvincible

Well-Known member
Dec 5, 2017
446
472
Ohio
I think the peace deal between the




THREAD!!

A very interesting thread on the Taliban it's ideology, hierarchy, various factions , differences between them, their strengths, aims, activities, finances etc.


@Falcon ; @Milspec ; @Ginvincible

I get that the Taliban structure isn't centralized and that there are competing factions within the greater Taliban umbrella, but are the gulfs between factions so large that an outside power could exploit them?

By the way, I don't think the US strategy in pulling out of Afghanistan is some grand plan to undermine China/Russia/Iran. It's just war weariness and understanding that the war is unwinnable. The Taliban will probably take control and ally with Pakistan to have some limited economic development. They'll be a reliable voice for all the Islamist causes but I have no idea if they will become another safe haven for terror again or if they will have learned their lesson and stick to their own internal affairs.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
14,520
10,493
Mumbai
I think the peace deal between the


I get that the Taliban structure isn't centralized and that there are competing factions within the greater Taliban umbrella, but are the gulfs between factions so large that an outside power could exploit them?
The TTP , AQ cadres & ISIS of Khorasan come from the same stock & share the same ideology as the Taliban. Then there's the ETIM & other fellow travellers too. Besides neither the Taliban nor the present government of Afghanistan have explicitly recognised the Durand line . This is where those ideological differences could become chasms.

By the way, I don't think the US strategy in pulling out of Afghanistan is some grand plan to undermine China/Russia/Iran. It's just war weariness and understanding that the war is unwinnable.
Probably . But in the last few years US participation in operations had come down markedly. In any case compared to the surge during the Obama administration the present US presence before the Biden administration set deadline was announced was almost token.

I suspect the converging of interests of a motley group of nations mostly United by their antagonism of the US like Iran Russia & China apart from Pakistan in seeing the US out played more of a role than the reasons you've given though that obviously was also a consideration.


The Taliban will probably take control and ally with Pakistan to have some limited economic development. I have no idea if they will become another safe haven for terror again or if they will have learned their lesson and stick to their own internal affairs.
I also suspect the old plan of seeing Afghanistan divided into 2 halfs with the southern being Pashtun dominated ruled by Taliban Deobandi ideology & the northern half comprising of non Pashtun ethnicities comes into play once more. Naturally, all of this depends on how the situation pans out in the next few months .

As regards if the Taliban will continue to offer sanctuary to terror groups , pls refer to #386 .

If possible , try to follow that handle Durian ( assuming you're on Twitter ) . He's posted a wealth of information on how Turkey has facilitated the movement of some dozens of ETIM fighters from Syria into Badakshan rumoured to be in the hundreds but could go up into the thousands if the full complement of ETIM from Syria is deployed here .





Incidentally the present Afghan crisis also began with a communist country invading Afghanistan who feared the internal situation there in the late 1970's increasingly resembled a quasi civil war between communists & their allies in the government vs the Islamists would spill over into their own territory in Central Asia namely the sthans. They then decided to kill 2 birds with one stone & in order to prop up their communist allies , do away with the troublesome government of the day & tackle the Islamists once & for all , against their own better judgement they invaded Afghanistan. The rest is history.

It's Deja Vu all over again .

It's never over till it's over .

In theory there's no difference between theory & practice . In practice , it's different.

If these oxymoronic paradoxes seem familiar to you , so will Afghanistan.
 

Ginvincible

Well-Known member
Dec 5, 2017
446
472
Ohio
The TTP , AQ cadres & ISIS of Khorasan come from the same stock & share the same ideology as the Taliban. Then there's the ETIM & other fellow travellers too. Besides neither the Taliban nor the present government of Afghanistan have explicitly recognised the Durand line . This is where those ideological differences could become chasms.


Probably . But in the last few years US participation in operations had come down markedly. In any case compared to the surge during the Obama administration the present US presence before the Biden administration set deadline was announced was almost token.

I suspect the converging of interests of a motley group of nations mostly United by their antagonism of the US like Iran Russia & China apart from Pakistan in seeing the US out played more of a role than the reasons you've given though that obviously was also a consideration.



I also suspect the old plan of seeing Afghanistan divided into 2 halfs with the southern being Pashtun dominated ruled by Taliban Deobandi ideology & the northern half comprising of non Pashtun ethnicities comes into play once more. Naturally, all of this depends on how the situation pans out in the next few months .

As regards if the Taliban will continue to offer sanctuary to terror groups , pls refer to #386 .

If possible , try to follow that handle Durian ( assuming you're on Twitter ) . He's posted a wealth of information on how Turkey has facilitated the movement of some dozens of ETIM fighters from Syria into Badakshan rumoured to be in the hundreds but could go up into the thousands if the full complement of ETIM from Syria is deployed here .





Incidentally the present Afghan crisis also began with a communist country invading Afghanistan who feared the internal situation there in the late 1970's increasingly resembled a quasi civil war between communists & their allies in the government vs the Islamists would spill over into their own territory in Central Asia namely the sthans. They then decided to kill 2 birds with one stone & in order to prop up their communist allies , do away with the troublesome government of the day & tackle the Islamists once & for all , against their own better judgement they invaded Afghanistan. The rest is history.

It's Deja Vu all over again .

It's never over till it's over .

In theory there's no difference between theory & practice . In practice , it's different.

If these oxymoronic paradoxes seem familiar to you , so will Afghanistan.

Bill Hader Popcorn GIF by Saturday Night Live

My reaction if Turkey really does sponsor an islamist insurrection in Xinjiang through Afghanistan (ignoring the brutality and civilian casualties of course).

I personally think the Chinese won't invade or occupy Afghanistan in any capacity though. They will throw fat stacks of cash at whatever warlord/ruling party exists in the region and ensure peace through tribute. If push comes to shove, maybe they'll occupy Bagram Airfield and conduct air strikes against training camps with the blessing of the Taliban à la the US conducting strikes against islamists in Pakistan with the blessing of the Pakistani government.

As much as foreign support of the Taliban played a factor I think the war in Afghanistan is just unwinnable due to it's society. I recall that the average Taliban "commander" was between the ages of 16-20, US/western ideals made little to no headway in tribal Afghanistan.

I don't use twitter but I will keep an eye on the account.
 

jetray

Well-Known member
Mar 15, 2018
1,458
945
India
Right now we are scratching each other's backs when it comes to China, but it's still in America's favour, where we are dependent on them. And we do not see eye to eye when it comes to other areas like the Middle East and Central Asia.

Plus, since we don't plan on starting a war anytime soon, we need the American hold over Pakistan, like the FATF greylist, preventing direct Chinese military aid etc. So we are going to have to deal with Pakistan through America for the time being.

Basically with both China and Pakistan, in relation to India, the Americans are holding all the cards. If we are to gain cards of our own, we need to be able to contribute as well, which we cannot as of today, we are neither economically strong nor militarily.
Thats what holds us back that we keep backing off thinking abt loss/profit, we will never get a opportune time for any thing. One who dares wins.
If you keep telling the enemy we have a lot to lose then they wont change. Only when you respond we are ready to take losses and give you the same damage then only they will back off.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
14,520
10,493
Mumbai
Bill Hader Popcorn GIF by Saturday Night Live

My reaction if Turkey really does sponsor an islamist insurrection in Xinjiang through Afghanistan (ignoring the brutality and civilian casualties of course).
On it's own Turdkey or Turdogan can't even be expected to pee inside Syria or Afghanistan without US permission. This is all happening at the behest of the US. That's what I meant by wheels within wheels within wheels . You've heard of Naya Paxtan . Welcome to Naya Afghanistan .

I suspect Pakistan too has reached some sort of an understanding with the US on this though what the exact contours of that agreement are remains unknown as of this point in time though I expect it won't be for too long before one figures it out .

Why do I say so ? The fall of Badakshan without much of a resistance wherein the last time the Taliban were in charge they weren't able to subjugate the whole province , the sudden emergence of large number of ETIM / TIP fighters there & the recent revocation of their names from the proscribed list of the US State Department are all too much of a coincidence if you think about it calmly.

Moreover with the recent downturn in the relationship between US & China coupled with aggressive moves all across by the latter in it's neighbourhood & it's persecution of the Uighurs , you could even say they brought it upon themselves.

The only casualties there would be the Pamiri Tajiks who're more Wakhi & other associated tribes who're of Ismaili Shia persuasion - anathema to the Deobandi Taliban who as of now seem to have fled across to Tajikistan .

I personally think the Chinese won't invade or occupy Afghanistan in any capacity though. They will throw fat stacks of cash at whatever warlord/ruling party exists in the region and ensure peace through tribute.
Too early to predict how things pan out . As to the Chinese throwing money , I doubt whether the ETIM / TIP can be bought out especially if their countrymen are facing an existential battle for their lives & way of life in their own homeland.

Further , I doubt whether the Taliban could be bought over on this point too or at least a section of them can't be bought over . This will be very interesting to observe as such incidents will be bring out the fault lines within the Taliban & between the Taliban & Pakistan.

If push comes to shove, maybe they'll occupy Bagram Airfield and conduct air strikes against training camps with the blessing of the Taliban à la the US conducting strikes against islamists in Pakistan with the blessing of the Pakistani government.
Nothing would please the US more than to see Chinese troops with their boots on the ground in Afghanistan. For that matter nothing would please the Indians Japanese South Koreans the ASEAN nations & especially Taiwan more .

As much as foreign support of the Taliban played a factor I think the war in Afghanistan is just unwinnable due to it's society. I recall that the average Taliban "commander" was between the ages of 16-20, US/western ideals made little to no headway in tribal Afghanistan.
That's not exactly true. Afghanistan has been conquered many a times in the past. In the past 1 millennium the Mongols & Timur have been it's most notable or notorious conquerors.

The formula is simple - exterminate on sight.

That's how Maharaja Ranjit Singh used to maintain his hold over the areas which now constitute KPK province in Pakistan. His governor Paolo Avitable used to hang any where between 20-30 people daily which he duly witnessed over breakfast if his own accounts & those of independent observers are to be believed.

It was only thru such genocidal measures that they achieved their task. It may sound extreme or may even constitute a taboo in civilised societies but that's how it is in Afghanistan.

The Taliban seem to be giving a good account of themselves following this timeless tradition of the Afghans which invited severe reprisals from other conquerors especially the Mongols & Timur.

I don't use twitter but I will keep an eye on the account.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,554
8,791
India
Thats what holds us back that we keep backing off thinking abt loss/profit, we will never get a opportune time for any thing. One who dares wins.
If you keep telling the enemy we have a lot to lose then they wont change. Only when you respond we are ready to take losses and give you the same damage then only they will back off.

But the fact is we are not interested in a Pyrrhic victory.

Punishing them every time there's an attack should be our minimum response. But we can't solve it this way, rather they will get more funding and recruits and further compound the problem. If we are to actually make a dent in terms of response, we need to do it in the same scale as what the Israelis do in Gaza and Lebanon. Basically we need to do a reverse Kargil. But Pakistan isn't soft enough for us to half-*censored* any operation at that level.

The core issue is we do not know how exactly the international community has successfully coerced India into not attacking Pakistan. For example, we even had to sell the story to the west that we only hit "non-military" targets in Balakot. There's something happening behind the scenes which very few people are aware of. In the 70s and 80s, we had built up our forces to the scale needed to finish off Pak once and for all, but we were prevented in doing so. Immediately after Op Brasstacks, our already falling defence budget fell drastically. GoI also kept the military underequipped since the 90s, to the point where the army was practically using obsolete systems in the 2000s. particularly during the 10 years of the UPA. Our focus then moved towards nuclear deterrence instead. It was only post-Modi that we are seeing some levels of military modernisation again, although its nowhere near the levels of the 70s and 80s.

This isn't as simple as lacking political will. We simply do not know the extent to which the west can go to in order to protect Pakistan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

jetray

Well-Known member
Mar 15, 2018
1,458
945
India
But the fact is we are not interested in a Pyrrhic victory.

Punishing them every time there's an attack should be our minimum response. But we can't solve it this way, rather they will get more funding and recruits and further compound the problem. If we are to actually make a dent in terms of response, we need to do it in the same scale as what the Israelis do in Gaza and Lebanon. Basically we need to do a reverse Kargil. But Pakistan isn't soft enough for us to half-*censored* any operation at that level.

The core issue is we do not know how exactly the international community has successfully coerced India into not attacking Pakistan. For example, we even had to sell the story to the west that we only hit "non-military" targets in Balakot. There's something happening behind the scenes which very few people are aware of. In the 70s and 80s, we had built up our forces to the scale needed to finish off Pak once and for all, but we were prevented in doing so. Immediately after Op Brasstacks, our already falling defence budget fell drastically. GoI also kept the military underequipped since the 90s, to the point where the army was practically using obsolete systems in the 2000s. particularly during the 10 years of the UPA. Our focus then moved towards nuclear deterrence instead. It was only post-Modi that we are seeing some levels of military modernisation again, although its nowhere near the levels of the 70s and 80s.

This isn't as simple as lacking political will. We simply do not know the extent to which the west can go to in order to protect Pakistan.
West will protect paksitan as long as they think they can get away with it. Good case is hong kong/tibet , western countries keep ranting on it all the time about it, but they are not prepared to take any risk on it. So is the case with taiwan.

For them it is not survival , if they see they are losing they will walk away. Why would they take risk when they dont gain any thing? Its only that India is just pussy footing all along , its more incompetency & lack of risk taking & strategic thinking.

Israel in spite of all the opposition from US or europe has gone after their enemies iran or in arab world. Thats the reason why many countries dont want to be on their wrong side. They have shown the intent with action , telling this is what the end result will be. Most countries wont invest time/effort when they see they will be on losing side. Israel has set that benchmark & expectation. While India on the other hand even minions like maldives or srilanka take us for granted as they know India will do nothing to put them in a spot.

Our foreign policy should be dictated by us not by others if we want it to beneficial. Bottom line India is incompetent, in coherent, risk averse and literally no strategic thinking beyond few months. There is a good reason why we keep fire fighting all the time.
 

Defc0n

Well-Known member
Sep 8, 2019
675
721
India
But the fact is we are not interested in a Pyrrhic victory.

Punishing them every time there's an attack should be our minimum response. But we can't solve it this way, rather they will get more funding and recruits and further compound the problem. If we are to actually make a dent in terms of response, we need to do it in the same scale as what the Israelis do in Gaza and Lebanon. Basically we need to do a reverse Kargil. But Pakistan isn't soft enough for us to half-*censored* any operation at that level.

The core issue is we do not know how exactly the international community has successfully coerced India into not attacking Pakistan. For example, we even had to sell the story to the west that we only hit "non-military" targets in Balakot. There's something happening behind the scenes which very few people are aware of. In the 70s and 80s, we had built up our forces to the scale needed to finish off Pak once and for all, but we were prevented in doing so. Immediately after Op Brasstacks, our already falling defence budget fell drastically. GoI also kept the military underequipped since the 90s, to the point where the army was practically using obsolete systems in the 2000s. particularly during the 10 years of the UPA. Our focus then moved towards nuclear deterrence instead. It was only post-Modi that we are seeing some levels of military modernisation again, although its nowhere near the levels of the 70s and 80s.

This isn't as simple as lacking political will. We simply do not know the extent to which the west can go to in order to protect Pakistan.

How about we find it out - India is more useful to US from business perspective to regional balance with China. Let's test if US is willing to give up the relation with India to save Pakistan! It might try, but if we are strong enough - we can get through it.
Remember, we didn't sign CTBT despite a sh*t load of pressure and sanctions from US. Not sure succumbing every time to US pressure is the way forward for a country of our size and stature.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,554
8,791
India
West will protect paksitan as long as they think they can get away with it. Good case is hong kong/tibet , western countries keep ranting on it all the time about it, but they are not prepared to take any risk on it. So is the case with taiwan.

For them it is not survival , if they see they are losing they will walk away. Why would they take risk when they dont gain any thing? Its only that India is just pussy footing all along , its more incompetency & lack of risk taking & strategic thinking.

Israel in spite of all the opposition from US or europe has gone after their enemies iran or in arab world. Thats the reason why many countries dont want to be on their wrong side. They have shown the intent with action , telling this is what the end result will be. Most countries wont invest time/effort when they see they will be on losing side. Israel has set that benchmark & expectation. While India on the other hand even minions like maldives or srilanka take us for granted as they know India will do nothing to put them in a spot.

Our foreign policy should be dictated by us not by others if we want it to beneficial. Bottom line India is incompetent, in coherent, risk averse and literally no strategic thinking beyond few months. There is a good reason why we keep fire fighting all the time.

India is too big with too much potential for others to allow India to do anything it wants.

No matter how aggressive Israel is, it lacks the potential to have twice the economy of the US and Europe combined no matter how many centuries pass. It's the same reason why even the Chinese have kept quiet for so long, more than 40 years already.

How about we find it out - India is more useful to US from business perspective to regional balance with China. Let's test if US is willing to give up the relation with India to save Pakistan! It might try, but if we are strong enough - we can get through it.
Remember, we didn't sign CTBT despite a sh*t load of pressure and sanctions from US. Not sure succumbing every time to US pressure is the way forward for a country of our size and stature.

The West has allowed us some transgressions in exchange for compliance in others.

From a business perspective, we only take from the US, give back nothing in return. Our domestic economy is not sufficient enough to absorb the impacts of any financial roadblocks the US can impose. In exchange they are also working to an extent enough to curtail our enemies without putting too much pressure on them, but enough that it barely meets our expectations. For example, sanctioning Pak for its nuclear weapons program, preventing the supply of BVR missiles for their F-16s, tightening access to capital etc. But they are also actively helping us against our other main enemy on a quid pro quo basis, but more in our favour than theirs.

Right now, our economy needs foreign capital. Until such time that we are no longer dependent on them, we can't do anything that breaks this balance we have with the West.

It's the same with the Chinese, akin to a bull in a china shop. The minute they could stand up on their own feet, they started dancing. We are still chewing the cud.