From today's NYTimes analysis piece by David Sanger comes a chess piece that I had not considered.
But for years, throughout the Bush administration and into the Obama administration, American officials have been making trips to Pakistan to reassure its government that the United States has no intention of pulling out of Afghanistan as it did 20 years ago, after the Soviets retreated from the country. Inside the Pakistani Army and the intelligence service, which is known as the ISI, it is an article of faith among some officers that the United States is deceiving them, and that it will replay 1989.
If that happens, some Pakistanis argue, India will fill the void in southern Afghanistan, leaving Pakistan surrounded by its longtime enemy. So any talk of exit strategies is bound to reaffirm the belief of some Pakistani officials that they have to maintain their contacts with the Taliban — their hedge against Indian encroachment.
I'm just an arm-chair strategist in these sorts of geopolitical chess games but have long thought that one thing missing from cogent discussion of the issues are GEO-political considerations. For example, Iran might rightly be concerned about the US military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, given that it presents a two-front threat, but google a map of the region and you'll see that, lumping Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan in the middle, surrounded by US forces in Iraq on the west and Indian forces on the east...
Is it possible that staging a LOVELY state dinner for the Indian Prime Minister on Tuesday evening is a mere coincidence, given the (now) imminent declaration of Obama's plans for Afghanistan? I fear that my tin foil hat is tingling for no good reason and would appreciate any informed guidance on reading these tea leaves.