In the context of the upcoming withdrawal of the international coalition troops from Afghanistan, political, military and other circles in many countries are actively discussing scenarios for the further development of this country, as well as current problems of the Afghan conflict and the positions of individual countries and international organizations. India, one of the leading Asian powers, was particularly active in the 2000s and early 2010, and was interested in Afghan affairs in the context of its relations with Pakistan and the overall security situation in South Asia.

The Indian approach to Afghanistan is characterized not only by a large-scale contribution to the development of the country's social sphere, infrastructure and economy in general, but also by a desire to strengthen trust in each other on all sides of the conflict - internal, regional and extra-regional. For this purpose, the potential of political, diplomatic and other means, including non-state ones, is being used - the Indian side has repeatedly launched peacekeeping initiatives of various formats and levels. One of these initiatives was a series of India-Pakistan-Afghanistan trilateral conferences organized by the Delhi Policy Group. DGP is a non-governmental organization ("think tank"), founded in 1994 by a well-known Indian diplomat, former Ambassador to Pakistan, China and the United States. Shankar Bajpai, who is still its chairman. Its task is, among other things, to establish a treaty process between the United States and Pakistan.

At the initiative of the Delhi Policy Group and the Director of its Peace and Conflict Program, Radha Kumar, a specialist in ethnic issues and conflict resolution, an international conference "Peace and Stabilization in Afghanistan" was organized in Delhi and Jaipur on July 19-21, 2012.: what can the neighbors do for this?" Along with Radha Kumar, Leela K. played a prominent role in the organization of this conference. Ponappa, a member of the Delhi Policy Group, is a former Deputy National Security Adviser, India's Representative to the United Nations, and current Chairman of the Asia-Pacific Security Cooperation Council.

In addition to representatives of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, experts and politicians from China, Iran, Russia, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan, a number of diplomatic missions in India (ambassadors of Afghanistan, the United States, Turkey, Kyrgyzstan, representatives of the embassies of Germany, Japan), national and international organizations were invited to participate in this conference. 50 people.

The first meeting of the conference, held in Delhi, was open, while discussions in Jaipur were held behind closed doors only at the expert level. The forum participants were familiarized with the progress and results of all ongoing negotiation initiatives and conferences on Afghanistan (the Heart of Asia Conference in Istanbul in November 2011, the conference on assistance to Afghanistan in the post-transit period 2014-2024). ("Decade of Transformation"), Delhi Investment Summit, Tokyo Conference, UN assistance, Qatar talks, etc.) and were able to express their views on confidence-building measures in Afghanistan and the surrounding region of Central and South Asia, the positions and policies of neighboring countries in bilateral and multilateral formats, including: issues of regional security, border control, training of personnel for Afghanistan, cooperation in the field of culture and education.

A significant aspect of the conference in its expanded format was the criticism of Russia's position made by the Indian Ambassador to Kabul, G. Mukhopadhyay. In particular, he reproached the Russian side ,which " obstructed the Istanbul and Bonn conferences of 2011 only because their actual organizers were Western circles." Another aspect that characterizes the attitude towards Russia and its allies was the silence not only about its role and participation in the current Afghan settlement, but also about its possible contribution to the peacekeeping process and the restoration of Afghanistan in the SCO, despite the fact that all participants of the conference were citizens of countries that are more or less organizationally connected with the SCO (members, observers, applicants for full-time membership).

Tajik delegates Sunatilo Zhonboboev and Shokhboz Asadov, both representatives of the University of Central Asia, funded and administered by the Aga Khan Foundation, limited themselves to cultural and educational initiatives of their organization as an example of its contribution to the reconstruction of Afghanistan without political conditions and preferences.

Only the Iranian delegate Hossein Sheikh-ul-Islam, senior adviser and Director of the International Affairs Department of the Iranian Parliament, openly criticized the US policy in Afghanistan and plans for the military and political presence of the West in the region.

Najmuddin Sheikh, a former chief of Staff of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan and now an influential analyst from Karachi, was equally critical, but above all of the positive contribution of conferences like the Delhi-Jaipur conference. He called for a detailed analysis of what is happening in and around Afghanistan and equally detailed peace proposals. At the same time, he, like his compatriot, prominent parliamentarian, representative of the Pashtun community Afrasiab Khattak, emphasized the position of Pakistan as one of the main victims of the Afghan conflict.

In general, there is an impression that both the previous trilateral conferences on Afghanistan, organized by the Delhi Policy Group, and the current one, the first of a series of multilateral meetings with the participation of representatives of neighboring countries (Russia and Turkey are included in this category), are multi-way actions to solve a complex political and diplomatic task: strengthening confidence-building measures, primarily between Afghanistan India and Pakistan - in fact, it is the Afghan affairs that should reconcile the Indian and Pakistani sides.

The postulates of the US strategy in Afghanistan and the South-Central Asian region were outlined by the representative of Afghanistan, Daud Muradyan, who was then a professor at the American University in Kabul, using the example of the US-Afghan strategic cooperation agreement. He voiced some provisions of the US-Afghan strategic partnership - it should become a guarantee of Afghanistan's security for the next ten years, and its elements are border security without the creation of military bases, but with the preservation of 20 thousand military personnel in Afghanistan with various functions, including the functions of special forces, the creation of public administration institutions, economic development and regional cooperation, and the latter provides for the principle of inclusion of many countries (Iran, Russia, etc.), but not Pakistan.

The project, initiated by the Delhi Policy Group, is actually intended to raise India's role to the status of the leading strategic partner of the United States in Afghanistan in the post-conflict period. It is the Indians who are tasked with weakening Pakistan as a catalyst for regional conflict - both Afghan and Indo-Pakistani. In addition, they will also have to find channels for closer cooperation in Afghanistan with Iran-both at the bilateral and multilateral levels (including the US-Iranian rapprochement on Afghanistan and a broader range of issues, the issue of cooperation within the framework of the Greater Central Asia infrastructure project). Thus, Iran is given a chance to avoid a direct conflict with the United States and resolve the most pressing issues in the field of energy, weapons, etc. in a compromise or even "compensation" format.

The solution to this daunting task, or even partial success along the way, should show China - a very influential economically, but so far mostly a "shadow" player in the Afghan "field" - that the real prospect for a second potential superpower is isolation, which it must accept and prepare for the division of spheres of influence in the world. In this scheme, Russia, like other post-Soviet states of Central Asia, looks like a marginal country or a participant in certain projects "allowed" by the West. The role of the SCO is hardly taken into account in the process of Afghan settlement, although its organizational dynamics (increasing the level of cooperation between the SCO and the SCO) is still growing.

status of Afghanistan and Turkey, issues of new membership in future agendas) looks favorable.

Such a course of events became possible in the context of the weakening of international / regional organizations, their stagnation (UN, SCO, Collective Security Treaty Organization-CSTO, etc.), as well as the evolution of elites in many countries of foreign, including post-Soviet, Asia. This is also typical for India, which is increasingly associated with the United States not only in the field of economics, information technology, nuclear energy, military affairs, etc. The Afghan scenario in the Indian version is considered as one of the most ambitious projects of the new geopolitical and geo-economic structure of the world, and India sees in it its chance, which would allow it, without by engaging in a confrontation with China and not being closely associated with the United States, take a leading position in Asia.

On the eve of the expected withdrawal of the bulk of the international coalition's troops from Afghanistan in 2013-2014. India's efforts to develop and implement scenarios for Afghanistan's future development are becoming increasingly visible. The "transformation decade 2014-2024" is used as a chronological format, i.e., the time allotted for stabilization in Afghanistan. This approach reflects the lack of confidence in the ability to quickly solve the problems that have accumulated over the almost 35-year history of the Afghan conflict. As for India, due to the change in the priorities of Indian foreign policy ("non-alignment") in the direction of expanding the zone of strategic responsibility ("near abroad") to the whole of Asia, its line in regional affairs is becoming more and more decisive. India is the initiator of large-scale programs for the Afghan settlement - such programs are being developed both at the state and other levels. Here again, the initiatives of the same Delhi Policy Group deserve attention, which, as mentioned above, in 2009 proposed a new non-governmental negotiating format-the Afghanistan-India-Pakistan trialog, which was continued in 2010., and in 2012 supplemented by the participation of a number of neighboring States and other countries.

Another, second conference of this series with a slightly changed theme - " Decade of Transformations [in Afghanistan] and Neighbors" - was held on October 19-21, 2012 in partnership with the newly established Afghan Institute for Strategic Studies (Director - D. Muradyan) in Herat (Afghanistan). The meetings of the conference were held in the spirit of the "Declaration on Good-Neighborly Relations" (signed by the Interim Administration of Afghanistan and the Governments of China, Iran, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan on December 22, 2002 in Kabul) and the Istanbul process. The main attention was paid to the initiatives of Afghanistan's neighboring states, primarily Iran, Pakistan, and Russia, as well as to the cultural revival in the region conventionally referred to as the "Heart of Asia" - representatives of Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkey, and Russia received the floor on this occasion (O. V. Kulakov).

Daoud Saba, Governor of Herat Province, former Foreign Minister Dadfar Rangin Spant, National Security Adviser to the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, former Foreign Minister Dadfar Rangin Spant, Afghan government ministers, parliamentarians, local and foreign experts took part in the forum. At the special embassy session, the most convincing speech was made by the Plenipotentiary Representative of India in Afghanistan, G. Mukhopadhyay. He stressed that the presence of NATO has led to certain economic shifts in Afghanistan, in particular to the development of the so-called logistics economy (infrastructure). However, he considers the lack of an economic development strategy to be a serious omission and as one of the measures suggests activating such platforms as the Delhi Investment Forum, paying more attention to small and medium-sized production, mining, and agriculture, taking into account the presence of a huge labor market in Afghanistan. The Indian diplomat focused on the traditional policy of neutrality of his country, the prevalence of economic assistance and advice, as well as the value of Indian experience in conflict resolution. At the same time, he noted the lack of joint efforts of the countries of the region to solve the Afghan problem.

A significant place at the conference was occupied by speeches of Afghan politicians and high-ranking officials of various departments (Deputy Interior Minister General Yarman, representative of the Ministry of Defense Geneneral Azimi, etc.), experts, as well as activists of non-governmental organizations, journalists. The former head of the Afghan security Service, Amrullah Saleh, expressed a pessimistic attitude, noting that corruption, including political corruption, does not allow changing the strategic balance in the country, which is insufficient-

but we also use tactical (including military-tactical) means to combat the opposition, which adapts to the situation.

A thorough analysis of the economic situation in Afghanistan was presented by Professor X of Kabul University. D. Koskinas, Vice-President of the Mining Corporation, spoke about international investment and entrepreneurial projects.

One of the final sessions of the conference was devoted to "Khorasan of Ideas". K. Iskandarov (Tajikistan), B. Amirahmadianyan (Iran), S. Kolakoglu (Turkey) and B. S. Boyko (Russia) each interpreted this formula in their own way, but it seems that the main idea of the organizers was to test the idea of a complementary (complementary) integration project, in the manner of the ancient Khorasan region,which is located in the southern Caucasus. including the territories of present-day Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. This idea, with its historical associations, actually means seeking a compromise with Iran, but with the condition of changing Iran's uncompromising line in relations with the West, and above all with the United States. Iran is hinted that there are areas where this country could take responsibility for solving the Afghan and other regional problems, but these areas are strictly regulated by the West. This is partly economic, but also cultural, but without encroaching on general and higher education, which are delegated to Pakistan and India, respectively, which should bring them closer together as partners in Afghan affairs.

There is also a place for Uzbekistan in the Khorasan project: despite the special ethno-cultural identity of the majority of its population, Uzbekistan could, referring to its historical ties in the Khorasan space and the current foreign policy course (refusal to cooperate within the CSTO, freezing of activity within the SCO, etc.), join integration processes with other countries. states and territories without prejudice to their special line in the international arena. But this would mean recruiting Uzbekistan for a project being developed by the West and its partners. This project also creates certain opportunities for Russia - due to its multinational and multi-confessional population, Russia can claim to participate in cooperation and integration processes of this format at the state and other levels.

The "Decade of Transformation [in Afghanistan] and its Neighbors" conference was a convincing proof of India's activation in Afghanistan at the expert-analytical, project-based, and practical-political levels. The Indian side, using the potential of the state and non-governmental organizations, is diversifying its partnership in the Afghan direction, examples of which are cooperation with the newly created non-governmental Afghan Institute for Strategic Studies and the Khorasan project. India's activity is characterized by attempts to expand the range of actions in Afghanistan, as well as in its near abroad, which includes, in fact, most of Asia. The moderate lobbying of American interests by some groups of the Indian elite reflects, first of all, their understanding of current and possible security threats and their perception of the United States as one of the few forces capable of reducing these threats, including the Chinese one. At the same time, the Indian side is concerned about the tension in Iranian-American relations and is looking for ways to bring the positions of these two countries closer, not excluding the Afghan conflict. But both the Indians and other possible participants/moderators of cooperative projects in the "Heart of Asia" do not fully understand the challenges that arise for Iran when it is included in the Khorasan project on a large scale. Such inclusion can mean, in addition to the obvious status and content benefits, the threat of being drawn into the Afghan conflict - this threat the former and current Iranian leadership managed to minimize to a controlled scale by carefully building its Afghan policy and having to focus on other domestic and international issues.

Permanent link to this publication: