Afghan campaign gains from India-Pakistan thaw

LONDON (Reuters) - The U.S.-led campaign in Afghanistan may have just been given a fresh injection it badly needs -- from a parliamentary debate hundreds of miles to the east in New Delhi.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, under fire from his political opponents for peace moves toward Pakistan, told parliament on Wednesday he intended to press ahead with a "step-by-step" dialogue with Islamabad.

While it is too early to talk of a real breakthrough in relations, his stance highlighted how much the regional context has changed since last November's attack on Mumbai by Pakistan-based militants derailed a fragile peace process.

And that has major implications for Afghanistan.

Pakistan has long been seen as reluctant to turn fully against the Afghan Taliban as long as it believes it might need them to counter growing Indian influence in Afghanistan.

Nor will it move the bulk of its forces away from the Indian border to fight the Taliban on its own soil as long as it fears retaliation in the event of any fresh Mumbai-style attacks.

"We look at capabilities, not intentions," Pakistan Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani is quoted by diplomats as telling those who press him on moving troops from east to west.

India and Pakistan have agreed their foreign secretaries -- their top diplomats -- should meet as often as necessary to try and improve relations.

At the same time, Singh has refused to reopen a formal peace process until Pakistan takes action against the Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group accused of organizing the Mumbai attacks.

But he had come under fire over the drafting of a joint statement issued this month with Pakistan Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani which some argued had given too many concessions.

"Unless we talk directly to Pakistan we will have to rely on a third party to do so," Singh told parliament.

"Unless you want to go to war with Pakistan, there is no way, but to go step-by-step ... dialogue and engagement are the best way forward."

The Hindu newspaper said his comments could eventually be seen as a "game-changer" in India's approach to Pakistan.

They "create room for the government to be flexible in its approach to Pakistan, giving it room to calibrate the pace of engagement to the degree to which Islamabad moves ahead on its commitments to act against terror," it said.

Pakistan's Dawn newspaper in turn highlighted a move to put on trial five Lashkar-e-Taiba operatives over the Mumbai attack -- an unprecedented decision in a country which has been reluctant to talk openly about Pakistan-based militants.

So while the media in India and Pakistan still snipe at each others' countries, they have come a very long way since the post-Mumbai days when the talk was of war rather than peace.

"It will take a while but the process (of dialogue) is getting together again," said one diplomat.

"SIGNIFICANT REDEPLOYMENT"

The thaw in relations appears already to be offering some respite to the U.S.-led campaign against the Taliban, at a time when good news is desperately needed to offset the reports of rising casualties in the Afghan war.

U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke said on Wednesday the Pakistan Army had moved "a very large number of troops" from the eastern border to the western border in a "significant redeployment."

He gave no numbers and analysts say some of those troops have been moved in preparation for a planned offensive against Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud in South Waziristan.

But the United States is also keen to ensure that the Pakistan Army is ready to prevent Taliban militants moving into Pakistan's Baluchistan province following a U.S. and British military offensive in neighboring southern Afghanistan.

The redeployment does not mean the army is turning its back on its traditional enemy, nor that troops cannot be rushed back east as they were during a military stand-off with India in 2001/2002 and more recently following the Mumbai attack.

It does however improve the possibility of coordination between U.S. and Pakistani military operations against the Taliban; something that was widely seen as lacking following the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

At a more fundamental level, an easing of tensions with New Delhi would strengthen the hand of those in Pakistan who believe that Islamist militants rather than India pose the greatest threat to its stability.

Although the country rallied around a military offensive against the Pakistani Taliban in Swat this year, it is far from clear whether the government could drum up similar support in targeting the Afghan Taliban.

Pakistan's military offensives so far have been directed primarily at those militants which threaten the Pakistani state.

But analysts believe Pakistan is far more ambivalent about targeting the Afghan Taliban and other militant groups which could be used to expand its influence in Afghanistan if and when the Americans and their allies leave.

And at the heart of its interest in Afghanistan is its rivalry with India, going right back to the Soviet invasion in 1979; a time when close relations between Moscow and New Delhi convinced Pakistan it was threatened on both sides.

It supported the Taliban in Kabul in part to give it a strong rear base in the event of war with India, and since 9/11 has seen Indian influence growing in Afghanistan while its own position there was considerably weakened.

An easing of tensions between India and Pakistan would therefore be necessary to U.S.-led efforts to bring long-term stability to Afghanistan -- though far from sufficient.

Defense analyst and Pakistan specialist Brian Cloughley, who has been critical of the U.S.-led military operation, says he believes Afghanistan is beyond help.

"I do not believe that rapprochement between India and Pakistan -- so welcome as it will be -- can have any effect on the shambles in Afghanistan," he said.

(Editing by Jon Hemming)