Did you expect this rather sudden takeover by the Northern Alliance (NA) after weeks of stubborn resistance by the Taliban?
See, firstly I disagree with this "all of a sudden" thing that the media is talking about. It was not all of a sudden. I think that everything so far has gone exactly according to plan. The US had a specific military action plan, and as far as my understanding goes, everything has gone according to plan. See, the action plan was divided into all these phases.

It started with the US using their air force to drop bombs and missiles across the country (Afghanistan). That was followed by a more strategic set of airdrops, which effectively finished the Taliban resistance off. Then they moved to the ground, obviously with the help of the NA. So, by week five and six, the Taliban had been softened completely, and were at a stage where they could not offer any further resistance. And that was when the NA moved into specific Taliban strongholds, and took them over one by one. The military asymmetry was effectively turned against the Taliban, and in favour of the US and the NA.

But to be fair, till about a week back, it seemed like the resistance would go on for longer than it eventually did…
No, I think it was really a media thing more than anything else. You (the media) hoped that the US would get stuck, and were against them defeating the Taliban. But from the military perspective, this was always on the cards. From the military perspective, the proceedings were completely satisfactory, and according to the US gameplan. There were no ground troops deployed at the beginning. In fact, the gameplan this time was strikingly similar to the US gameplan during the Gulf War in 1991. But to be honest, they have not been able to meet with the same degree of success this time around, because at the end of it, their main objective was the capture of Osama bin Laden. They haven't been able to get him yet…

But they didn't really get Saddam Hussain either during the Gulf War, did they?
True. True. But the NA is different from the Kuwaitis. They had their own agenda, unlike the Kuwaitis. The Kuwaitis were only interested in the downfall of Iraq, but here, the NA wanted to regain their lost territory. The Taliban were faced by both the US agenda as well as the NA agenda.

Coming back to the NA, how do you look at their return to some semblance of power in Afghanistan?
As far as the NA is concerned, it has been extremely satisfactory all around. They were pushed out by the Taliban from their territories, and had only about 20-25 per cent of Afghanistan under their control. This was the situation till just two months back. And today, just over two months after the September 11 incidents, they are back to almost full control of Afghanistan. The NA has effectively turned tables on the Taliban, and will now prepare to establish their government soon.

That's the question I was going to come to; what do you think are the chances of the NA returning to power and establishing their government in Afghanistan now?
Not so soon. See, these political processes are very complex. There are lots of pushes and pulls both within and around Afghanistan. Countries like Pakistan, Iran, Russia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, China…of course the US, and even India, are going to have some sort of say in the governance. Even within Afghanistan, there are lots of ethnic complexities, and they will try and influence that also.

What do you think are the stakes on Zahir Shah returning as the ruler?
It will only be a transition thing, if he does return. The US is keen that he returns as the ruler. He seems to be the only option that symbolises some sort of rulership in Afghanistan. But it can only be a transitory government. Personally, I think there is a big question mark about Zahir Shah as well. I don't think he has the kind of mass support that is required to form a government. The people of Afghanistan don't hold him in very high regard.

He qualifies as a bit of a deserter, does he?
Yeah. Absolutely. He has not been in Afghanistan for a very long time. I don't think the people of Afghanistan have a great deal of faith in him.

Moving to the Taliban; what happens to the remaining soldiers in Afghanistan?
That's an interesting scenario really. Go into hiding maybe. I think that's what will happen. See, the thing with the Taliban, which was essentially a movement more than a political party, is that they are not a recognised body. The Taliban was a movement that started suddenly about five years back, and spread across Afghanistan. But the common factor with all movements that start suddenly is that they all get over suddenly as well. I don't see too much of a future for them at all. But then, there is also a chance that they will retaliate, and try to come back at some point.

Does that mean there is further bloodshed in store for Afghanistan?
Like I said, that really depends on the Taliban retaliation now. There are large numbers of Taliban soldiers still in pockets across Afghanistan. There are approximately 20,000 soldiers in Konduz. If they decide carry out guerrilla warfare, there could be a lot of bloodshed. But I don't see that happening. You can't have a group indulging in guerrilla warfare without the support of the local people. And the Taliban does not have the support of the local people. Plus, with countries like the US and Pakistan against them, I am not sure the Taliban will be able to work towards any sort of retaliation.

What about India then? Do you foresee India having a role in the events to come?
I think India has a huge role to play from here on. It is an area of huge strategic import for us, contrary to what most people think. Afghanistan is our direct neighbour as well. As neighbours, we have a very long association. The borders have gone away a lot with Pakistan and China, but historically we were neighbours. More than anything else, I think India will have a huge role to play in the rehabilitation of the people there and in peace rebuilding. We are doing a lot of good work already by airdropping food and medicine packets. And that's what we have to go on doing. More than a political or diplomatic role, India's role has to be humanitarian.