Russia sends troops to Afghanistan in 2001/2

Thande

Donor
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Putin's Russia made clear its support of America's "war on terror", not least because it gave the Russians an excuse to crack down on their Chechen 'problem' without facing too much international condemnation. Taking this a little further than OTL, what if the Russians had contributed troops to the multinational force that ejected the Taliban from Afghanistan - either during the 'war' phase, or later as some coalition partners did?

If Putin made the offer, I can see it being a difficult decision for the Americans - it would be valuable diplomatically in the West, but would send the wrong message in Afghanistan (after backing the mujahideen against the Russians in the 80s, it's now the other way around...).

If Russian troops served alongside U.S. and multinational forces in 2001/2, would this alter what came afterwards? Say Russia still opposes the Iraq war, but in a more measured way like France and Germany OTL, and continues to support operations in Afghanistan (like France and Germany). Would this avoid the recent cooling of relations between Moscow and Washington (and especially London) or would that still happen regardless?
 
I think Putin is watching with glee at what the Bush Administration does, alongside their British lapdog (as it's a way of signalling his displeasure by proxy to pick fights with London) so why would he possibly help them? America less popular = happier times for Russia's president: more scope to criticise, more willing listeners.
 

Thande

Donor
I think Putin is watching with glee at what the Bush Administration does, alongside their British lapdog (as it's a way of signalling his displeasure by proxy to pick fights with London) so why would he possibly help them? America less popular = happier times for Russia's president: more scope to criticise, more willing listeners.

Well...if Russia is involved in Afghanistan, it would give them even more leeway with Chechnya, make it harder for the West to criticise Putin for his shenanigans against oligarchs, journalists etc., and might also lead to Central Asia slipping back more directly into the Russian sphere of influence.
 
Putin gave away a hell of a lot by giving the US a chance to use the Northern Alliance and build bases. Now the US won't pull out.
 
Putin gave away a hell of a lot by giving the US a chance to use the Northern Alliance and build bases. Now the US won't pull out.

They pulled out of Uzbekistan. To my knowledge they only have troops in Tajikistan, where Russia itself stationed troops until relatively recently and India, of all countries, controls an air base.

And since when was Russia telling the Northern Alliance who it can and can't accept help from?
 
Yeltsin.

fillerfiller

Yeltsin was free to cut off aid at any time and see the Northern Alliance fall under the influence of China or Iran. It's not like Russia was the only one supplying them. He was also free to ask himself if US aid to the Northern Alliance was worse than complete Taliban control in Afghanistan. Putin had the same freedoms.
 
Umm, they were. They supplied Masood's and Rabbani's forces because of - you guessed it! - the fear of a Tajikistan becoming another Chechnya.

I'd be surprised if they were the only ones, but their obvious interest in this ensured they couldn't "punish" the Northern Alliance. Better to live with it than risk having the Taliban border former Soviet Central Asia.
 
Would Russia dare to do that much, It wasn't long since the Soviets where bogged down there. It might also be a PR problem.
 

ninebucks

Banned
I think Putin is watching with glee at what the Bush Administration does, alongside their British lapdog (as it's a way of signalling his displeasure by proxy to pick fights with London) so why would he possibly help them? America less popular = happier times for Russia's president: more scope to criticise, more willing listeners.

I disagree, I don't think the current Anglo-Russian spat has much to do with America at all. Russia has always suffered from a significant inferiority complex, especially since the collapse of the USSR - as such, Moscow's view of Britain is perhaps more inflated than it should be. In the eyes of many Russians, Britain is still the mighty globe-spanning empire that humiliated them in the Crimea. Whereas in British eyes, Russia is the nation that threatened us with nuclear holocaust for most of the last century. Both sides view the other as the arrogant flaunting superpower.

Actually, I disagree. Iraq might go significantly better with Russia on board, especially if it sours relations between Moscow and Tehran.

What could the Russians bring to Iraq other than a massive disrespect for human rights that would knock the Coalition even further off the moral highground than OTL?

Anyway, back to the OP. I don't think the USA was interested in using Afghanistan as a foreign relations bridge. Iran, for instance, acted extraordinarily friendly towards America following 9/11 - they offered to give NATO all the support it needed in the Afghanistan, Washington in return told Tehran to fuck off. The Bush Administration at this point was just not interested in reconcilliation with anyone.
 
The Russians could bring significantly more ground forces, and yes, perhaps a sense of fear that would deincentivize acts of terrorism on the part of locals or foreign Arab agents in the country. Also, having the Russians on board in Iraq could pose problems for Iranian interference in the country.
 
Top