THE MUMBAI TERROR ATTACK was no proxy war, but an all-out assault on the Indian state. Pakistan should not be allowed to get away with the impression that India will not react for fear of a nuclear reaction
In the introduction to her book “What Terrorists Want”, Louise Richardson explains why she studied terrorism “to try to establish why an otherwise responsible parent, student or teacher would chose to join a terrorist movement and remain in one and why a group of people would collectively choose to kill innocent people they do not know in order to advance some goal unlikely t o be achieved in their lifetime.” What happened in Mumbai on November 26 for three days raises just these and several other questions. And what we have seen is no longer proxy war but an all out assault on the Indian state. It is an attack on all Indians and all Indians will have to be prepared to fight this one. It is far too serious to be left to politicians.
It may be state policy in Pakistan to use jehad as a deadly instrument of foreign policy and as a force equaliser against the superior Indian military but then that state has the manpower willing to act as its emissaries in this bloody game virtually sure that they will die. There is a terrorist rationality in this seeming irrationality – of dying unsung for a cause unfulfilled. Perhaps the incident itself is the rationale. Perhaps the incident coverage by the media provides the narrative and renown for the future. Or perhaps the debate that ensues with the pseudo-liberal platitudes provides some justification.
The Mumbai terrorists were seeking a global audience for their expression of hatred and the spectacular act was part of their psychological warfare. Their inspiration may be the desire of their leaders and ideologues– like Syed Qutb, Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam, Ibn Taymiyah and even Hafeez Saeed to return to the glory of 7th century Islam. This would inevitable put them into conflict with the 21st century world including a large percentage of Muslims. Pakistani rulers have used Kashmir as glue for organising groups like Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT) as a policy instrument against India. It may now be getting out of control.
WHY NOW?
The question that many ask is that given Pakistan’s present political uncertainties, an economic crisis despite having just received an IMF bailout, and a security predicament in the NWFP and US pressure to co-operate, given the kinds of peace overtures coming from the President, why did it feel necessary to indulge in this kind of adventurism. Maybe these are the very reasons why this adventure was necessary. All this is part of a devious plot, to create a crisis on the eastern frontier by having this terrorist act which is difficult for the Indians to ignore, then move troops away from the FATA and NWFP which would alarm the US/NATO in their battles against the Taliban in Afghanistan. The ensuing tension on the eastern frontier would absolve Pakistan of having to fight America’s war in the west unless the US is able to assure Pakistan that its eastern flank is not endangered by the Indians.
A major terrorist incident in Mumbai would provoke an Indian reaction, raise tension and alarm the US. Kashmir would be back on the radar screen of the new President. So if India could be made to see reason on this, Pakistan would be able to help the American cause in Afghanistan. There is considerable writing in the US precisely on these lines and a major terrorist action would be useful in impressing the new President anxious to find a different path to solving the Afghanistan imbroglio. The hope would be that the Americans would be able to leave Afghanistan with Pakistani assistance, Pakistan would have access to Afghanistan and Kashmir and, finally, the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba would be the heroes.
As it is, the Pakistan army has been fighting its FATA campaign very half heartedly and has been more interested in obtaining a steady cash inflow of money from the US. The Pakistanis do not want to eliminate the Taliban as they would have future uses for it in Afghanistan and Kashmir in a post-US phase. Sushant Sareen feels that there will be immense US political, military and economic pressure on Pakistan to prevent it from entering into a deal with the Islamists. If the Pakistanis defy the Americans, then they risk economic collapse and military confrontation with the US. On the other hand, acceptance of US demands will cause public outrage as the US and Pakistani forces take on the Taliban and the Taliban retaliate by hitting in major towns and cities. In this context, the Mumbai plot was a way to pre-empt this pressure.
Over time the Pakistani Taliban have been able to or been allowed to take control of large chunks of territory in FATA and Swat. The startling disclosure that Baitullah Mehsud, till recently accused of assassinating Benazir Bhutto, had now been declared a Pakistani patriot who would allow the Army to pull out and concentrate on the Indian frontier could be an indicator of the shape of things to come. It is possible that there is a strong difference of opinion in the Pak Army about priorities – whether Pakistan should be fighting America’s war in the NWFP and killing their own Muslim brothers in the province or fighting its own war in Kashmir and against India. Possibly, there are those in the Pak Army who feel that Pakistan must not be seen to be fighting its own people – although that never bothered the Pak armed forces whenever they have had to tackle the Baloch. Maybe this is a victory for the Islamists inside the Pak Army.
The Pak Army’s badge of professionalism is heavily imbued with Islamic overtones. The Pakistani soldier and officer are different from the officers who graduate from Khadakvasla, Sandhurst or West Point. The man from Kakul trains under the motto ‘Jihad fi’isbillah’ – Jihad in the name of God. He leads a modern Islamic Army and genuinely believes that he is the protector of the Faith and the Defender of the Realm. And this Army is steadily losing control of parts of its territory in the northwest as the Taliban spread deeper into Pakistan.
PAKISTAN ARMY’S GUIDED MISSILE
The Lashkar-e- Tayyaba (Army of Pure) whose involvement in the Mumbai attacks is now established is an Islamic terrorist force in Asia with links to Al Qaeda. Its network extends across South Asia, has links in Afghanistan, has received generous donations from the Middle East especially Saudi Arabia and has the support of the Pak Army and the ISI. Seed money came from Osama bin Laden and there have been generous donations from rich Pakistani businessmen. Saudi Arabia has sustained this outfit with considerable funding. The political wing of the LeT, the Markaz Dawa Irshad, (renamed Jamaat ut Dawa renamed Idara Khidmat e Khalq) today runs 200 mainstream Dawa schools, 11 madrassas, two science colleges, an ambulance service, mobile clinics and blood banks. Its recruits are not ill-educated madrassa students but also well educated and educationally qualified urban professionals.
The Lashkar continues to have training camps in Muridke, its headquarters near Lahore. The LeT has conducted operations in Chechnya, Bosnia Iraq and SE Asia. The Lashkar is an invaluable asset to the Pak authorities as it enables it to keep the Kashmir option open even while supporting the US campaign in Afghanistan.
It is sometimes assumed, incorrectly, that the LeT is a Kashmiri outfit. It is a purely Punjabi Pakistani group. As an associate of Osama bin Laden’s International Islamic Front for Jihad Against Crusaders and Jews and then later to include Hindus, its scope of activity is beyond Kashmir. As Wilson John of the Observer Research Foundation points out Hafeez Saeed’s favourite verse from the Quran is Wajahidu fi Sabilallah (Wage a holy war in the name of God). It was not too long ago when the LeT chief Hafiz Saeed told his followers in Lahore from where he usually doles out inflammatory sermons against India when he said “India understands only one language – the language of Jehad.” This was on October 13, 2008, a few weeks before the Mumbai attacks were launched or as one can suspect, maybe by then the operation had already begun.
US REACTIONS
The Indians got angry after the Mumbai attacks and demanded retribution .In response the Pakistanis announced ordered troop mobilisation on their eastern front. The US predictably sent in Condoleezza Rice on another mission to hold and stay India’s hand. Presidential candidate McCain had preceded her and Adm. Mullen did the same circuit later. Their immediate purpose has been served in as much as the Indians did not go in for reprisals.
At the same time there is a distinct toughening of the US posture. The usual US reaction in the past has been to first contain the immediate crisis and then begin backtracking on various issues that there is not enough evidence about the Pakistani involvement, and that these were the acts of non-state actors. This time the terrorists have not been described as freedom fighters but if the past is any guide attempts to say that there were some elements acting on their own and that there may be renegade elements in the ISI are untenable. The US cannot expect India to restrain itself and then do nothing to restrict Pakistan. There is thus still hope that this time it would be different.
The truth is that the ISI and the LeT have been planning joint operations for long. Saleem Shahzad, in his latest article in the Asia Times online, said that an old ISI-LeT plan has been dusted off the shelves and put into operation. This is more or less similar to what Musharraf did in Kargil in 1998. This is as plausible as it is difficult to believe that in a country where the Army is supreme there would be such renegade elements who can carry out a major operation of this magnitude without the Army at least encouraging this or looking the other way. No Army worth its name will have an intelligence agency run amok in this fashion and no intelligence agency will allow such renegade elements to exist.
If we assume that the Pakistan army has lost control of what it has created then it has to be assumed that it is losing control of the country. Pakistan today looks more and more like a vast real estate where the Islamists have a free run and the dwindling free society cowers in fear. If that be so, then there is every danger that some time in the future there could be a terrorist group armed with a WMD or at least a dirty bomb. The time for coddling Pakistan has gone.
Successive US administrations have opted for the policy that merely seemed to reward Pakistan’s rulers for each delinquency. There was more aid each time they blackmailed and raised the stakes. This policy has not worked. Unending military and economic supplies have only emboldened the military rulers to greater adventurism. This flawed policy has always upset India as it felt deprived of its good boy bonus for being a ‘responsible’ democracy even when under stress with no punishment to the delinquent. Possibly we are seeing a change in this approach. A good deal would depend on how volatile the NWFP becomes in the days ahead.
Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment is right when he says in a recent article ‘The Sovereignty Dodge’ that ... “In Pakistan's case, the continuing complicity of the military and intelligence services with terrorist groups pretty much shreds any claim to sovereign protection. The Bush administration has tried for years to work with both the military and the civilian governments, providing billions of dollars in aid and advanced weaponry. But as my Carnegie endowment colleague Ashley Tellis has observed this strategy has not worked.” Kagan has suggested that there should be an international force that takes out the terrorist camps in Pakistan as only this would convince the Indians that the rest of the world takes attacks on India seriously. His argument is very persuasive when he says that nations should not be able to claim sovereign rights when they cannot control territory from which terrorist attacks are launched. This rebuts the argument of governments when they talk about non-state or stateless actors or rogue elements.
WHAT NEXT
The main fears would now be - how many were they and have we accounted for all of them. The fear is that some may have escaped and may have gone into hiding in India with their local support. The other worry would be that if they could move into Mumbai with such ease they could have occupied any one of our uninhabited islands in the Arabian Sea or the Bay of Bengal from where to launch more attacks. They could slip into India along the vast and unguarded coastline and then disappear into the hinterland.
The Mumbai attack has been followed by a massive attack on the transport depots of the NATO in Peshawar where the terrorists burnt 160 transport vehicles. It is too early to say that this was a coincidence but there is also an uneasy feeling that this could be a reaction to the hardening US stance in Pakistan. It has come a day after Senator McCain threatened the Pakistanis with joint action by India and the US. The attack was also on the day there were raids on two LeT facilities in Muzzafarabad (Pak Occupied Kashmir).
The continuing violence with the almost daily bombings in NWFP the retreat of the Pakistani state, the Kabul bombings of the Indian Embassy and the Marriott bombings against the US, are part of a larger battle. It is a battle between the ambitions of some seeking to impose their creed globally against a power striving to retain its declining global supremacy.
DEALING WITH PAKISTAN
Internationally we need to show the world that the danger from Pakistan is now global. The LeT uses the diaspora in the UK, has links in the US and operates indirectly in Europe. In Afghanistan terrorists have run autonomous private enterprises that a weak government has been unable to control. In Pakistan, the state has been actively involved in this enterprise. The LeT is thus better equipped, controlled and direction comes from the Centre which for form’s sake may be Muridke, the LeT headquarters but in reality is Rawalpindi the Army headquarters and Islamabad from where the ISI executes these orders.
Meanwhile, as they say, get real. Pakistan has always played for high stakes and understands the language of strength. It should not be allowed to get away with the impression that India will not retaliate for fear of a nuclear reaction. It is true that the US would be extremely concerned about an India-Pakistan confrontation with its troops deployed in the region and this would have been one of the calculations in the timing of the Mumbai attack. But an immediate reprisal strike should always be an option and the US must accept this possibility. India must revive its covert capabilities and be able to take deniable covert actions inside Pakistan. India needs to step up its psy-war capabilities that target Pakistan as well as the rest of the world
At the same time, dealing with Pakistan today also means dealing with this phenomenon of international jehad emanating from Pakistan. It may not be enough to detect, deter and destroy terrorism. It is no longer a purely intelligence-military-counter terror solution. A truly global approach where the earlier principle of - my terrorist is more important than yours, has to be abandoned. The moderates must be given a voice. The sponsors of terrorism have to be punished; their financiers, in many cases States and their front organisations, singled out and ostracised. Terrorists have to be denied access to territory, sanctuaries and the media.
Terrorists went global a long time ago. It is time the rest of the world took this on as a truly global challenge.
It may be state policy in Pakistan to use jehad as a deadly instrument of foreign policy and as a force equaliser against the superior Indian military but then that state has the manpower willing to act as its emissaries in this bloody game virtually sure that they will die. There is a terrorist rationality in this seeming irrationality – of dying unsung for a cause unfulfilled. Perhaps the incident itself is the rationale. Perhaps the incident coverage by the media provides the narrative and renown for the future. Or perhaps the debate that ensues with the pseudo-liberal platitudes provides some justification.
The Mumbai terrorists were seeking a global audience for their expression of hatred and the spectacular act was part of their psychological warfare. Their inspiration may be the desire of their leaders and ideologues– like Syed Qutb, Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam, Ibn Taymiyah and even Hafeez Saeed to return to the glory of 7th century Islam. This would inevitable put them into conflict with the 21st century world including a large percentage of Muslims. Pakistani rulers have used Kashmir as glue for organising groups like Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT) as a policy instrument against India. It may now be getting out of control.
WHY NOW?
The question that many ask is that given Pakistan’s present political uncertainties, an economic crisis despite having just received an IMF bailout, and a security predicament in the NWFP and US pressure to co-operate, given the kinds of peace overtures coming from the President, why did it feel necessary to indulge in this kind of adventurism. Maybe these are the very reasons why this adventure was necessary. All this is part of a devious plot, to create a crisis on the eastern frontier by having this terrorist act which is difficult for the Indians to ignore, then move troops away from the FATA and NWFP which would alarm the US/NATO in their battles against the Taliban in Afghanistan. The ensuing tension on the eastern frontier would absolve Pakistan of having to fight America’s war in the west unless the US is able to assure Pakistan that its eastern flank is not endangered by the Indians.
A major terrorist incident in Mumbai would provoke an Indian reaction, raise tension and alarm the US. Kashmir would be back on the radar screen of the new President. So if India could be made to see reason on this, Pakistan would be able to help the American cause in Afghanistan. There is considerable writing in the US precisely on these lines and a major terrorist action would be useful in impressing the new President anxious to find a different path to solving the Afghanistan imbroglio. The hope would be that the Americans would be able to leave Afghanistan with Pakistani assistance, Pakistan would have access to Afghanistan and Kashmir and, finally, the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba would be the heroes.
As it is, the Pakistan army has been fighting its FATA campaign very half heartedly and has been more interested in obtaining a steady cash inflow of money from the US. The Pakistanis do not want to eliminate the Taliban as they would have future uses for it in Afghanistan and Kashmir in a post-US phase. Sushant Sareen feels that there will be immense US political, military and economic pressure on Pakistan to prevent it from entering into a deal with the Islamists. If the Pakistanis defy the Americans, then they risk economic collapse and military confrontation with the US. On the other hand, acceptance of US demands will cause public outrage as the US and Pakistani forces take on the Taliban and the Taliban retaliate by hitting in major towns and cities. In this context, the Mumbai plot was a way to pre-empt this pressure.
Over time the Pakistani Taliban have been able to or been allowed to take control of large chunks of territory in FATA and Swat. The startling disclosure that Baitullah Mehsud, till recently accused of assassinating Benazir Bhutto, had now been declared a Pakistani patriot who would allow the Army to pull out and concentrate on the Indian frontier could be an indicator of the shape of things to come. It is possible that there is a strong difference of opinion in the Pak Army about priorities – whether Pakistan should be fighting America’s war in the NWFP and killing their own Muslim brothers in the province or fighting its own war in Kashmir and against India. Possibly, there are those in the Pak Army who feel that Pakistan must not be seen to be fighting its own people – although that never bothered the Pak armed forces whenever they have had to tackle the Baloch. Maybe this is a victory for the Islamists inside the Pak Army.
The Pak Army’s badge of professionalism is heavily imbued with Islamic overtones. The Pakistani soldier and officer are different from the officers who graduate from Khadakvasla, Sandhurst or West Point. The man from Kakul trains under the motto ‘Jihad fi’isbillah’ – Jihad in the name of God. He leads a modern Islamic Army and genuinely believes that he is the protector of the Faith and the Defender of the Realm. And this Army is steadily losing control of parts of its territory in the northwest as the Taliban spread deeper into Pakistan.
PAKISTAN ARMY’S GUIDED MISSILE
The Lashkar-e- Tayyaba (Army of Pure) whose involvement in the Mumbai attacks is now established is an Islamic terrorist force in Asia with links to Al Qaeda. Its network extends across South Asia, has links in Afghanistan, has received generous donations from the Middle East especially Saudi Arabia and has the support of the Pak Army and the ISI. Seed money came from Osama bin Laden and there have been generous donations from rich Pakistani businessmen. Saudi Arabia has sustained this outfit with considerable funding. The political wing of the LeT, the Markaz Dawa Irshad, (renamed Jamaat ut Dawa renamed Idara Khidmat e Khalq) today runs 200 mainstream Dawa schools, 11 madrassas, two science colleges, an ambulance service, mobile clinics and blood banks. Its recruits are not ill-educated madrassa students but also well educated and educationally qualified urban professionals.
The Lashkar continues to have training camps in Muridke, its headquarters near Lahore. The LeT has conducted operations in Chechnya, Bosnia Iraq and SE Asia. The Lashkar is an invaluable asset to the Pak authorities as it enables it to keep the Kashmir option open even while supporting the US campaign in Afghanistan.
It is sometimes assumed, incorrectly, that the LeT is a Kashmiri outfit. It is a purely Punjabi Pakistani group. As an associate of Osama bin Laden’s International Islamic Front for Jihad Against Crusaders and Jews and then later to include Hindus, its scope of activity is beyond Kashmir. As Wilson John of the Observer Research Foundation points out Hafeez Saeed’s favourite verse from the Quran is Wajahidu fi Sabilallah (Wage a holy war in the name of God). It was not too long ago when the LeT chief Hafiz Saeed told his followers in Lahore from where he usually doles out inflammatory sermons against India when he said “India understands only one language – the language of Jehad.” This was on October 13, 2008, a few weeks before the Mumbai attacks were launched or as one can suspect, maybe by then the operation had already begun.
US REACTIONS
The Indians got angry after the Mumbai attacks and demanded retribution .In response the Pakistanis announced ordered troop mobilisation on their eastern front. The US predictably sent in Condoleezza Rice on another mission to hold and stay India’s hand. Presidential candidate McCain had preceded her and Adm. Mullen did the same circuit later. Their immediate purpose has been served in as much as the Indians did not go in for reprisals.
At the same time there is a distinct toughening of the US posture. The usual US reaction in the past has been to first contain the immediate crisis and then begin backtracking on various issues that there is not enough evidence about the Pakistani involvement, and that these were the acts of non-state actors. This time the terrorists have not been described as freedom fighters but if the past is any guide attempts to say that there were some elements acting on their own and that there may be renegade elements in the ISI are untenable. The US cannot expect India to restrain itself and then do nothing to restrict Pakistan. There is thus still hope that this time it would be different.
The truth is that the ISI and the LeT have been planning joint operations for long. Saleem Shahzad, in his latest article in the Asia Times online, said that an old ISI-LeT plan has been dusted off the shelves and put into operation. This is more or less similar to what Musharraf did in Kargil in 1998. This is as plausible as it is difficult to believe that in a country where the Army is supreme there would be such renegade elements who can carry out a major operation of this magnitude without the Army at least encouraging this or looking the other way. No Army worth its name will have an intelligence agency run amok in this fashion and no intelligence agency will allow such renegade elements to exist.
If we assume that the Pakistan army has lost control of what it has created then it has to be assumed that it is losing control of the country. Pakistan today looks more and more like a vast real estate where the Islamists have a free run and the dwindling free society cowers in fear. If that be so, then there is every danger that some time in the future there could be a terrorist group armed with a WMD or at least a dirty bomb. The time for coddling Pakistan has gone.
Successive US administrations have opted for the policy that merely seemed to reward Pakistan’s rulers for each delinquency. There was more aid each time they blackmailed and raised the stakes. This policy has not worked. Unending military and economic supplies have only emboldened the military rulers to greater adventurism. This flawed policy has always upset India as it felt deprived of its good boy bonus for being a ‘responsible’ democracy even when under stress with no punishment to the delinquent. Possibly we are seeing a change in this approach. A good deal would depend on how volatile the NWFP becomes in the days ahead.
Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment is right when he says in a recent article ‘The Sovereignty Dodge’ that ... “In Pakistan's case, the continuing complicity of the military and intelligence services with terrorist groups pretty much shreds any claim to sovereign protection. The Bush administration has tried for years to work with both the military and the civilian governments, providing billions of dollars in aid and advanced weaponry. But as my Carnegie endowment colleague Ashley Tellis has observed this strategy has not worked.” Kagan has suggested that there should be an international force that takes out the terrorist camps in Pakistan as only this would convince the Indians that the rest of the world takes attacks on India seriously. His argument is very persuasive when he says that nations should not be able to claim sovereign rights when they cannot control territory from which terrorist attacks are launched. This rebuts the argument of governments when they talk about non-state or stateless actors or rogue elements.
WHAT NEXT
The main fears would now be - how many were they and have we accounted for all of them. The fear is that some may have escaped and may have gone into hiding in India with their local support. The other worry would be that if they could move into Mumbai with such ease they could have occupied any one of our uninhabited islands in the Arabian Sea or the Bay of Bengal from where to launch more attacks. They could slip into India along the vast and unguarded coastline and then disappear into the hinterland.
The Mumbai attack has been followed by a massive attack on the transport depots of the NATO in Peshawar where the terrorists burnt 160 transport vehicles. It is too early to say that this was a coincidence but there is also an uneasy feeling that this could be a reaction to the hardening US stance in Pakistan. It has come a day after Senator McCain threatened the Pakistanis with joint action by India and the US. The attack was also on the day there were raids on two LeT facilities in Muzzafarabad (Pak Occupied Kashmir).
The continuing violence with the almost daily bombings in NWFP the retreat of the Pakistani state, the Kabul bombings of the Indian Embassy and the Marriott bombings against the US, are part of a larger battle. It is a battle between the ambitions of some seeking to impose their creed globally against a power striving to retain its declining global supremacy.
DEALING WITH PAKISTAN
Internationally we need to show the world that the danger from Pakistan is now global. The LeT uses the diaspora in the UK, has links in the US and operates indirectly in Europe. In Afghanistan terrorists have run autonomous private enterprises that a weak government has been unable to control. In Pakistan, the state has been actively involved in this enterprise. The LeT is thus better equipped, controlled and direction comes from the Centre which for form’s sake may be Muridke, the LeT headquarters but in reality is Rawalpindi the Army headquarters and Islamabad from where the ISI executes these orders.
Meanwhile, as they say, get real. Pakistan has always played for high stakes and understands the language of strength. It should not be allowed to get away with the impression that India will not retaliate for fear of a nuclear reaction. It is true that the US would be extremely concerned about an India-Pakistan confrontation with its troops deployed in the region and this would have been one of the calculations in the timing of the Mumbai attack. But an immediate reprisal strike should always be an option and the US must accept this possibility. India must revive its covert capabilities and be able to take deniable covert actions inside Pakistan. India needs to step up its psy-war capabilities that target Pakistan as well as the rest of the world
At the same time, dealing with Pakistan today also means dealing with this phenomenon of international jehad emanating from Pakistan. It may not be enough to detect, deter and destroy terrorism. It is no longer a purely intelligence-military-counter terror solution. A truly global approach where the earlier principle of - my terrorist is more important than yours, has to be abandoned. The moderates must be given a voice. The sponsors of terrorism have to be punished; their financiers, in many cases States and their front organisations, singled out and ostracised. Terrorists have to be denied access to territory, sanctuaries and the media.
Terrorists went global a long time ago. It is time the rest of the world took this on as a truly global challenge.
Source : India and Global Affairs , January-March 2009 Issue
0 comments:
Post a Comment