In the lush, green valleys of the Punjab, young men are being schooled in the principles of mass murder.
By Sean Rayment, Security Correspondent
Some 70 miles north of Lahore, in a 200-acre camp that also houses a large mosque, swimming pool and fish farm, volunteers are taught how to assemble bombs, fire weapons, create terrorist networks and communicate covertly using the internet and mobile phones.
They are also instructed in resistance to interrogation techniques and how to create cover stories in the event of being captured.
This is the headquarters of the Pakistani militant group Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) – which in Urdu translates as "army of the pure" – the organisation widely believed to be responsible for the Mumbai massacre in November which left 172 people dead.
LeT, which professes to be a peaceful organisation, is known to have close links with al-Qaeda and is understood to train around 40,000 young men every year at its madrassas (religious schools) and military bases.
Some of the trainees at its base in the Punjab are British.
Many of those who graduate from the camps are sent to the front line in Kashmir to wage war against the Indian army, others venture north to Afghanistan to fight against Nato forces, while many of the British return to the UK and begin plotting.
Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer are both thought to have visited the camp several times before carrying out the 7/7 suicides attacks on the London Tube network.
Mohammed Ajmal Khan, who was sentenced to nine years in March 2006 for fundraising for terrorist groups operating in Pakistan and Afghanistan, also admitted visiting one of the organisation’s camps.
Virtually all of the al-Qaeda terrorists convicted in Britain since 2001, including the 7/7 bombers and Dhiren Barot – the so-called "Dirty Bomber" – received training in Pakistan.
Gordon Brown recently stated that three quarters of all British terror plots originate from within the state.
However, monitoring everyone visiting or returning from Pakistan is an impossible task for Britain’s police and MI5.
Up to 400,000 British Pakistanis visit the country every year, the vast majority for completely legitimate reasons. Up to 10,000 young Pakistanis enter the UK every year on student visas.
It is also believed that some of the 12 terrorist suspects arrested in Wednesday’s Operation Pathway may have been trained to form a covert cell in Pakistan before entering Britain.
LeT is a hardcore terrorist organisation committed to using extreme violence to achieve its aim of forcing India to leave the disputed area of Kashmir.
But in the 18 years since its creation, the movement has forged links with other terror groups, most notably al-Qaeda, and has become a major threat to many western countries.
After the Mumbai attacks, it emerged that the group had compiled a worldwide hit list of 320 targets. Yet despite being banned by most western countries, the Pakistani authorities stand accused of effectively having turned a blind eye to its operations.
And the organisation is not alone. Another militant group, Lashkar-e-Janghvi is believed to have been behind the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore last month, also operates openly, while other groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen are understood to be expanding their influence in Punjab, an area with strong British connections.
In one area of Kashmir roughly the size of the West Midlands, 25 militant groups are known to operate with impunity.
Many of their volunteers sign up here for jihad – or ‘holy war’ – before taking the next step of joining other organisations committed to attacking the West.
It is against this backdrop that Pakistan has now acquired the dubious distinction of being epicentre for Islamist terrorism in the world.
At the same time, MI5 and the CIA are becoming increasingly worried by the country’s inability to clamp down on militants.
Pakistan is now a very dangerous country for Westerners to live and work. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office only allows its diplomats to work in the country unaccompanied, meaning partners, wives and children must remain behind in the UK.
As far as the FCO is concerned, Pakistan is as dangerous as Afghanistan, which is currently in the grips of a full-blown insurgency.
The rise of militant Islamist groups in Pakistan began in the early 1980s under the country’s then leader General Muhammad Zia-ul-Huq, largely in response to the growth of Shia fundamentalism in Iran and in a bid to support the Mujahideen who were fighting the Soviets in neighbouring Afghanistan.
Over the last 30 years, the country’s leaders have been content for various Islamist groups to train and recruit in Pakistan, and to wage a proxy war with India over the disputed Kashmir region. During the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the Inter-Services Agency (ISI), the intelligence wing of the Pakistan army, funded the Mujahideen and, later, the Taliban in the mid-Nineties.
Although Pakistan is fighting its own counter-insurgency war against militants, the ISI is believed to have firm links with groups like the Taliban and even al-Qaeda, much to the consternation of Britain and the US.
MI5 treats any intelligence passed to it by the ISI with caution, given that much of it is politicised, although the relationship between the two organisations remains strong.
But the US, which over the last few years has funded the Pakistan military and therefore the ISI to the tune of £7 billion, is said to be increasingly frustrated with rogue, Islamist-supporting elements within the ISI.
Washington wants the Pakistani government to clamp down on the militant groups operating within the country and to cleanse the ISI of Taliban and Islamist sympathisers.
Admiral Michael Mullen, the US Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staffs and America’s most senior officer, recently called for the ISI to make "fundamental" changes in its relationship with militants.
But despite the frustrations, there have been some major advances.
The bilateral agreement between Pakistan and Washington, which had been a secret until recently and allowed America’s heavily armed unmanned aircraft, known as Reapers, to attack al-Qaeda and Taliban targets inside Pakistan, have produced enormous dividends.
Security sources said the various strikes over the past 12 months have severely disrupted al-Qaeda operations in Pakistan and their lines of communication back to the UK.
MI5 are convinced that the current lack of so-called "late-stage plots" – in which "cells" of terrorists are close to launching attacks – is partly down to the Reaper strikes in the Pakistan/Afghanistan border regions.
Pakistan, however, remains a country on the brink of catastrophe.
The ‘Talibanisation’ of the Swat Valley in the tribal areas of the northwest frontier province serves to illustrate how the central government is beginning to lose control in certain areas.
It is in this region that more than 75,000 soldiers of its Frontier Corps are waging a bitter counter-insurgency war against the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
The war has reached a stalemate and is causing deep divides within the Pakistani Army. While the officer class support the war, the rank and file see little honour in killing fellow Muslims. The potential for revolt within the Army is very real.
The economy is also in freefall, with some estimates suggesting that Pakistan will be bankrupt within six months, a position which will play further into the hands of the militants, who already recruit the majority of their foot soldiers from the poorest areas.
Pakistan is a country of 150 million people, many of whom are trapped in poverty. It is in desperate need of help, probably more so than neighbouring Afghanistan.
If the economy implodes, the Army revolts and the Islamists gain power – a sequence of events that is entirely possible – the problems for the West will dwarf anything seen in Iraq or Afghanistan and will take international terrorism to a new infinitely more dangerous level.
For the first time since the Cold War, the West would have an enemy with a nuclear capability.
Showing posts with label Lashkar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lashkar. Show all posts
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
The rise & rise of Pakistan's Taliban
Subodh Varma, TNN
In the spring of 1994, a new military force appeared in Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires. Legend has it that its first public action was in
Kandahar. A local warlord had abducted two girls for serving his troops. One night, a group of young, bearded Pashtuns, wearing black turbans emerged from the darkness, stormed the base, rescued the girls and hanged the warlord from the turret of a tank.
They were called the Taliban, and soon they stormed Kabul and established one of the most brutal regimes in the world, based on a narrow fundamentalist interpretation of Islam.
Their origins lay in the western border areas of Pakistan, where thousands of Afghans, mainly Pashtuns, had fled during the decade-long jihad against the Soviet army. A whole generation of boys grew up in refugee camps in tribal areas, learning the ideology of hate and revenge. The camps and seminaries were organised by the Pakistani government, with funds received covertly from the US (for fighting communism) and openly from Saudi Arabian armchair jihadists who wanted to spread Islam. Because of their origins in madrassas, these fighters were called the "Taliban", or students.
After the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989 with a bloody nose and the Najib government in Kabul fell in 1992, the Taliban continued to operate from refugee camps in Pakistan, bidding their time, as a vicious civil war raged in Afghanistan. Following a series of bold moves, which increased their popularity and gave them access to much-needed arms, the Taliban moved in and captured Kabul in 1999, declaring their motherland the "Islamic Caliphate of Afghanistan".
Over the next few years, this fundamentalist brand of Islam grew, not just in Afghanistan but also in areas bordering it. Drawing upon public anger against the US, and Pakistan government's inefficient and corrupt collusion, Taliban-like organisations spread in Pakistan: among them, Jamaat-e-Islami and its associated organisations like Hizbul Mujahideen, Deobandi organisations like Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, and Wahaabi groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jamaat-ud-Dawa, all of whom subscribe to the global-jihad ideology.
Today, Pakistani people are being held to ransom by extremist groups, ranging from global jihadists like the remnants of al-Qaida and the Taliban to the various "lashkars" (armies) and mujahideen that operate throughout the country. Last year, 1,201 people died in 598 bombings. This year, in just two months, 106 bombings have taken place. As summer approaches, and the war in Afghanistan escalates, extremist violence may well intensify in Pakistan.
These groups seek to establish in their strongholds and eventually across the world, the same vicious regime as Taliban had established in Afghanistan until they were thrown out by invading US and NATO forces after 9/11.
The Taliban had ruled Afghanistan with an iron fist. It conducted medieval practices like public flogging and stoning, prohibited education for women, scorned modern systems like democracy and plural politics. They stamped out all divergent ideas — political, social or religious, including those within Islam.
Meanwhile, as the US continued its global war on terror with Iraq and Afghanistan as the two frontlines, and Pakistan as its key ally, the Taliban went back into hiding in villages on both sides of the Durand line, which marks the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mullah Umar, who headed the Taliban government in Kabul is most likely functioning from Quetta, the capital of Balochistan province in Pakistan.
Since 2003-04, the Taliban started regrouping and making increasingly daring attacks on the occupying US/NATO forces in the difficult terrain of
Afghanistan, and retreating to safe havens on the Pakistani side when under pressure. Gen Musharraf, acting under pressure and inducement from US, launched ineffective military campaigns against the growing clout of fundamentalists in the border areas the North Western Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).
Here the local warlords and tribal chiefs either became assimilated into the fundamentalist fold or were systematically eliminated. In 2007, several fundamentalist groups made a joint front called the "Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan" (TTP) led by Baitullah Mehsud, and supported by such local warlords as Maulana Fazlullah of Swat.
Under the garb of fighting terror, and to get more dollars out of US, Musharraf targeted several fundamentalist groups pushing them further into extremist arms. These include Sunni groups such as the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen al-Alami, the Jundullah, and Shia groups such as the Sipah-e-Muhammad.
Many of these groups function on sectarian or ethnic lines. Thus the TTP is largely a Pashtun, or "Pathan" (as they are called in Pakistan) organisation. Pathans make up 15% of the population and belong to the Sunni branch of Islam. Shias, the other major branch, comprise about 20% of the population.
While these groups have their differences on ideological and tactical issues, they have several commonalties. All are products of the Afghan jihad against the Soviet Union. They were nurtured by General Zia-ul-Haq, and received funding from Saudi and covert western sources in the early days. Various governments in Pakistan used them for political gains, including fighting for Kashmir.
All these groups strive for a more rigid interpretation of Islam, opposing the more flexible South Asian way of Muslim life.
In the spring of 1994, a new military force appeared in Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires. Legend has it that its first public action was in
Kandahar. A local warlord had abducted two girls for serving his troops. One night, a group of young, bearded Pashtuns, wearing black turbans emerged from the darkness, stormed the base, rescued the girls and hanged the warlord from the turret of a tank.
They were called the Taliban, and soon they stormed Kabul and established one of the most brutal regimes in the world, based on a narrow fundamentalist interpretation of Islam.
Their origins lay in the western border areas of Pakistan, where thousands of Afghans, mainly Pashtuns, had fled during the decade-long jihad against the Soviet army. A whole generation of boys grew up in refugee camps in tribal areas, learning the ideology of hate and revenge. The camps and seminaries were organised by the Pakistani government, with funds received covertly from the US (for fighting communism) and openly from Saudi Arabian armchair jihadists who wanted to spread Islam. Because of their origins in madrassas, these fighters were called the "Taliban", or students.
After the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989 with a bloody nose and the Najib government in Kabul fell in 1992, the Taliban continued to operate from refugee camps in Pakistan, bidding their time, as a vicious civil war raged in Afghanistan. Following a series of bold moves, which increased their popularity and gave them access to much-needed arms, the Taliban moved in and captured Kabul in 1999, declaring their motherland the "Islamic Caliphate of Afghanistan".
Over the next few years, this fundamentalist brand of Islam grew, not just in Afghanistan but also in areas bordering it. Drawing upon public anger against the US, and Pakistan government's inefficient and corrupt collusion, Taliban-like organisations spread in Pakistan: among them, Jamaat-e-Islami and its associated organisations like Hizbul Mujahideen, Deobandi organisations like Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, and Wahaabi groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jamaat-ud-Dawa, all of whom subscribe to the global-jihad ideology.
Today, Pakistani people are being held to ransom by extremist groups, ranging from global jihadists like the remnants of al-Qaida and the Taliban to the various "lashkars" (armies) and mujahideen that operate throughout the country. Last year, 1,201 people died in 598 bombings. This year, in just two months, 106 bombings have taken place. As summer approaches, and the war in Afghanistan escalates, extremist violence may well intensify in Pakistan.
These groups seek to establish in their strongholds and eventually across the world, the same vicious regime as Taliban had established in Afghanistan until they were thrown out by invading US and NATO forces after 9/11.
The Taliban had ruled Afghanistan with an iron fist. It conducted medieval practices like public flogging and stoning, prohibited education for women, scorned modern systems like democracy and plural politics. They stamped out all divergent ideas — political, social or religious, including those within Islam.
Meanwhile, as the US continued its global war on terror with Iraq and Afghanistan as the two frontlines, and Pakistan as its key ally, the Taliban went back into hiding in villages on both sides of the Durand line, which marks the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mullah Umar, who headed the Taliban government in Kabul is most likely functioning from Quetta, the capital of Balochistan province in Pakistan.
Since 2003-04, the Taliban started regrouping and making increasingly daring attacks on the occupying US/NATO forces in the difficult terrain of
Afghanistan, and retreating to safe havens on the Pakistani side when under pressure. Gen Musharraf, acting under pressure and inducement from US, launched ineffective military campaigns against the growing clout of fundamentalists in the border areas the North Western Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).
Here the local warlords and tribal chiefs either became assimilated into the fundamentalist fold or were systematically eliminated. In 2007, several fundamentalist groups made a joint front called the "Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan" (TTP) led by Baitullah Mehsud, and supported by such local warlords as Maulana Fazlullah of Swat.
Under the garb of fighting terror, and to get more dollars out of US, Musharraf targeted several fundamentalist groups pushing them further into extremist arms. These include Sunni groups such as the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen al-Alami, the Jundullah, and Shia groups such as the Sipah-e-Muhammad.
Many of these groups function on sectarian or ethnic lines. Thus the TTP is largely a Pashtun, or "Pathan" (as they are called in Pakistan) organisation. Pathans make up 15% of the population and belong to the Sunni branch of Islam. Shias, the other major branch, comprise about 20% of the population.
While these groups have their differences on ideological and tactical issues, they have several commonalties. All are products of the Afghan jihad against the Soviet Union. They were nurtured by General Zia-ul-Haq, and received funding from Saudi and covert western sources in the early days. Various governments in Pakistan used them for political gains, including fighting for Kashmir.
All these groups strive for a more rigid interpretation of Islam, opposing the more flexible South Asian way of Muslim life.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Pakistan should be made to pay the price for terror
Satish Chandra- former deputy National Security Advisor.
The terrorist attacks on Mumbai are nothing short of an act of war against India. There is incontrovertible evidence that the terrorists were Pakistani Lashkar-e-Tayiba operatives, who had been meticulously trained by military personnel, former or serving over several months for this operation.
They came to Mumbai by boat from Karachi and much of the material recovered from them, from toilet paper to grenades, had its origins in Pakistan. Given the Inter Services Intelligence's close links with and patronage of the LeT, as well as the commando style in which it was conducted, leaves no doubt that Pakistan was behind this action.
This incident must sadden every Indian not merely because of its terrible toll on life and property but because it is a scathing indictment of our leadership. We do not enjoy the luxury of explaining it away on grounds of surprise. The 1993 Mumbai blasts were our 9/11 with a casualty toll around double that in the present incident. Since then, with increasing frequency in the last three years, there have been several major terrorist incidents in India undertaken from Pakistan.
The government's inability to prevent such incidents is testimony to its abject failure both, to compel Pakistan to desist from exporting terrorism to India and, to appropriately upgrade its intelligence and security systems, including at the local level, so that the impact of such incidents is minimised.
It is well documented that Pakistan, since its very inception, has been involved in terrorist activities directed against India. The use of terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy against India was progressively refined into a fine art from Zia-ul Haq's time. While under Zia Pakistan fomented Sikh terrorism, subsequently, it guided and supported terrorist outfits, like the LeT, Harkat-ul Mujahideen [Images], Jaish-e-Mohammad, etc, as well as the Bangladesh's Directorate General of Forces Intelligence, in terrorist actions in India.
Successive governments in India have been complicit in emboldening Pakistan to use terrorism against our country by failing to penalise it for so doing. Pakistan's use of razakars in 1947 prompted India to merely engage in a defensive war, which was fought not in Pakistan, but on our soil, resulting in a substantial part of Kashmir being left under illegal Pakistani occupation.
Its covert operations in Kashmir in 1965 evoked a firmer response by way of an attack across the international border but the outcome was no more than a stalemate. Its actions in support of the Sikh and Kashmiri insurgency as well as terrorism elsewhere in the country saw no retaliatory action. The best that the then National Democratic Alliance government could muster up in response to the attack on Parliament was coercive diplomacy which resulted in Pakistan repeatedly promising to ensure that its territory would not be used for terrorism against India and that it would maintain a ceasefire along the LoC.
While the ceasefire held till recently Pakistan never stopped using terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy against India. The United Progressive Alliance government's record in this regard has been even worse. Far from chastising Pakistan, it projected it as a "victim" of terror, argued that we must distinguish between actions taken by terrorist groups which are not in the control of Pakistan and those undertaken by the state, and went so far as to set up a joint anti terror mechanism with it thereby undermining the possibility of mounting concerted international pressure on Pakistan for its actions in support of terrorism.
Even Afghanistan has been more forthright than India in criticising Pakistan for its involvement in terrorist activities. In this background, is it any surprise, therefore, that Pakistan continues to bleed us with a thousand cuts confident that a pusillanimous India will only bleat, not bite? Indeed, unless India adopts a much more proactive policy designed to make the use of terror painful for Pakistan there will be many more Mumbai like incidents.
If the UPA government's management of relations with Pakistan has left much to be desired, its management of our intelligence and security systems, essential to our having been able to foresee the Mumbai incident and deal with it effectively, has been abysmal. This is particularly regrettable as more had been done in India for security, from April 1999 to December 2004, than ever before in terms of establishing systems and structures and charting out a comprehensive reform of the national security system in its entirety. Indeed, execution of nearly 350 recommendations emanating from the Group of Ministers Report of 2001 on national security reform was well underway when the UPA government assumed office.
These reforms, evolved on the basis of advice given by our best experts in the field were inter alia designed precisely to forestall the possibility of our being taken by surprise, as we had been at Kargil [Images], either from land, from the air or by sea. Many of the structures and systems created, as a result of the reform process, have not been nurtured, or have been undone, and such reforms as are being pursued are progressing at a snail's pace. Tardy implementation of security related reforms such as the setting up of marine police in our coastal states, strengthening of the coast guard, modernisation of state police forces etc are, to an extent, responsible for our inability to minimize the impact of the terrorist actions in Mumbai.
It is common knowledge that the National Security Council Secretariat, which was functioning as the apex intelligence agency, has been gutted, with the revival of the Joint Intelligence Committee, whose functions had, in 1999, been subsumed within the NSCS, and with the appointment of three superannuated secretary level officers at its head. This has inevitably impacted negatively on its role as a coordinator of intelligence, as the key player in tasking and evaluating the agencies, and as the final assessor of the threat advisories put out by the intelligence collecting agencies.
It is well known that intelligence collecting agencies issue innumerable warnings, many of which are not actionable and in most cases the projected threat does not materialise. If each of these was taken at face value the country would be in a state of nervous breakdown! It is up to the final assessment agency, in India's case the NSCS, (now possibly once again the JIC?) with access to inputs from all the agencies as well as open sources, to join the dots, validate the advisories issued, spell out the nature of the threat and call for remedial action. This clearly did not happen and hence we were caught napping at Mumbai.
The government's criminal neglect in addressing the terrorist threat from Pakistan was matched by its casual management of the crisis as it unfolded in Mumbai. The errors were innumerable and indicative of the absence of a firm hand at the wheel. The 12-hour delay in deployment of the NSG is, perhaps, the most glaring. The inability to take out the terrorists quickly raises questions about adequacy of training, drills, tactics, protocols, weapons etc of the forces deployed. Media management was non existent. The media should not have been allowed access to within a mile of the affected area and individuals from the various organisations involved in the operations should not have been permitted to interact with it. Instead, frequent media briefings should have been organised through a team of designated spokespersons. This would have starved the terrorists of much useful information through the incessant media chatter. Crowd management also left much to be desired. In fact, the terrorists could have inflicted much higher casualties had they simply opened fired upon the mass of humanity milling around Nariman House.
India's response to the Mumbai attacks is still in a state of evolution, influenced, at one extreme by the enormous public anger against Pakistan and, at the other by the UPA government's peacenik mindset and reluctance to move beyond the US prescribed lakshman rekha of "restraint". Symbolic of the latter was the harebrained idea, modelled on the now discredited joint terror mechanism set up in the aftermath of the 2006 Mumbai serial train blasts apparently to mollify the public, to call the Pakistani DG ISI for discussions.
Apparently, the government, after each Pakistani inspired terrorist incident has the inexplicable urge to get into bed again with its rapist! Rather than squarely blaming Pakistan for its involvement in the Mumbai attacks it still adheres to the US dictated line that the attack was not a Pakistani state inspired exercise but came only from elements in that country and that they must be brought to book. Such a mild approach is irrational as it ignores the well documented symbiotic relationship between terrorism and the Pakistani state which has been cultivated over the decades. As long as Indian leaders do not recognise this a meaningful response to Pakistani terrorist actions against us cannot be fashioned.
Pakistan's involvement with terrorist activities directed against us can only be curbed by making it extremely painful to pursue such a policy. This can be achieved only through use of all the instrumentalities of state power and could entail the following specific measures:
* Suspension of the composite dialogue process in order to make it clear that there can be no business as usual with Pakistan till it mends its ways;
* Undertaking of a sustained and well prepared campaign to project Pakistan as it is, notably a terrorist state, so that harsh international sanctions are imposed on it;
* Termination of many of the CBMs, particularly those designed to help Pakistan economically. In fact, we should not hesitate to take actions that undermine Pakistan's economy
* Exploitation of the faultlines of Pakistan as it has consistently done vis a vis India;
* Serve notice for the renegotiation of the Indus Waters Treaty, thus indicating our resolve to use water as a pressure point against Pakistan; in the meantime minimise the release of Indus waters to Pakistan through maximum use of water in India as permitted under the Treaty
* Address terrorist outfits through covert action and if need be through focused military strikes.
Some of the arguments adduced against such robust action are that the US will force Pakistan to give us satisfaction, that we need to distinguish between the civilian regime and the military in Pakistan and not penalise the former, and that Pakistan is a nuclear weapon state. In this context, the following may be mentioned:
* We should not expect the US to pull our chestnuts out of the fire. Their record hardly inspires confidence. The US promises much and delivers little. We must not be satisfied by the cosmetic measures that Pakistan may take such as the arrest of the odd LeT commander or a raid on a LeT camp in PoK. India must ensure the complete shutdown of the infrastructure of terror in Pakistan.
* While there is some merit in making a distinction between the military and the civilian regime in the ultimate analysis reactions to Pakistan have to be dictated by what its government, whether civilian or military, does. Everyone knows that, in the instant case, the military calls the shots in Pakistan and, therefore, the regime in that country is civilian only in name. The civilians in Pakistan can hardly expect India to fight their battles for them against their military. It is up to them to tell the military to refrain from patronising terrorists not only because it hurts India but Pakistan as well.
* Pakistan's nuclear capability should not push us into a paralysis of action. India, too, is a nuclear weapon state and use of such weapons against us is unlikely because of our deterrent capabilities.
Finally, let us recognise that no one is going to fight our battles for us, that only we can safeguard our security and integrity through our own actions, and that any outside help, whether by a super power or the international community, can only be supplementary to our own efforts.
The terrorist attacks on Mumbai are nothing short of an act of war against India. There is incontrovertible evidence that the terrorists were Pakistani Lashkar-e-Tayiba operatives, who had been meticulously trained by military personnel, former or serving over several months for this operation.
They came to Mumbai by boat from Karachi and much of the material recovered from them, from toilet paper to grenades, had its origins in Pakistan. Given the Inter Services Intelligence's close links with and patronage of the LeT, as well as the commando style in which it was conducted, leaves no doubt that Pakistan was behind this action.
This incident must sadden every Indian not merely because of its terrible toll on life and property but because it is a scathing indictment of our leadership. We do not enjoy the luxury of explaining it away on grounds of surprise. The 1993 Mumbai blasts were our 9/11 with a casualty toll around double that in the present incident. Since then, with increasing frequency in the last three years, there have been several major terrorist incidents in India undertaken from Pakistan.
The government's inability to prevent such incidents is testimony to its abject failure both, to compel Pakistan to desist from exporting terrorism to India and, to appropriately upgrade its intelligence and security systems, including at the local level, so that the impact of such incidents is minimised.
It is well documented that Pakistan, since its very inception, has been involved in terrorist activities directed against India. The use of terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy against India was progressively refined into a fine art from Zia-ul Haq's time. While under Zia Pakistan fomented Sikh terrorism, subsequently, it guided and supported terrorist outfits, like the LeT, Harkat-ul Mujahideen [Images], Jaish-e-Mohammad, etc, as well as the Bangladesh's Directorate General of Forces Intelligence, in terrorist actions in India.
Successive governments in India have been complicit in emboldening Pakistan to use terrorism against our country by failing to penalise it for so doing. Pakistan's use of razakars in 1947 prompted India to merely engage in a defensive war, which was fought not in Pakistan, but on our soil, resulting in a substantial part of Kashmir being left under illegal Pakistani occupation.
Its covert operations in Kashmir in 1965 evoked a firmer response by way of an attack across the international border but the outcome was no more than a stalemate. Its actions in support of the Sikh and Kashmiri insurgency as well as terrorism elsewhere in the country saw no retaliatory action. The best that the then National Democratic Alliance government could muster up in response to the attack on Parliament was coercive diplomacy which resulted in Pakistan repeatedly promising to ensure that its territory would not be used for terrorism against India and that it would maintain a ceasefire along the LoC.
While the ceasefire held till recently Pakistan never stopped using terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy against India. The United Progressive Alliance government's record in this regard has been even worse. Far from chastising Pakistan, it projected it as a "victim" of terror, argued that we must distinguish between actions taken by terrorist groups which are not in the control of Pakistan and those undertaken by the state, and went so far as to set up a joint anti terror mechanism with it thereby undermining the possibility of mounting concerted international pressure on Pakistan for its actions in support of terrorism.
Even Afghanistan has been more forthright than India in criticising Pakistan for its involvement in terrorist activities. In this background, is it any surprise, therefore, that Pakistan continues to bleed us with a thousand cuts confident that a pusillanimous India will only bleat, not bite? Indeed, unless India adopts a much more proactive policy designed to make the use of terror painful for Pakistan there will be many more Mumbai like incidents.
If the UPA government's management of relations with Pakistan has left much to be desired, its management of our intelligence and security systems, essential to our having been able to foresee the Mumbai incident and deal with it effectively, has been abysmal. This is particularly regrettable as more had been done in India for security, from April 1999 to December 2004, than ever before in terms of establishing systems and structures and charting out a comprehensive reform of the national security system in its entirety. Indeed, execution of nearly 350 recommendations emanating from the Group of Ministers Report of 2001 on national security reform was well underway when the UPA government assumed office.
These reforms, evolved on the basis of advice given by our best experts in the field were inter alia designed precisely to forestall the possibility of our being taken by surprise, as we had been at Kargil [Images], either from land, from the air or by sea. Many of the structures and systems created, as a result of the reform process, have not been nurtured, or have been undone, and such reforms as are being pursued are progressing at a snail's pace. Tardy implementation of security related reforms such as the setting up of marine police in our coastal states, strengthening of the coast guard, modernisation of state police forces etc are, to an extent, responsible for our inability to minimize the impact of the terrorist actions in Mumbai.
It is common knowledge that the National Security Council Secretariat, which was functioning as the apex intelligence agency, has been gutted, with the revival of the Joint Intelligence Committee, whose functions had, in 1999, been subsumed within the NSCS, and with the appointment of three superannuated secretary level officers at its head. This has inevitably impacted negatively on its role as a coordinator of intelligence, as the key player in tasking and evaluating the agencies, and as the final assessor of the threat advisories put out by the intelligence collecting agencies.
It is well known that intelligence collecting agencies issue innumerable warnings, many of which are not actionable and in most cases the projected threat does not materialise. If each of these was taken at face value the country would be in a state of nervous breakdown! It is up to the final assessment agency, in India's case the NSCS, (now possibly once again the JIC?) with access to inputs from all the agencies as well as open sources, to join the dots, validate the advisories issued, spell out the nature of the threat and call for remedial action. This clearly did not happen and hence we were caught napping at Mumbai.
The government's criminal neglect in addressing the terrorist threat from Pakistan was matched by its casual management of the crisis as it unfolded in Mumbai. The errors were innumerable and indicative of the absence of a firm hand at the wheel. The 12-hour delay in deployment of the NSG is, perhaps, the most glaring. The inability to take out the terrorists quickly raises questions about adequacy of training, drills, tactics, protocols, weapons etc of the forces deployed. Media management was non existent. The media should not have been allowed access to within a mile of the affected area and individuals from the various organisations involved in the operations should not have been permitted to interact with it. Instead, frequent media briefings should have been organised through a team of designated spokespersons. This would have starved the terrorists of much useful information through the incessant media chatter. Crowd management also left much to be desired. In fact, the terrorists could have inflicted much higher casualties had they simply opened fired upon the mass of humanity milling around Nariman House.
India's response to the Mumbai attacks is still in a state of evolution, influenced, at one extreme by the enormous public anger against Pakistan and, at the other by the UPA government's peacenik mindset and reluctance to move beyond the US prescribed lakshman rekha of "restraint". Symbolic of the latter was the harebrained idea, modelled on the now discredited joint terror mechanism set up in the aftermath of the 2006 Mumbai serial train blasts apparently to mollify the public, to call the Pakistani DG ISI for discussions.
Apparently, the government, after each Pakistani inspired terrorist incident has the inexplicable urge to get into bed again with its rapist! Rather than squarely blaming Pakistan for its involvement in the Mumbai attacks it still adheres to the US dictated line that the attack was not a Pakistani state inspired exercise but came only from elements in that country and that they must be brought to book. Such a mild approach is irrational as it ignores the well documented symbiotic relationship between terrorism and the Pakistani state which has been cultivated over the decades. As long as Indian leaders do not recognise this a meaningful response to Pakistani terrorist actions against us cannot be fashioned.
Pakistan's involvement with terrorist activities directed against us can only be curbed by making it extremely painful to pursue such a policy. This can be achieved only through use of all the instrumentalities of state power and could entail the following specific measures:
* Suspension of the composite dialogue process in order to make it clear that there can be no business as usual with Pakistan till it mends its ways;
* Undertaking of a sustained and well prepared campaign to project Pakistan as it is, notably a terrorist state, so that harsh international sanctions are imposed on it;
* Termination of many of the CBMs, particularly those designed to help Pakistan economically. In fact, we should not hesitate to take actions that undermine Pakistan's economy
* Exploitation of the faultlines of Pakistan as it has consistently done vis a vis India;
* Serve notice for the renegotiation of the Indus Waters Treaty, thus indicating our resolve to use water as a pressure point against Pakistan; in the meantime minimise the release of Indus waters to Pakistan through maximum use of water in India as permitted under the Treaty
* Address terrorist outfits through covert action and if need be through focused military strikes.
Some of the arguments adduced against such robust action are that the US will force Pakistan to give us satisfaction, that we need to distinguish between the civilian regime and the military in Pakistan and not penalise the former, and that Pakistan is a nuclear weapon state. In this context, the following may be mentioned:
* We should not expect the US to pull our chestnuts out of the fire. Their record hardly inspires confidence. The US promises much and delivers little. We must not be satisfied by the cosmetic measures that Pakistan may take such as the arrest of the odd LeT commander or a raid on a LeT camp in PoK. India must ensure the complete shutdown of the infrastructure of terror in Pakistan.
* While there is some merit in making a distinction between the military and the civilian regime in the ultimate analysis reactions to Pakistan have to be dictated by what its government, whether civilian or military, does. Everyone knows that, in the instant case, the military calls the shots in Pakistan and, therefore, the regime in that country is civilian only in name. The civilians in Pakistan can hardly expect India to fight their battles for them against their military. It is up to them to tell the military to refrain from patronising terrorists not only because it hurts India but Pakistan as well.
* Pakistan's nuclear capability should not push us into a paralysis of action. India, too, is a nuclear weapon state and use of such weapons against us is unlikely because of our deterrent capabilities.
Finally, let us recognise that no one is going to fight our battles for us, that only we can safeguard our security and integrity through our own actions, and that any outside help, whether by a super power or the international community, can only be supplementary to our own efforts.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Economic destabilisation of the Terror Central is must for rooting out terror.
R Vaidyanathan
Tuesday, December 09, 2008 03:36 IST
I did not anticipate the huge response my inbox received for the article last week (December 2) slamming Pakistan. Many of those who wrote in have sought concrete steps to tackle the Terror Central. The terror attack on world citizens at Mumbai has created revulsion and outrage all over the world. It is imperative that India seize the opportunity provided to destabilise Pakistan.
A stable Pakistan is not in the interest of world peace, leave alone India. Army controls the country and owns its economy. A significant portion of its GDP is due to army-controlled entities (See Military Inc Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy by Ayesha Siddiqa; OUP; 2007). One can easily say that Pakistan Economy and its Army/ISI are synonymous.
Unless this elementary fact is internalised, we are not going anywhere. This implies we should stop talking of a stable Pakistan since a stable Pakistan means multiple attacks on many more cities of India by that rogue organisation ISI, which is the core of the Pakistan Army and the heart of Pakistan’s economy.
Let us not even assume that Zardari is in control. Poor man - he did not trust his own investigators to probe his wife’s assassination - he wanted Scotland Yard to do the job. Now he blabbers that if his investigators are satisfied, then he will initiate action against terrorists sitting inside Pakistan. Periodically, the Pakistan Army likes to present some useful idiots (as Lenin would have called them) as elected representatives and we swoon over such events.
India should take the following steps to destabilise the economy of Pakistan Identify the major export items of Pakistan (like Basmati rice, carpets etc) and provide zero export tax or even subsidise them for export from India. Hurt Pakistan on the export front.
Identify the major countries providing arms to Pakistan and arm twist them. Tell Brazil and Germany (currently planning to supply massive defense items to Pakistan) that it will impact their ability to invest in India. Tell Germany that retail license to Metro will be off and other existing projects will be in jeopardy.
Incidentally, after the arrival of Coke and Pepsi in China, the human rights violations of China are not talked about much by US government organs. Think it is a coincidence? Unless we use our markets to arm-twist arms exporters to Pakistan, we will not achieve our objectives.
Tell American companies that for every 5% increase in FDI limit for them, their government needs to reduce equipping Pakistan by $5 billion. That is real politics, not whining. Let us remember that funds are in desperate search of emerging markets and not the other way about. Let us also remember that international economics is politics by another name.
Create assets to print/distribute their currency widely inside their country. To some extent, Telgi types can be used to outsource this activity. Or just drop their notes in remote areas.
Pressurise IMF to add additional conditionality to the loans given to them or at least do not vote for their loans.
Create assets within Pakistan to destabilise Karachi Stock market - it is already in shambles.
Cricket and Bollywood are the opium of the Indian middle classes. Both have been adequately manipulated/ controlled by the D-company since the eighties. Chase the D-company money in cricket/ Bollywood and punish by burning D-assets in India instead of trying to have them auctioned by the IT department when nobody comes to bid for it.
Provide for capital punishment to those who fund terror and help in that. We have the division in the finance ministry to monitor money laundering, etc. It is important that terror financing is taken seriously and fully integrated into money laundering monitoring systems and this division is provided with much larger budget and human resources. And it should coordinate with RAW.
Encourage and allow scientists/ academicians/ elites of Pakistan to opt for Indian passport and widely publicise that fact since it will hurt their self-respect and dignity. There will be a long queue to get Indian passports — many will jump to get our passport — since they will not be stopped at international airports. It is rumoured that Adnan Sami wants one. Do not give passports to all — make it a prized possession. Let it hurt the army and ISI controlled country. This one step will destroy their identity and self-confidence.
Discourage companies from India from investing in Pakistan, particularly IT companies, till Pakistan stops exporting its own IT (international terrorism).
In all these, it is important that we do not bring in the domestic religious issues. The target is the terror central, namely Pakistan, and if there are elements helping them here then they also should be punished-irrespective of religious labels. If Pakistan is dismantled and the idea of Pakistan is gone, many of our domestic issues will also be sorted out.
Will the Indian elite go for the jugular or just light more candles and scream at the formless/ nameless political class before TV cameras? It is going to be a long haul and may be in a decade or so, we can find a solution to our existential crisis of being attacked by barbarians from the West. We need to combine strategy and patience and completely throw to the dustbin the ‘Gujral Doctrine’ by that mumbling Prime Minister about treating younger brothers with equanimity.
The doctrine essentially suggests that if we are slapped on both the cheeks we should feel bad that we do not have a third cheek to show. He, according to security experts, seems to have dismantled our human intelligent assets inside Pakistan, which has resulted in the gory death of thousands of Indian citizens in the last few years. Such is our strategic thinking in this complex world since our political class is not adequately briefed and the elite don’t think through issues. Better to be simple in our talks and vicious in our actions rather than the other way.
Hopefully, this November attack will create a new vibrant India capable of taking care of its own interests.
The writer is professor of finance and control, Indian Institute of Management - Bangalore, and can be reached at vaidya@iimb.ernet.in.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008 03:36 IST
I did not anticipate the huge response my inbox received for the article last week (December 2) slamming Pakistan. Many of those who wrote in have sought concrete steps to tackle the Terror Central. The terror attack on world citizens at Mumbai has created revulsion and outrage all over the world. It is imperative that India seize the opportunity provided to destabilise Pakistan.
A stable Pakistan is not in the interest of world peace, leave alone India. Army controls the country and owns its economy. A significant portion of its GDP is due to army-controlled entities (See Military Inc Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy by Ayesha Siddiqa; OUP; 2007). One can easily say that Pakistan Economy and its Army/ISI are synonymous.
Unless this elementary fact is internalised, we are not going anywhere. This implies we should stop talking of a stable Pakistan since a stable Pakistan means multiple attacks on many more cities of India by that rogue organisation ISI, which is the core of the Pakistan Army and the heart of Pakistan’s economy.
Let us not even assume that Zardari is in control. Poor man - he did not trust his own investigators to probe his wife’s assassination - he wanted Scotland Yard to do the job. Now he blabbers that if his investigators are satisfied, then he will initiate action against terrorists sitting inside Pakistan. Periodically, the Pakistan Army likes to present some useful idiots (as Lenin would have called them) as elected representatives and we swoon over such events.
India should take the following steps to destabilise the economy of Pakistan Identify the major export items of Pakistan (like Basmati rice, carpets etc) and provide zero export tax or even subsidise them for export from India. Hurt Pakistan on the export front.
Identify the major countries providing arms to Pakistan and arm twist them. Tell Brazil and Germany (currently planning to supply massive defense items to Pakistan) that it will impact their ability to invest in India. Tell Germany that retail license to Metro will be off and other existing projects will be in jeopardy.
Incidentally, after the arrival of Coke and Pepsi in China, the human rights violations of China are not talked about much by US government organs. Think it is a coincidence? Unless we use our markets to arm-twist arms exporters to Pakistan, we will not achieve our objectives.
Tell American companies that for every 5% increase in FDI limit for them, their government needs to reduce equipping Pakistan by $5 billion. That is real politics, not whining. Let us remember that funds are in desperate search of emerging markets and not the other way about. Let us also remember that international economics is politics by another name.
Create assets to print/distribute their currency widely inside their country. To some extent, Telgi types can be used to outsource this activity. Or just drop their notes in remote areas.
Pressurise IMF to add additional conditionality to the loans given to them or at least do not vote for their loans.
Create assets within Pakistan to destabilise Karachi Stock market - it is already in shambles.
Cricket and Bollywood are the opium of the Indian middle classes. Both have been adequately manipulated/ controlled by the D-company since the eighties. Chase the D-company money in cricket/ Bollywood and punish by burning D-assets in India instead of trying to have them auctioned by the IT department when nobody comes to bid for it.
Provide for capital punishment to those who fund terror and help in that. We have the division in the finance ministry to monitor money laundering, etc. It is important that terror financing is taken seriously and fully integrated into money laundering monitoring systems and this division is provided with much larger budget and human resources. And it should coordinate with RAW.
Encourage and allow scientists/ academicians/ elites of Pakistan to opt for Indian passport and widely publicise that fact since it will hurt their self-respect and dignity. There will be a long queue to get Indian passports — many will jump to get our passport — since they will not be stopped at international airports. It is rumoured that Adnan Sami wants one. Do not give passports to all — make it a prized possession. Let it hurt the army and ISI controlled country. This one step will destroy their identity and self-confidence.
Discourage companies from India from investing in Pakistan, particularly IT companies, till Pakistan stops exporting its own IT (international terrorism).
In all these, it is important that we do not bring in the domestic religious issues. The target is the terror central, namely Pakistan, and if there are elements helping them here then they also should be punished-irrespective of religious labels. If Pakistan is dismantled and the idea of Pakistan is gone, many of our domestic issues will also be sorted out.
Will the Indian elite go for the jugular or just light more candles and scream at the formless/ nameless political class before TV cameras? It is going to be a long haul and may be in a decade or so, we can find a solution to our existential crisis of being attacked by barbarians from the West. We need to combine strategy and patience and completely throw to the dustbin the ‘Gujral Doctrine’ by that mumbling Prime Minister about treating younger brothers with equanimity.
The doctrine essentially suggests that if we are slapped on both the cheeks we should feel bad that we do not have a third cheek to show. He, according to security experts, seems to have dismantled our human intelligent assets inside Pakistan, which has resulted in the gory death of thousands of Indian citizens in the last few years. Such is our strategic thinking in this complex world since our political class is not adequately briefed and the elite don’t think through issues. Better to be simple in our talks and vicious in our actions rather than the other way.
Hopefully, this November attack will create a new vibrant India capable of taking care of its own interests.
The writer is professor of finance and control, Indian Institute of Management - Bangalore, and can be reached at vaidya@iimb.ernet.in.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Lashkar, ISI involved in Mumbai terror: US
Zeenews Bureau
Islamabad, Dec 04: US told Pakistan it has evidence of LeT’s involvement in last week’s Mumbai terror attacks and that it should arrest its chief Hafeez Sayeed.
Sources close to the talks between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Pakistan leadership have revealed that US has shared evidence of LeT’s involvement in the attacks that killed 200 and injured over 300.
Pakistan has also been told that it was hard to believe the country’s armed forces, including the ISI, were not in the know of the ghastly terror operation.
However, in an interview with an Indian publication, LeT chief Hafeez has denied his organisation is involved in the terror attacks. He also alleged that Indian intelligence agencies' failure to prevent the attacks was leading them to blame Pakistan.
A veteran CIA analyst also claimed earlier in the day that Mumbai attackers had ISI links.
"If there's anything that is a 64 million dollar question today," it is finding out the "extent of its(LeT) current ties to the Pakistani intelligence service(Inter Services Intelligence)," said Bruce Riedel in Washington.
Meanwhile Indian authorities have claimed that they have ‘incontrovertible’ proof about ISI involvement in the attacks. Sleuths are aware of who trained the 10 terrorists and where the training took place in Pakistan. This and other pieces of evidence have been shared with the US, sources reveal.
Evidence collected in probes so far has pointed to two members of outlawed Pakistani group Lashkar-e-Taiba as masterminds in the attacks, according to two officials familiar with the matter.
The men, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi and Yusuf Muzammil, are believed to be in Pakistan, the officials said. Lakhvi was identified as the group's operations chief and Muzammil as its operations chief in Kashmir and other parts of India.
The lone surviving gunman in the assault, Ajmal Amir Kasab, 21, told police Lakhvi recruited him for the operation, and the assailants called Muzammil on a satellite phone after hijacking an Indian vessel en route to Mumbai. During the attacks, the gunmen used mobile phones taken from hotel guests to place calls to Lahore.
But it has come to light that the US knows more about the attacks that earlier thought. Its troops being stationed in Pakistan, the US has reportedly got more evidence about Pakistan’s role. It is aware of the exact route that the terrorists took from Karachi to Mumbai and the same has been shared with Pakistani authorities.
Islamabad, Dec 04: US told Pakistan it has evidence of LeT’s involvement in last week’s Mumbai terror attacks and that it should arrest its chief Hafeez Sayeed.
Sources close to the talks between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Pakistan leadership have revealed that US has shared evidence of LeT’s involvement in the attacks that killed 200 and injured over 300.
Pakistan has also been told that it was hard to believe the country’s armed forces, including the ISI, were not in the know of the ghastly terror operation.
However, in an interview with an Indian publication, LeT chief Hafeez has denied his organisation is involved in the terror attacks. He also alleged that Indian intelligence agencies' failure to prevent the attacks was leading them to blame Pakistan.
A veteran CIA analyst also claimed earlier in the day that Mumbai attackers had ISI links.
"If there's anything that is a 64 million dollar question today," it is finding out the "extent of its(LeT) current ties to the Pakistani intelligence service(Inter Services Intelligence)," said Bruce Riedel in Washington.
Meanwhile Indian authorities have claimed that they have ‘incontrovertible’ proof about ISI involvement in the attacks. Sleuths are aware of who trained the 10 terrorists and where the training took place in Pakistan. This and other pieces of evidence have been shared with the US, sources reveal.
Evidence collected in probes so far has pointed to two members of outlawed Pakistani group Lashkar-e-Taiba as masterminds in the attacks, according to two officials familiar with the matter.
The men, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi and Yusuf Muzammil, are believed to be in Pakistan, the officials said. Lakhvi was identified as the group's operations chief and Muzammil as its operations chief in Kashmir and other parts of India.
The lone surviving gunman in the assault, Ajmal Amir Kasab, 21, told police Lakhvi recruited him for the operation, and the assailants called Muzammil on a satellite phone after hijacking an Indian vessel en route to Mumbai. During the attacks, the gunmen used mobile phones taken from hotel guests to place calls to Lahore.
But it has come to light that the US knows more about the attacks that earlier thought. Its troops being stationed in Pakistan, the US has reportedly got more evidence about Pakistan’s role. It is aware of the exact route that the terrorists took from Karachi to Mumbai and the same has been shared with Pakistani authorities.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
‘Indian Mujahideen’ claims responsibility
Praveen Swami
Reprisal for 2002 riots, say suspected SIMI-Lashkar front organisations
NEW DELHI: In a 14-page manifesto e-mailed to the media minutes before Saturday’s serial bombings, an organisation calling itself the “Indian Mujahideen” has claimed responsibility for the Ahmedabad attacks.
Titled “The Rise of Jihad”, the manifesto says the bombings were carried out to avenge the 2002 anti-Muslim violence in Gujarat. “In the light of the injustice and wrongs on the Muslims of Gujarat,” it says, “we advance our jihad and call all our brethren under it to unite and answer these irresolute kafireen [infidels] of India.”
It warns of future attacks, complaining that the police “disturbed us by arresting, imprisoning, and torturing our brothers in the name of SIMI [Students Islamic Movement of India].”
In a similar document sent minutes before May’s serial bomb strikes in Jaipur, the IM had said such bombings were intended “to clearly give our message to Kuffar-e-Hind [the infidels of India] that if Islam and Muslims in this country are not safe then the light of your safety will also go off very soon.”
Near-identical language had been earlier used by the IM in a document e-mailed to television stations minutes before the bombing of three trial-court buildings in Uttar Pradesh last year. In its e-mail, the IM said it was retaliating against “wounds given by the idol worshipers of India.”
Investigators belive the IM is a loose coalition of elements from the Students Islamic Movement of India, the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Harkat ul-Jihad-e-Islami.
Police were able to determine that the explosive used in the Uttar Pradesh bombings was supplied by a Jammu and Kashmir-based Harkat-ul-Jihad-e-Islami unit. Jaunpur-based SIMI activist Mohammad Khalid Mujahid and Azamgarh Unani doctor Mohammad Tariq were held for their alleged role in planning two of the three court bombings, However, the members of the third cell, who are also thought to have sent out the e-mail, remain untraced.
While military-grade plastic explosive was used in Jaipur and Uttar Pradesh, the bombs used in Ahmedabad appear to have been constructed with ammonium nitrate, a widely-available chemical with a range of industrial applications. Police sources said the bombs resembled the devices used in Bangalore on Friday.
Reprisal for 2002 riots, say suspected SIMI-Lashkar front organisations
NEW DELHI: In a 14-page manifesto e-mailed to the media minutes before Saturday’s serial bombings, an organisation calling itself the “Indian Mujahideen” has claimed responsibility for the Ahmedabad attacks.
Titled “The Rise of Jihad”, the manifesto says the bombings were carried out to avenge the 2002 anti-Muslim violence in Gujarat. “In the light of the injustice and wrongs on the Muslims of Gujarat,” it says, “we advance our jihad and call all our brethren under it to unite and answer these irresolute kafireen [infidels] of India.”
It warns of future attacks, complaining that the police “disturbed us by arresting, imprisoning, and torturing our brothers in the name of SIMI [Students Islamic Movement of India].”
In a similar document sent minutes before May’s serial bomb strikes in Jaipur, the IM had said such bombings were intended “to clearly give our message to Kuffar-e-Hind [the infidels of India] that if Islam and Muslims in this country are not safe then the light of your safety will also go off very soon.”
Near-identical language had been earlier used by the IM in a document e-mailed to television stations minutes before the bombing of three trial-court buildings in Uttar Pradesh last year. In its e-mail, the IM said it was retaliating against “wounds given by the idol worshipers of India.”
Investigators belive the IM is a loose coalition of elements from the Students Islamic Movement of India, the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Harkat ul-Jihad-e-Islami.
Police were able to determine that the explosive used in the Uttar Pradesh bombings was supplied by a Jammu and Kashmir-based Harkat-ul-Jihad-e-Islami unit. Jaunpur-based SIMI activist Mohammad Khalid Mujahid and Azamgarh Unani doctor Mohammad Tariq were held for their alleged role in planning two of the three court bombings, However, the members of the third cell, who are also thought to have sent out the e-mail, remain untraced.
While military-grade plastic explosive was used in Jaipur and Uttar Pradesh, the bombs used in Ahmedabad appear to have been constructed with ammonium nitrate, a widely-available chemical with a range of industrial applications. Police sources said the bombs resembled the devices used in Bangalore on Friday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
