B.RAMAN
The Chinese are less tense and more relaxed as Tibet and Tibetans observe the second anniversary of the uprising of March 10,2008, which started in Lhasa and spread across the Tibetan areas. They have made many preventive arrests in Tibet to prevent anything untoward happening, but the high tension, which one witnessed last year, is not there.
2.The Chinese authorities continue to be more nervous about the situation in Muslim-majority Xinjiang than in Buddhist-majority Tibet. Despite the reported death last month of Abdul Haq al-Turkistani, the Amir of the Islamic Movement of East Turkestan (IMET), in a missile strike by a Drone (pilotless plane) of the US in North Waziristan of Pakistan, the Chinese officials in charge of internal security in Xinjiang are worried over the situation in the Autonomous Region and are taking no chances. If the death of Abdul Haq is confirmed, it is not clear who would succeed him. So little is known about the organisational structure of the IMET that it is difficult to assess what would happen to the IMET after him.
3. There has been a greater sophistication in Beijing in the handling of the Tibetan issue. One no longer sees the kind of demonisation of His Holiness the Dalai Lama which one used to see before March,2009. The Chinese reacted with anger to the meeting of President Barack Obama with His Holiness in the White House last month, but refrained from talk of any retaliatory action against the US.
4. The Chinese authorities held a Tibet strategy session at Beijing from January 18 to 20, 2010. Since the People’s Liberation Army occupied Tibet in 1949-50, Chinese leaders are reported to have held five such strategy sessions under the name the Tibet Work Forum. The latest session called the Fifth Tibet Work Forum was reported to have been attended by about 300 Party, Government and military leaders playing a role in policy-making on Tibet.
5.There were three significant outcomes of the Forum:
While continuing to reject the Dalai Lama's idea of an integration of all the Tibetan areas of Tibet,Sichuan, Yunnan, Gansu and Qinghai provinces, they are now making a distinction between the problems of governance in the Tibet Autonomous Region and the problems of development of the Tibetan minority living in these provinces. There is an attempt to approach the development, religious and cultural problems of the Tibetans in a comprehensive manner, wherever they might be living.
While continuing to claim that Tibet has developed considerably under Chinese rule, there is now an admission that there is a wide gap between the urban and rural areas. The development in Tibet has till now been focused largely on infrastructure projects. The beneficiaries of infrastructure-centric development were the people in the urban areas. The rural people benefited mush less. There is now an admission of the need to develop further the rural areas in order to improve the quality of life of the people.
The Work Forum led to a decision to resume the dialogue with the representatives of His Holiness after a gap of 14 months. The talks, which were held in the last week of January, 2010, could not break the deadlock. Both sides stuck to their respective position. While the representatives of His Holiness maintained that the purpose of the dialogue was to discuss the future of Tibet and the Tibetans in the context of His Holiness' demand for greater autonomy and for the integration of all Tibetan-inhabited areas in a single province, the Chinese made it clear that the purpose was to discuss the future of His Holiness and not of Tibet and the Tibetans. However, despite the deadlock, both sides have kept open the possibility of more meetings.
6. The opportunity provided by the current session of the National People's Congress (NPC), the Chinese Parliament, at Beijing has been utilised by the Chinese leaders to make it clear in a media briefing held on March 7,2010, in the margins of the session that the Chinese Government will have the final say regarding succession to His Holiness.Padma Choling, an ethnic Tibetan who was appointed Governor of the Tibet autonomous regional government in January, 2010, told the media briefing as follows:"The reincarnation of Living Buddhas in Tibetan Buddhism should follow strict historical conventions and religious rituals. There have been 14 Dalai Lamas ... It is unreasonable for him to do whatever he wants (about reincarnation). There's no way for him to do so.The 14th Dalai Lama himself was approved by the Nationalist government, the then central regime of China."
7.Qiangba Puncog, Chairman of the standing committee of the Tibet autonomous region's People's Congress, said at the briefing: "The reincarnation must meet the traditional requirements in four aspects: religious rituals, historical conventions passed on since the Qing Dynasty (1644-1912), lot drawing from the Golden Urn in front of the Buddha Sakyamuni, as well as approval from the Central Government.
Any claimed reincarnation that fails to meet all these requirements will be illegitimate and invalid."
8.Padma Choling ridiculed the Dalai Lama's indecision on his succession and said: "The Dalai Lama has previously made a series of assertions, saying that he might choose his reincarnation while alive, that he could stop his reincarnation, that his reincarnation could be designated, that his reincarnation could be a female, or that his reincarnation would be found inside or even outside China. People don't know which assertion is what he really wants. There is currently no need to talk too much about issues related to the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, as he is still alive."
9. The Chinese have utilised the current NPC session to give a greater political exposure to the Panchen Lama nominated by the Chinese Government in 1995 after rejecting the Panchen Lama designated according to Tibetan Buddhist traditions by the Dalai Lama. The Government-designated Panchen Lama is one of the 13 new members nominated to the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), a top advisory body with no legislative powers.
10. During his interactions with the Tibetan delegates to the NPC session, President Hu Jintao said that political stability and economic development would be the keynotes of the Government's policy on Tibet. ( 9-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Monday, March 8, 2010
TERRORISTS TARGET LAHORE AGAIN
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR--PAPER NO. 627
B.RAMAN
At least 11 persons are reported to have been killed in a suicide bomb attack on a rented building of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) of Pakistan in the residential Model Town area of Lahore on the morning of March 8,2010. The large quantity of explosive used brought down the entire building.
2. This is the first terrorist attack in Lahore this year. Last year, there were five as follows:
15 October: Terrorists attacked offices of law enforcement agencies.
12 June: A prominent anti-Taliban cleric killed by a suicide bomber at his religious school
27 May: A car bomb attack on police buildings killed 23 persons.
30 March: Gunmen attacked a police academy, killing eight people
3 March: Gunmen killed six police guards in an ambush of the Sri Lankan cricket team
3. The latest attack has taken place after an interval of about five months. There are two possibilities--- either it was carried out by the Terhrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to demonstrate that it still had the capability to attack targets in the non-tribal areas despite the losses suffered by it since the beginning of this year----including the reported but unconfirmed death of its Amir Hakimullah Mehsud after he was injured in a missile strike by a Drone (unmanned) plane of the US in January--- or it was carried out by the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) in retaliation for the reported death of its leader Qari Mohammad Zafar in a US Drone strike in North Waziristan on February 24,2010. The greater possibility is that the latest attack was carried out by a bomber of the LEJ, which has been operating jointly with the TTP and Al Qaeda and which has the capability for spectacular strikes in Lahore.
4. Police and FIA-connected targets and a target of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) have been attacked in Lahore since the beginning of last year because of the terrorists' calculation that instability in Lahore could make the Army and the FIA go slow in their operations against the TTP and the Punjabi Taliban. The targeting of the FIA and the ISI in recent months is due to their being perceived by the TTP and the LEJ as working in close co-operation with the US intelligence agencies in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). The FIA has also been in receipt of increasing assistance from the US for strengthening its counter-terrorism capability.
5. The Lahore attack came a day after sections of the Pakistani media had claimed that the Pakistani intelligence agencies had managed to arrest Adam Gadahn, the American convert to Islam, who heads the As-Sahab, the propaganda wing of Al Qaeda from a hide-out in a Pashtun inhabited area of Karachi where a large number of Mehsuds from South Waziristan live. Western sources have expressed skepticism about the correctness of the Pakistani claim.
6. If the Pakistani claim proves to be correct, this is a significant breakthrough in the fight against Al Qaeda. If the Pakistani authorities allow the US agencies to interrogate him, they could have fairly correct information regarding the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. As mentioned by me in my note of February 22,2010 titled "Are Bin Laden & Zawahiri in Karachi?" available at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers37/paper3681.html, "sources in Mr.Altaf Hussain's organisation are now alleging that not only leaders of the Afghan Taliban, but also many absconding elements of Al Qaeda, including Osama bin Laden, and his No.2 Ayman al-Zawahiri, have shifted to Karachi from North Waziristan to escape the intensified Drone (unmanned planes) attacks by the USA's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and that they have been given shelter by their Pashtun sympathisers in Karachi. They further allege that the Pakistani authorities and some of the political leaders are aware of this."
7. There is no reason to believe that the Lahore attack might have been connected with Gadahn's claimed capture, but retaliatory attacks in Karachi, Rawalpindi and Lahore are likely if it turns out that he has in fact been captured. Whether Gadahn has been captured in Karachi or not, there is a need for an intensified hunt to smoke out Al Qaeda leaders and members from Karachi. After Tora Bora in 2001-02, many of them including Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and bin Laden himself had taken shelter in Karachi, but they ran away from Karachi after Ramzi Binalshib was captured.
8. If the capture of Gadahn in Karachi proves to be correct, there is bound to be panic in the terrorist hide-outs in Karachi and the others taking shelter there might flee back to the tribal areas or might try to escape to Yemen. Strong surveillance to prevent this is necessary. (8-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
B.RAMAN
At least 11 persons are reported to have been killed in a suicide bomb attack on a rented building of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) of Pakistan in the residential Model Town area of Lahore on the morning of March 8,2010. The large quantity of explosive used brought down the entire building.
2. This is the first terrorist attack in Lahore this year. Last year, there were five as follows:
15 October: Terrorists attacked offices of law enforcement agencies.
12 June: A prominent anti-Taliban cleric killed by a suicide bomber at his religious school
27 May: A car bomb attack on police buildings killed 23 persons.
30 March: Gunmen attacked a police academy, killing eight people
3 March: Gunmen killed six police guards in an ambush of the Sri Lankan cricket team
3. The latest attack has taken place after an interval of about five months. There are two possibilities--- either it was carried out by the Terhrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to demonstrate that it still had the capability to attack targets in the non-tribal areas despite the losses suffered by it since the beginning of this year----including the reported but unconfirmed death of its Amir Hakimullah Mehsud after he was injured in a missile strike by a Drone (unmanned) plane of the US in January--- or it was carried out by the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) in retaliation for the reported death of its leader Qari Mohammad Zafar in a US Drone strike in North Waziristan on February 24,2010. The greater possibility is that the latest attack was carried out by a bomber of the LEJ, which has been operating jointly with the TTP and Al Qaeda and which has the capability for spectacular strikes in Lahore.
4. Police and FIA-connected targets and a target of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) have been attacked in Lahore since the beginning of last year because of the terrorists' calculation that instability in Lahore could make the Army and the FIA go slow in their operations against the TTP and the Punjabi Taliban. The targeting of the FIA and the ISI in recent months is due to their being perceived by the TTP and the LEJ as working in close co-operation with the US intelligence agencies in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). The FIA has also been in receipt of increasing assistance from the US for strengthening its counter-terrorism capability.
5. The Lahore attack came a day after sections of the Pakistani media had claimed that the Pakistani intelligence agencies had managed to arrest Adam Gadahn, the American convert to Islam, who heads the As-Sahab, the propaganda wing of Al Qaeda from a hide-out in a Pashtun inhabited area of Karachi where a large number of Mehsuds from South Waziristan live. Western sources have expressed skepticism about the correctness of the Pakistani claim.
6. If the Pakistani claim proves to be correct, this is a significant breakthrough in the fight against Al Qaeda. If the Pakistani authorities allow the US agencies to interrogate him, they could have fairly correct information regarding the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. As mentioned by me in my note of February 22,2010 titled "Are Bin Laden & Zawahiri in Karachi?" available at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers37/paper3681.html, "sources in Mr.Altaf Hussain's organisation are now alleging that not only leaders of the Afghan Taliban, but also many absconding elements of Al Qaeda, including Osama bin Laden, and his No.2 Ayman al-Zawahiri, have shifted to Karachi from North Waziristan to escape the intensified Drone (unmanned planes) attacks by the USA's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and that they have been given shelter by their Pashtun sympathisers in Karachi. They further allege that the Pakistani authorities and some of the political leaders are aware of this."
7. There is no reason to believe that the Lahore attack might have been connected with Gadahn's claimed capture, but retaliatory attacks in Karachi, Rawalpindi and Lahore are likely if it turns out that he has in fact been captured. Whether Gadahn has been captured in Karachi or not, there is a need for an intensified hunt to smoke out Al Qaeda leaders and members from Karachi. After Tora Bora in 2001-02, many of them including Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and bin Laden himself had taken shelter in Karachi, but they ran away from Karachi after Ramzi Binalshib was captured.
8. If the capture of Gadahn in Karachi proves to be correct, there is bound to be panic in the terrorist hide-outs in Karachi and the others taking shelter there might flee back to the tribal areas or might try to escape to Yemen. Strong surveillance to prevent this is necessary. (8-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Sunday, March 7, 2010
CHINA PUTS GOOGLE & OBAMA IN THEIR PLACE
B.RAMAN
The Chinese Government has quietly put Google and President Barack Obama in their place.
2. In January this year, Google had expressed its intention to review its presence in China if the Chinese Government continued to insist that its search engines should black out items and web sites of political dissidents. It also protested against the alleged snooping of the e-mail addresses of Tibetan and other separatist elements using the Google mail service by the Chinese authorities.
3. The Chinese authorities, while regretting the decision of Google, had pointed out that the restrictions imposed in the interest of national security by the Chinese Government were in force even when Google entered the Chinese market. They looked upon the move of Google for a so-called review as politically motivated without any legal justification and made it clear that Google was welcome to continue to function in China provided it observed the Chinese regulations relating to the Internet. They rejected with indignation Google’s allegations of cyber snooping by Beijing.
4. Members of the Obama Administration, including Mrs.Hilary Clinton, the Secretary of State, came out in support of Google, but this did not have any effect on Beijing. Since then there has been a stalemate with neither Google nor the Chinese Government making any further move in the matter.
5. In the latest development, the Chinese authorities have strongly denied that any talks on the issues raised by Google were going on with its officials. They have bluntly made it clear that while they would be happy if Google decided to continue in China and observe its Internet regulations, they would be equally happy to facilitate its exit from the Chinese market if it wanted to quit.
6.The “China Daily” reported as follows on March 6,2010: “China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology refuted that China has been involved in any negotiations with Google since the US search engine threatened on January 21 to pull back from the country."We have yet to have any direct contacts or negotiations with them on this topic," said Miao Wei, vice-minister of the MIIT, at the sidelines of the annual session of the National People's Congress. Google had never filed reports over alleged Internet regulations and cyber attacks to the ministry or requested for negotiations, said Miao. It had also never informed the ministry that it was planning to withdraw from China. He said China respects Google's right to decide whether to continue its business in the country. "If Google decides to continue its business in China and abides by China's laws, it's welcome to stay," Miao said. "If the company chooses to withdraw from the Chinese market, it must go through certain procedures according to the law and regulations and deal with customers' problems that may arise." Miao also said he didn't think the Google incident should affect relations between China and the US."It's not a huge problem that should impact the relationship of two countries," he said. He said China doesn't want to see an Internet technical incident upgraded to a political dispute.He also said China welcomes Google to provide further information about the hacker attacks it claimed. "We will definitely investigate on the issue, because we are the victims of hackers too."Google had studied China's laws and regulations before it entered the Chinese market in 2007 and had pledged in written form to abide by the laws and regulations.”
7.The Chinese have similarly put Obama in his place over his decisions to sell a fresh package of arms to Taiwan and to receive His Holiness the Dalai Lama in the White House last month. The Chinese had initially reacted strongly against these decisions and announced the postponement of exchanges of military level visits between the two countries over the Taiwan issue. They had also threatened to impose sanctions against US companies selling military equipment to Taiwan under the proposed package. They have since played down these threats and permitted the US naval ship USS Nimitz to visit Hong Kong.
8. On Tibet, they had strongly criticised the Mr.Obama's meeting with His Holiness, but refrained from openly threatening any retaliatory action. However, Chinese officials were spreading word that President Hu Jintao may not attend the Nuclear Security Summit to be held in the US next month to which Obama attaches considerable importance to express Beijing's unhappiness over the sale of arms to Taiwan and over the meeting with His Holiness.
9.Chinese sources see a link between the speculation about a likely boycott of the nuclear security summit by Mr.Hu Jintao and Mr.Obama's decision to send Mr.James Steinberg, Deputy Secretary of State, and Mr.Jeffrey Bader , a White House aide, to Beijing last week reportedly to remove misunderstandings arising from the decisions to sell more arms to Taiwan and to receive His Holiness. The visiting US officials were reported to have reassured their Chinese interlocutors that Mr.Obama's decisions did not mean any change in the US position on the one-China policy and that Tibet was an integral part of China
10. Commenting on the visit of the two officials to Beijing, Mr.Philip Crowley, a State Department spokesman, said on March 4,2010, that the US and China "agreed on the high importance each attaches to the relationships and their commitment to building a positive, cooperative and comprehensive relationship." He added that the US responded to China's concerns on Taiwan "by reiterating that it has followed a consistent approach, pursued by both administrations of both political parties, on a 'One China' policy."
11. Briefing the media in Beijing, Qin Gang, a spokesman of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said that the US had agreed to "take China's position seriously, honor China's core interests and major concerns" and to act to improve relations. Mr. Yang Jiechi, the Chinese Foreign Minister, also commented on the relations with the US while briefing the media on March 7,2010, on China’s foreign policy in the margins of the annual session of the National People’s Congress, the Chinese Parliament, being held since March 5,2010. He urged the US to take seriously China's position and respect China's core interests and major concerns with credible steps.
12. He added: "The United States should properly handle relevant sensitive issues and work with the Chinese side to return the China-US relationship to the track of stable development. The China-US relationship had a good start after President Obama took office last year. However, the US arms sales to Taiwan and the US leader’s meeting with the Dalai Lama caused a serious disturbance to the China-US ties and posed difficulty to the cooperation between the two countries. Such a situation is not in the interest of either side, and the responsibility for the difficulty in Sino-US relations does not lie with China."
13. Referring to the talks with the two visiting US officials, he said: “"The Chinese side stated in full its principled position on China-US relations and on major issues, including Taiwan and Tibet related issues. We pointed out that the relevant moves taken by the US side had seriously violated the principles set out in the three China-US joint communiques and the China-US joint statement. The moves undermined China's core interests and the overall interests of China-US relations, and China is firmly opposed to these moves."
14. While the US has thus taken the initiative to cool the bilateral tensions by reassuring Beijing that there has been no change in its one-China policy and on Tibet being an integral part of China, it is not yet clear whether the Chinese are sufficiently satisfied by the US assurances and whether President Hu will attend the nuclear security summit. (8-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The Chinese Government has quietly put Google and President Barack Obama in their place.
2. In January this year, Google had expressed its intention to review its presence in China if the Chinese Government continued to insist that its search engines should black out items and web sites of political dissidents. It also protested against the alleged snooping of the e-mail addresses of Tibetan and other separatist elements using the Google mail service by the Chinese authorities.
3. The Chinese authorities, while regretting the decision of Google, had pointed out that the restrictions imposed in the interest of national security by the Chinese Government were in force even when Google entered the Chinese market. They looked upon the move of Google for a so-called review as politically motivated without any legal justification and made it clear that Google was welcome to continue to function in China provided it observed the Chinese regulations relating to the Internet. They rejected with indignation Google’s allegations of cyber snooping by Beijing.
4. Members of the Obama Administration, including Mrs.Hilary Clinton, the Secretary of State, came out in support of Google, but this did not have any effect on Beijing. Since then there has been a stalemate with neither Google nor the Chinese Government making any further move in the matter.
5. In the latest development, the Chinese authorities have strongly denied that any talks on the issues raised by Google were going on with its officials. They have bluntly made it clear that while they would be happy if Google decided to continue in China and observe its Internet regulations, they would be equally happy to facilitate its exit from the Chinese market if it wanted to quit.
6.The “China Daily” reported as follows on March 6,2010: “China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology refuted that China has been involved in any negotiations with Google since the US search engine threatened on January 21 to pull back from the country."We have yet to have any direct contacts or negotiations with them on this topic," said Miao Wei, vice-minister of the MIIT, at the sidelines of the annual session of the National People's Congress. Google had never filed reports over alleged Internet regulations and cyber attacks to the ministry or requested for negotiations, said Miao. It had also never informed the ministry that it was planning to withdraw from China. He said China respects Google's right to decide whether to continue its business in the country. "If Google decides to continue its business in China and abides by China's laws, it's welcome to stay," Miao said. "If the company chooses to withdraw from the Chinese market, it must go through certain procedures according to the law and regulations and deal with customers' problems that may arise." Miao also said he didn't think the Google incident should affect relations between China and the US."It's not a huge problem that should impact the relationship of two countries," he said. He said China doesn't want to see an Internet technical incident upgraded to a political dispute.He also said China welcomes Google to provide further information about the hacker attacks it claimed. "We will definitely investigate on the issue, because we are the victims of hackers too."Google had studied China's laws and regulations before it entered the Chinese market in 2007 and had pledged in written form to abide by the laws and regulations.”
7.The Chinese have similarly put Obama in his place over his decisions to sell a fresh package of arms to Taiwan and to receive His Holiness the Dalai Lama in the White House last month. The Chinese had initially reacted strongly against these decisions and announced the postponement of exchanges of military level visits between the two countries over the Taiwan issue. They had also threatened to impose sanctions against US companies selling military equipment to Taiwan under the proposed package. They have since played down these threats and permitted the US naval ship USS Nimitz to visit Hong Kong.
8. On Tibet, they had strongly criticised the Mr.Obama's meeting with His Holiness, but refrained from openly threatening any retaliatory action. However, Chinese officials were spreading word that President Hu Jintao may not attend the Nuclear Security Summit to be held in the US next month to which Obama attaches considerable importance to express Beijing's unhappiness over the sale of arms to Taiwan and over the meeting with His Holiness.
9.Chinese sources see a link between the speculation about a likely boycott of the nuclear security summit by Mr.Hu Jintao and Mr.Obama's decision to send Mr.James Steinberg, Deputy Secretary of State, and Mr.Jeffrey Bader , a White House aide, to Beijing last week reportedly to remove misunderstandings arising from the decisions to sell more arms to Taiwan and to receive His Holiness. The visiting US officials were reported to have reassured their Chinese interlocutors that Mr.Obama's decisions did not mean any change in the US position on the one-China policy and that Tibet was an integral part of China
10. Commenting on the visit of the two officials to Beijing, Mr.Philip Crowley, a State Department spokesman, said on March 4,2010, that the US and China "agreed on the high importance each attaches to the relationships and their commitment to building a positive, cooperative and comprehensive relationship." He added that the US responded to China's concerns on Taiwan "by reiterating that it has followed a consistent approach, pursued by both administrations of both political parties, on a 'One China' policy."
11. Briefing the media in Beijing, Qin Gang, a spokesman of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said that the US had agreed to "take China's position seriously, honor China's core interests and major concerns" and to act to improve relations. Mr. Yang Jiechi, the Chinese Foreign Minister, also commented on the relations with the US while briefing the media on March 7,2010, on China’s foreign policy in the margins of the annual session of the National People’s Congress, the Chinese Parliament, being held since March 5,2010. He urged the US to take seriously China's position and respect China's core interests and major concerns with credible steps.
12. He added: "The United States should properly handle relevant sensitive issues and work with the Chinese side to return the China-US relationship to the track of stable development. The China-US relationship had a good start after President Obama took office last year. However, the US arms sales to Taiwan and the US leader’s meeting with the Dalai Lama caused a serious disturbance to the China-US ties and posed difficulty to the cooperation between the two countries. Such a situation is not in the interest of either side, and the responsibility for the difficulty in Sino-US relations does not lie with China."
13. Referring to the talks with the two visiting US officials, he said: “"The Chinese side stated in full its principled position on China-US relations and on major issues, including Taiwan and Tibet related issues. We pointed out that the relevant moves taken by the US side had seriously violated the principles set out in the three China-US joint communiques and the China-US joint statement. The moves undermined China's core interests and the overall interests of China-US relations, and China is firmly opposed to these moves."
14. While the US has thus taken the initiative to cool the bilateral tensions by reassuring Beijing that there has been no change in its one-China policy and on Tibet being an integral part of China, it is not yet clear whether the Chinese are sufficiently satisfied by the US assurances and whether President Hu will attend the nuclear security summit. (8-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Saturday, March 6, 2010
CHINA IN MALDIVES
B.RAMAN
The Government-controlled Xinhua news agency of China has disseminated the following report on March 6,2010:
"China UnionPay (CUP) began cash withdrawal services for card holders in 95 percent of automatic teller machines in the Maldives, after launching a partnership with the island nation's biggest bank Friday (March 5).Following cooperation between the CUP and the Bank of Maldives, CUP card payment services will expand to 90 percent of point-of-sale (POS) terminals in Maldives. The move aims to better serve card users as China has become the Maldives' fastest growing tourist source country since 2008, with visitors hitting 40,000 a year, said Cai Jianbo, CUP first executive Vice-President. The international network of the CUP reaches 84 countries and regions. CUP launched a card payment service in Brunei on Tuesday." ((7-3-2010)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
ANNEXURE
A note on Sino-Maldives Relations disseminated by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs on August 19,2009 )
Sino-Maldives relations
Political Relations
Maldivesis called "Liushan Guo" or "Liuyang Guo" in Chinese history. In Yongle 10th year (1412) and Xuande 5th year (1430) of the Ming Dynasty, leading a fleet of merchant ships, Zheng He reached Maldives twice. Since Yongle 14th year, King of Maldives Yusof sent his envoys three times to China. In Foreign Splendors written by Zheng He and his entourage Ma Huan and Maritime Marvels by Fei Xin were true and detailed records of Maldives' geographical position, climate, products and customs. In Male Museum are China's porcelain and coins unearthed there on display, a witness to China's friendly contacts and trade relations with Maldives in history. Due to the imperialist invasion afterward, Sino-Maldives relations were suspended for several centuries.
In the early 1960s, Chinese and Maldives ambassadors to Sri Lanka started visiting each other. China supported Maldives in its struggle for national independence by ridding itself of the British colonial rule. On October 14, 1972, China and Maldives established diplomatic relations, and Chinese ambassador to Sri Lanka was concurrently accredited to Maldives. In 1980, Maldives Foreign Minister Jamil officially paid a friendly visit to China. In 1984, Maldives President Gayoom paid a state visit to China. In 1993, Foreign Minister Jameel visited China again. In 2000, Maldives State Minister of Defence and National Security Sattar visited China and in 2001, Foreign Minister Jameel, Speaker Hameed and Brigadier Zahir, General Chief of Staff for National Security Force visited China one after another.
On the other hand, Chinese Vice-Premier cum Foreign Minister Huang Hua, Vice-Premier cum Foreign Minister Qian Qichen, Vice-Chairperson of the Standing Committee of the NPC Chen Muhua, and Chairman of the CCPCC Li Ruihuan, General Chief of Staff of the PLA Fu Quanyou and Premier Zhu Rongji visited Maldives respectively in 1981, 1994, 1997, 1999 and 2001. On the occasion of 30th anniversary of the establishment of the Sino-Maldives diplomatic relations in 2002, President Jiang Zemin and Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan exchanged congratulatory messages respectively with President Gayoom and Foreign Minister Jameel. On May 26, 2009, Maldives opens its Chinese embassy in Beijing. Mr. Ahmed Latheef becomes Maldives' first Ambassador to China.
Economic and Trade Relations and Economic-Technological Cooperation
In 1981,China and Maldives started their economic and technological cooperation. In 1982, they restored direct trade. In 2002, Sino-Maldives trade volume totaled US$2.977 million, of which China's exports accounted for US$2.975 million and its imports US$2,000.
Since 1972, China has provided Maldives with aid totaling RMB74.7875 million. Starting form 1985, Chinese companies began entering project-contracting market in Maldives. By the end of 2001, the accumulated volume for their contracted projects in Maldives had reached US$46.37 million, with their turnover reaching US$40 million.
Sino-Maldives economic cooperation and trade volume are very insignificant. Hong Kong and Singapore serve as transit ports fro most of China's exports to Maldives. China's major products to Maldives are rice and consumer goods.
China and Maldives have seen infrequent contacts and cooperation in other fields. Between 20 and 30 September 2002, at the invitation of the Central Military Commission, Maldives State Minister of Defence and National Security paid a friendly visit to China, which was the first official contact between the Chinese and Maldives armies.
On May 18, 1998, the governments of Maldivesand SAR Hong Kong of China signed the transit agreement for civil flights.
The Government-controlled Xinhua news agency of China has disseminated the following report on March 6,2010:
"China UnionPay (CUP) began cash withdrawal services for card holders in 95 percent of automatic teller machines in the Maldives, after launching a partnership with the island nation's biggest bank Friday (March 5).Following cooperation between the CUP and the Bank of Maldives, CUP card payment services will expand to 90 percent of point-of-sale (POS) terminals in Maldives. The move aims to better serve card users as China has become the Maldives' fastest growing tourist source country since 2008, with visitors hitting 40,000 a year, said Cai Jianbo, CUP first executive Vice-President. The international network of the CUP reaches 84 countries and regions. CUP launched a card payment service in Brunei on Tuesday." ((7-3-2010)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
ANNEXURE
A note on Sino-Maldives Relations disseminated by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs on August 19,2009 )
Sino-Maldives relations
Political Relations
Maldivesis called "Liushan Guo" or "Liuyang Guo" in Chinese history. In Yongle 10th year (1412) and Xuande 5th year (1430) of the Ming Dynasty, leading a fleet of merchant ships, Zheng He reached Maldives twice. Since Yongle 14th year, King of Maldives Yusof sent his envoys three times to China. In Foreign Splendors written by Zheng He and his entourage Ma Huan and Maritime Marvels by Fei Xin were true and detailed records of Maldives' geographical position, climate, products and customs. In Male Museum are China's porcelain and coins unearthed there on display, a witness to China's friendly contacts and trade relations with Maldives in history. Due to the imperialist invasion afterward, Sino-Maldives relations were suspended for several centuries.
In the early 1960s, Chinese and Maldives ambassadors to Sri Lanka started visiting each other. China supported Maldives in its struggle for national independence by ridding itself of the British colonial rule. On October 14, 1972, China and Maldives established diplomatic relations, and Chinese ambassador to Sri Lanka was concurrently accredited to Maldives. In 1980, Maldives Foreign Minister Jamil officially paid a friendly visit to China. In 1984, Maldives President Gayoom paid a state visit to China. In 1993, Foreign Minister Jameel visited China again. In 2000, Maldives State Minister of Defence and National Security Sattar visited China and in 2001, Foreign Minister Jameel, Speaker Hameed and Brigadier Zahir, General Chief of Staff for National Security Force visited China one after another.
On the other hand, Chinese Vice-Premier cum Foreign Minister Huang Hua, Vice-Premier cum Foreign Minister Qian Qichen, Vice-Chairperson of the Standing Committee of the NPC Chen Muhua, and Chairman of the CCPCC Li Ruihuan, General Chief of Staff of the PLA Fu Quanyou and Premier Zhu Rongji visited Maldives respectively in 1981, 1994, 1997, 1999 and 2001. On the occasion of 30th anniversary of the establishment of the Sino-Maldives diplomatic relations in 2002, President Jiang Zemin and Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan exchanged congratulatory messages respectively with President Gayoom and Foreign Minister Jameel. On May 26, 2009, Maldives opens its Chinese embassy in Beijing. Mr. Ahmed Latheef becomes Maldives' first Ambassador to China.
Economic and Trade Relations and Economic-Technological Cooperation
In 1981,China and Maldives started their economic and technological cooperation. In 1982, they restored direct trade. In 2002, Sino-Maldives trade volume totaled US$2.977 million, of which China's exports accounted for US$2.975 million and its imports US$2,000.
Since 1972, China has provided Maldives with aid totaling RMB74.7875 million. Starting form 1985, Chinese companies began entering project-contracting market in Maldives. By the end of 2001, the accumulated volume for their contracted projects in Maldives had reached US$46.37 million, with their turnover reaching US$40 million.
Sino-Maldives economic cooperation and trade volume are very insignificant. Hong Kong and Singapore serve as transit ports fro most of China's exports to Maldives. China's major products to Maldives are rice and consumer goods.
China and Maldives have seen infrequent contacts and cooperation in other fields. Between 20 and 30 September 2002, at the invitation of the Central Military Commission, Maldives State Minister of Defence and National Security paid a friendly visit to China, which was the first official contact between the Chinese and Maldives armies.
On May 18, 1998, the governments of Maldivesand SAR Hong Kong of China signed the transit agreement for civil flights.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
FRESH FEARS OF MARITIME TERRORISM
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR--PAPER NO.626
B.RAMAN
The years following the Al Qaeda attack on the US naval ship USS Cole in Aden in October,2000, saw an increase in fears of sea-borne terrorism either on coastal targets or on sea-moving targets such as oil/gas tankers, container ships etc. There were also fears of a possible Al Qaeda-inspired attack to block maritime choke-points such as the Malacca Strait.
2. These fears were caused by the flow of human intelligence as well as by the interrogation of arrested suspects. These fears reached the zenith in the months following the US invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003. Consequently, there was increased international and regional co-operation in the form of exchange of intelligence and assessments, joint or co-ordinated naval patrolling, joint naval exercises, intensified action against piracy in the Malacca Strait etc.
3. Post-2005, these fears got diluted partly due to the absence of any terrorist attack from the sea, partly due to the preoccupation of Al Qaeda and its allies with land-based operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and partly due to the effective action taken against piracy in the Malacca Strait region.
4.In recent months, there has been a revival of the fears about a possible maritime terrorist strike due to the following reasons: Firstly, an increase in incidents of piracy by Somali/Yemeni pirates and the inability of the international community to deal effectively with the problem till now; secondly, an increase in the activities of Al Qaeda in Yemen and Somalia, both of which have a large number of sea-faring men who might be prepared to help Al Qaeda in sea-borne attacks; thirdly, the successful sea-borne terrorist strikes mounted by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) on land-based targets in Mumbai from November 26 to 29,2008, and the failure of the Indian Navy and other Navies operating in the seas of the region to detect the plans of the LET and the movement of the LET boat carrying the terrorists from Karachi to Mumbai; and fourthly, the strengthening of physical security for land-based targets, which has necessitated the terrorists once again turning their attention to sea-based targets.
5. The enormous publicity, which the LET got for its sea-borne attack in Mumbai, demonstrated the propaganda value of sea-borne attacks, where the surprise element is more. It is to be expected that not only Al Qaeda, but also other Al Qaeda allied elements such as those of the Jemmah Islamiyah and the Yemeni and Somali members of Al Qaeda might once again be tempted to think in terms of acts of maritime terrorism to prove that their capabilities are intact.
6. It is in this context that one has to see reports from Singapore that an unidentified terrorist g.roup is planning attacks against oil tankers in the Malacca Strait.The Singapore Shipping Association has been quoted as saying on March 2,2010, that it had received an advisory from the Singapore Navy Information Fusion Centre about "an indication that a terrorist group is planning attacks on oil tankers in the Malacca Strait." It added: "This does not preclude possible attacks on other large vessels with dangerous cargo." The Navy Centre's advisory reportedly said:"The terrorists' intent is probably to achieve widespread publicity and showcase that it remains a viable group." It reminded shipping operators that the militants could use smaller vessels such as dinghies and speedboats to attack oil tankers. It recommended that ships should "strengthen their onboard security measures and adopt community reporting to increase awareness and strengthen the safety of all seafarers," according to the Association.
7. It is necessay for the Indian counter-terrorism agencies too and the Indian Navy and Coast Guard to re-focus on the likelihood of fresh sea-borne terrorist strikes against Indian targets either on land or on the high seas in the waters to the west of India. Protection of sealanes against pirates and terrorists acting separatrely of each other or in tandem and prevention and countering of acts of maritime terrorism require close regional co-operation with the navies of countries such as the US, Japan, China,Pakistan,Sri Lanka, the ASEAN and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries and Australia. Such co-operation should address issues such as intelligence collection and sharing, joint or co-ordinated operations, mutual assistance on the high seas, joint exercises etc. It is important for India to take the initiative in this matter.
8. The two joint counter-terrorism exercises between India and China held so far were land-based. The first was held in Yunnan and the second in Karnataka. The next Sino-Indian joint exercise should focus on co-ordinated action and mutual assistance against maritime terrorism with the involvement of the navies of not only India and China, but also the US, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Japan and Australia. We should not allow the continuing differences with China over the border dispute to come in the way of evolving a co-operative mechanism against maritime terrorism and piracy.
9. Our adversarial relationship with Pakistan would not permit us to think in terms of joint maritime counter-terrorism exercises with Pakistan, but intelligence-sharing arrangements should be possible and advisable despite the continuing serious differences between the two countries on the issue of Pakistani inaction against terrorism.We must develop slowly habits of mutual assistance with Pakistan----in the field of investigation of terrorism-related cases and prevention of maritime terrorist incidents.( 5-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary ( retd), Cabinet Secretariat. Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
B.RAMAN
The years following the Al Qaeda attack on the US naval ship USS Cole in Aden in October,2000, saw an increase in fears of sea-borne terrorism either on coastal targets or on sea-moving targets such as oil/gas tankers, container ships etc. There were also fears of a possible Al Qaeda-inspired attack to block maritime choke-points such as the Malacca Strait.
2. These fears were caused by the flow of human intelligence as well as by the interrogation of arrested suspects. These fears reached the zenith in the months following the US invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003. Consequently, there was increased international and regional co-operation in the form of exchange of intelligence and assessments, joint or co-ordinated naval patrolling, joint naval exercises, intensified action against piracy in the Malacca Strait etc.
3. Post-2005, these fears got diluted partly due to the absence of any terrorist attack from the sea, partly due to the preoccupation of Al Qaeda and its allies with land-based operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and partly due to the effective action taken against piracy in the Malacca Strait region.
4.In recent months, there has been a revival of the fears about a possible maritime terrorist strike due to the following reasons: Firstly, an increase in incidents of piracy by Somali/Yemeni pirates and the inability of the international community to deal effectively with the problem till now; secondly, an increase in the activities of Al Qaeda in Yemen and Somalia, both of which have a large number of sea-faring men who might be prepared to help Al Qaeda in sea-borne attacks; thirdly, the successful sea-borne terrorist strikes mounted by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) on land-based targets in Mumbai from November 26 to 29,2008, and the failure of the Indian Navy and other Navies operating in the seas of the region to detect the plans of the LET and the movement of the LET boat carrying the terrorists from Karachi to Mumbai; and fourthly, the strengthening of physical security for land-based targets, which has necessitated the terrorists once again turning their attention to sea-based targets.
5. The enormous publicity, which the LET got for its sea-borne attack in Mumbai, demonstrated the propaganda value of sea-borne attacks, where the surprise element is more. It is to be expected that not only Al Qaeda, but also other Al Qaeda allied elements such as those of the Jemmah Islamiyah and the Yemeni and Somali members of Al Qaeda might once again be tempted to think in terms of acts of maritime terrorism to prove that their capabilities are intact.
6. It is in this context that one has to see reports from Singapore that an unidentified terrorist g.roup is planning attacks against oil tankers in the Malacca Strait.The Singapore Shipping Association has been quoted as saying on March 2,2010, that it had received an advisory from the Singapore Navy Information Fusion Centre about "an indication that a terrorist group is planning attacks on oil tankers in the Malacca Strait." It added: "This does not preclude possible attacks on other large vessels with dangerous cargo." The Navy Centre's advisory reportedly said:"The terrorists' intent is probably to achieve widespread publicity and showcase that it remains a viable group." It reminded shipping operators that the militants could use smaller vessels such as dinghies and speedboats to attack oil tankers. It recommended that ships should "strengthen their onboard security measures and adopt community reporting to increase awareness and strengthen the safety of all seafarers," according to the Association.
7. It is necessay for the Indian counter-terrorism agencies too and the Indian Navy and Coast Guard to re-focus on the likelihood of fresh sea-borne terrorist strikes against Indian targets either on land or on the high seas in the waters to the west of India. Protection of sealanes against pirates and terrorists acting separatrely of each other or in tandem and prevention and countering of acts of maritime terrorism require close regional co-operation with the navies of countries such as the US, Japan, China,Pakistan,Sri Lanka, the ASEAN and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries and Australia. Such co-operation should address issues such as intelligence collection and sharing, joint or co-ordinated operations, mutual assistance on the high seas, joint exercises etc. It is important for India to take the initiative in this matter.
8. The two joint counter-terrorism exercises between India and China held so far were land-based. The first was held in Yunnan and the second in Karnataka. The next Sino-Indian joint exercise should focus on co-ordinated action and mutual assistance against maritime terrorism with the involvement of the navies of not only India and China, but also the US, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Japan and Australia. We should not allow the continuing differences with China over the border dispute to come in the way of evolving a co-operative mechanism against maritime terrorism and piracy.
9. Our adversarial relationship with Pakistan would not permit us to think in terms of joint maritime counter-terrorism exercises with Pakistan, but intelligence-sharing arrangements should be possible and advisable despite the continuing serious differences between the two countries on the issue of Pakistani inaction against terrorism.We must develop slowly habits of mutual assistance with Pakistan----in the field of investigation of terrorism-related cases and prevention of maritime terrorist incidents.( 5-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary ( retd), Cabinet Secretariat. Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
WHAT NEXT IN PAKISTAN'S PASHTUN BELT?
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO.625
B.RAMAN
The Pakistan Army and the US intelligence are making headway in the battle against jihadi terrorism --- the indigenous as well as the global varieties--- in Pakistan's Pashtun tribal belt in the Malakand Division of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).
2. They are working in tandem in some places such as the Swat Valley of the Malakand Division and South Waziristan in the FATA and separately of each other in co-ordinated, but not joint operations in other areas such as the Bajaur and the North Waziristan Agencies of the FATA. While the Pakistan Army has been exclusively handling the ground situation in the Bajaur Agency with very little US involvement, the US has been keeping up relentless pressure on the terrorists in North Waziristan and occasionally in South Waziristan through its Drone (pilotless planes) strikes.
3.There is a gentlemen's agreement between Islamabad and Washington that the former will keep making proforma protests against the Drone strikes without trying to stop them. If Pakistan protests really and vehemently, the US will have to stop them. The US is able to continue them because the Pakistani protests are a charade. Pakistan knows it is benefiting from the Drone strikes and wants them to continue. Fears that disproportionate civilian casualties might add to anti-American feelings have been belied. Civilian casualties there have been, but they are not as heavy as made out by some US analysts. Even the Pakistani civil society and the local tribal population no longer protest against the civilian casualties. They have realised that by eliminating the jihadi terrorist leaders of not only Al Qaeda, but also indigenous organisations such as the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) and trans-border organisations such as the anti-Chinese Islamic Movement of East Turkestan (IMET) the US has given them some relief from the intimidation and terror imposed on the local population by these terrorist groups.
4. There are signs of a jihadi fatigue in the Pakistani Pashtun belt. This fatigue should account for the remarkable decline in public protests over the Drone strikes. It has also contributed to the increasing flow of valuable intelligence to the US agencies. Almost all the successful US Drone strikes were intelligence-driven. Initially, the intelligence came overwhelmingly from technical sources. Now, they are coming more and more from human sources. When there is popular fatigue with the terrorists, intelligence flow improves. We are witnessing this in the tribal belt.
5. The remarkable successes of the US intelligence in North Waziristan have been accompanied by the headway made by the Pakistani security forces in the Swat Valley, South Waziristan and the Bajaur Agency. These operations cannot be described as successful in terms of identified terrorist leaders neutralised by the Pakistan Army. Many of the terrorist leaders operating in these areas have escaped capture by the Pakistan Army. Their trained followers have dispersed and peeled off. They have retained a capability for re-grouping and striking back at a later stage if the Army pressure eases.
6. Despite this, the Pakistan Army operations have been successful in the sense that it has been able to re-establish territorial control over Swat, South Waziristan and the Bajaur Agency and deny the use of this territory to the terrorists. Is this territorial control ephemeral or will it be enduring? The training and equipment given by the US to Pakistani para-military forces such as the Frontier Corps have improved their morale and made them fight better to wrest control of the territory from the terrorists, but their ability to hold on to the "newly liberated" territory in the face of a renewed assault is yet to be tested.
7. Any comprehensive operation in this area has to have three components---liberate, hold on to it and develop. Only the first component is now being attempted by the Army with US assistance. US policy-makers and Pakistani civilian leaders are yet to pay attention to the other two components. Holding on to the "liberated" territory demands massive investments for a crash development of roads and other means of communications. One sees no signs of any such investments and related activity. It also demands a robust civilian governing machinery which enforces the civilian authority, brings the liberated areas into the national political mainstream from which the entire FATA had remained excluded ever since Pakistan became independent in 1947 and undertakes massive economic development programmes.
8. The elected civilian Government in Islamabad has shown very little interest in the civilian follow-up to the military actions. It has left all the initiatives in the FATA in the hands of the Army. There is hardly any thinking or discussion in Islamabad or the rest of the country on how to increase the extent and effectiveness of the civilian governing machinery in the tribal belt. The civilian leaders have no interest in the tasks of governance in the tribal areas. Even US policy-makers and experts have shown not much inteterest in following up on the military successes by undertaking a programme for changing the political and economic landscape of the tribal areas.
9. This total lack of interest in "what next" could facilitate re-grouping and a come-back by the terrorists and insurgents. (4-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
B.RAMAN
The Pakistan Army and the US intelligence are making headway in the battle against jihadi terrorism --- the indigenous as well as the global varieties--- in Pakistan's Pashtun tribal belt in the Malakand Division of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).
2. They are working in tandem in some places such as the Swat Valley of the Malakand Division and South Waziristan in the FATA and separately of each other in co-ordinated, but not joint operations in other areas such as the Bajaur and the North Waziristan Agencies of the FATA. While the Pakistan Army has been exclusively handling the ground situation in the Bajaur Agency with very little US involvement, the US has been keeping up relentless pressure on the terrorists in North Waziristan and occasionally in South Waziristan through its Drone (pilotless planes) strikes.
3.There is a gentlemen's agreement between Islamabad and Washington that the former will keep making proforma protests against the Drone strikes without trying to stop them. If Pakistan protests really and vehemently, the US will have to stop them. The US is able to continue them because the Pakistani protests are a charade. Pakistan knows it is benefiting from the Drone strikes and wants them to continue. Fears that disproportionate civilian casualties might add to anti-American feelings have been belied. Civilian casualties there have been, but they are not as heavy as made out by some US analysts. Even the Pakistani civil society and the local tribal population no longer protest against the civilian casualties. They have realised that by eliminating the jihadi terrorist leaders of not only Al Qaeda, but also indigenous organisations such as the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) and trans-border organisations such as the anti-Chinese Islamic Movement of East Turkestan (IMET) the US has given them some relief from the intimidation and terror imposed on the local population by these terrorist groups.
4. There are signs of a jihadi fatigue in the Pakistani Pashtun belt. This fatigue should account for the remarkable decline in public protests over the Drone strikes. It has also contributed to the increasing flow of valuable intelligence to the US agencies. Almost all the successful US Drone strikes were intelligence-driven. Initially, the intelligence came overwhelmingly from technical sources. Now, they are coming more and more from human sources. When there is popular fatigue with the terrorists, intelligence flow improves. We are witnessing this in the tribal belt.
5. The remarkable successes of the US intelligence in North Waziristan have been accompanied by the headway made by the Pakistani security forces in the Swat Valley, South Waziristan and the Bajaur Agency. These operations cannot be described as successful in terms of identified terrorist leaders neutralised by the Pakistan Army. Many of the terrorist leaders operating in these areas have escaped capture by the Pakistan Army. Their trained followers have dispersed and peeled off. They have retained a capability for re-grouping and striking back at a later stage if the Army pressure eases.
6. Despite this, the Pakistan Army operations have been successful in the sense that it has been able to re-establish territorial control over Swat, South Waziristan and the Bajaur Agency and deny the use of this territory to the terrorists. Is this territorial control ephemeral or will it be enduring? The training and equipment given by the US to Pakistani para-military forces such as the Frontier Corps have improved their morale and made them fight better to wrest control of the territory from the terrorists, but their ability to hold on to the "newly liberated" territory in the face of a renewed assault is yet to be tested.
7. Any comprehensive operation in this area has to have three components---liberate, hold on to it and develop. Only the first component is now being attempted by the Army with US assistance. US policy-makers and Pakistani civilian leaders are yet to pay attention to the other two components. Holding on to the "liberated" territory demands massive investments for a crash development of roads and other means of communications. One sees no signs of any such investments and related activity. It also demands a robust civilian governing machinery which enforces the civilian authority, brings the liberated areas into the national political mainstream from which the entire FATA had remained excluded ever since Pakistan became independent in 1947 and undertakes massive economic development programmes.
8. The elected civilian Government in Islamabad has shown very little interest in the civilian follow-up to the military actions. It has left all the initiatives in the FATA in the hands of the Army. There is hardly any thinking or discussion in Islamabad or the rest of the country on how to increase the extent and effectiveness of the civilian governing machinery in the tribal belt. The civilian leaders have no interest in the tasks of governance in the tribal areas. Even US policy-makers and experts have shown not much inteterest in following up on the military successes by undertaking a programme for changing the political and economic landscape of the tribal areas.
9. This total lack of interest in "what next" could facilitate re-grouping and a come-back by the terrorists and insurgents. (4-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
INDIA, PAKISTAN, AFGHANISTAN & THE US
B.RAMAN
Here are my answers to four questions e-mailed to me on March 3,2010, by a correspondent of the "Washington Post":
Question: Is the Indian government growing increasingly frustrated over the Obama administration's policy of reconciliation with the so called good Taliban? And why or how will this impact India and U.S. relations? What position does this put India in?
Answer:"Frustrated" is not the word. India is increasingly concerned over the US belief that there are good fundamentalists and bad fundamentalists and that it can do business with the good fundamentalists and bring them into the mainstream. India looks upon the "war" against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan as directed not only against these organisations, but also against their ideology of religious obscurantism by projecting before the Afghan people the ideas of a secular and liberal democratic society.If it makes a deal with the so-called good Taliban even if they do not give up their medieval ideas, the US will be admitting beforehand that it has lost the ideological battle. It will not be good for Afghanistan and other Muslim countries. And it will not be good for India, which has the second largest Muslim community in the world.
Question: Is India worried that Pakistan is getting too strong b/c the U.S. is courting Pakistan in its fight? And why is this a concern to India ie - despite Mumbai, despite everything, is there a growing feeling in Delhi that Pakistan will hoodwink the world?
Answer:India is worried over the US readiness to close its eyes to Pakistan's use of terrorism against India so long as Pakistan acts against terrorism directed against the US and helps the US in preventing another 9/11 in the US homeland. Pakistan is confident that so long as it helps the US against the Taliban and Al Qaeda it does not have to fear any adverse consequences from its continued use of terrorism against India. It is this confidence which should explain its inaction against the Lashkar-e-Toiba and other Punjabi terrorist organisations whose activities are directed against India.Pakistan has been hoodwinking the US not today, but for the last 30 years ever since it started using terrorism against India.It will continue to hoodwink the world brazenly so long it has the confidence that no action will be taken against it.
Question:Is Afghanistan the new Kashmir, a place india and Pakistan are fighting it out?
Answer:In Kashmir, India is resisting Pakistani attempts since 1989 to annex Indian territory through a proxy war using terrorist organisations trained in Pakistan. In Afghanistan, India has been resisting Pakistani efforts to exclude it from playing its due role as a historic ally of Afghanistan and as a well-wisher of the Afghan people who has been trying to help them convert their country into a modern democratic state. In Kashmir, it is a confrontation over territory which belongs to India. In Afghanistan it is a political and ideological confrontation.
Question: How big is India's intelligence presense in Afghanistan - is it robust? Is it as big as Pakistan claims? Does anyone know?
Answer: I would not know whether India has an intelligence presence in Afghanistan and, if so, how big is it. (3-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Here are my answers to four questions e-mailed to me on March 3,2010, by a correspondent of the "Washington Post":
Question: Is the Indian government growing increasingly frustrated over the Obama administration's policy of reconciliation with the so called good Taliban? And why or how will this impact India and U.S. relations? What position does this put India in?
Answer:"Frustrated" is not the word. India is increasingly concerned over the US belief that there are good fundamentalists and bad fundamentalists and that it can do business with the good fundamentalists and bring them into the mainstream. India looks upon the "war" against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan as directed not only against these organisations, but also against their ideology of religious obscurantism by projecting before the Afghan people the ideas of a secular and liberal democratic society.If it makes a deal with the so-called good Taliban even if they do not give up their medieval ideas, the US will be admitting beforehand that it has lost the ideological battle. It will not be good for Afghanistan and other Muslim countries. And it will not be good for India, which has the second largest Muslim community in the world.
Question: Is India worried that Pakistan is getting too strong b/c the U.S. is courting Pakistan in its fight? And why is this a concern to India ie - despite Mumbai, despite everything, is there a growing feeling in Delhi that Pakistan will hoodwink the world?
Answer:India is worried over the US readiness to close its eyes to Pakistan's use of terrorism against India so long as Pakistan acts against terrorism directed against the US and helps the US in preventing another 9/11 in the US homeland. Pakistan is confident that so long as it helps the US against the Taliban and Al Qaeda it does not have to fear any adverse consequences from its continued use of terrorism against India. It is this confidence which should explain its inaction against the Lashkar-e-Toiba and other Punjabi terrorist organisations whose activities are directed against India.Pakistan has been hoodwinking the US not today, but for the last 30 years ever since it started using terrorism against India.It will continue to hoodwink the world brazenly so long it has the confidence that no action will be taken against it.
Question:Is Afghanistan the new Kashmir, a place india and Pakistan are fighting it out?
Answer:In Kashmir, India is resisting Pakistani attempts since 1989 to annex Indian territory through a proxy war using terrorist organisations trained in Pakistan. In Afghanistan, India has been resisting Pakistani efforts to exclude it from playing its due role as a historic ally of Afghanistan and as a well-wisher of the Afghan people who has been trying to help them convert their country into a modern democratic state. In Kashmir, it is a confrontation over territory which belongs to India. In Afghanistan it is a political and ideological confrontation.
Question: How big is India's intelligence presense in Afghanistan - is it robust? Is it as big as Pakistan claims? Does anyone know?
Answer: I would not know whether India has an intelligence presence in Afghanistan and, if so, how big is it. (3-3-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)