INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO 569
B.RAMAN
Reports from Pakistan indicate that about 30,000 troops of the Pakistan army and Frontier Corps launched on the morning of October 17,2009, the long heralded offensive against the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in South Waziristan. The ground offensive was preceded by sustained air strikes against the suspected hide-outs of the TTP in the area.
2. The TTP is a hotch-potch of the myriad Pakistani insurgent and terrorist groups, which were trained and armed in the past by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Special Services Group (SSG) for use against India and for supporting the Afghan Taliban headed by Mulla Mohammad Omar, its Amir, now sheltered in the Quetta area of Balochistan. Most of these groups have since turned against the Pakistani State, which they look upon as apostate because of its co-operation with the US. The fighting capabilities imparted to them in the past by the ISI and the SSG have since been supplemented by the capabilities imparted to them by Al Qaeda, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), the Islamic Jihad Union, another Uzbek group, and by small numbers of Chechens and Uighurs.
3. The element of surprise, which is important in any such ground offensive, has been lost by the long time taken by the political and military leadership of Pakistan to launch the offensive. It is a face-saving offensive forced on the Pakistan Army by the series of spectacular attacks launched by the Pashtun and Punjabi components of the TTP on the General Headquarters of the Army in Rawalpindi and on prestigious police establishments in Lahore, Peshawar and Kohat. It is an offensive , which seems to focus only on the Mehsud component of the TTP based in South Waziristan.
4.The Mehsuds are the sons of the South Waziristan soil, but have repeatedly demonstrated a capability for action outside South Waziristan in areas such as the Orakzai agency of the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and in the Peshawar, Kohat and Dera Ismail Khan areas of the North-West Frontier Province. Hakeemullah Mehsud, who was chosen as the Amir of the TTP after the death of Baitullah Mehsud in a US Drone strike on August 5,2009, is reportedly still based in the Orakzai agency, where he has been supervising operations against the NATO's logistic convoys to Afghanistan while at the same time co-ordinating operations in Peshawar, Kohat and Dera Ismail Khan.
5. Waliur Rehman, a confidante of Baitullah, who is in charge of the Mehsuds based in South Waziristan, will be organising the resistance against the Pakistani forces in South Waziristan with the help of the forces of Serjuddin Haqqani of the so-called Haqqani network. The Pakistan Army seems to have launched the offensive without factoring into its planning the lessons from the recent attacks in Rawalpindi,Lahore. Peshawar and Kohat. While the attacks in Rawalpindi and Lahore were spearheaded by the Punjabi component of the TTP, which calls itself the Amjad Farooqi group and has shown a capability for SSG-style commando operations, the attacks in Peshawar and Kohat were carried out by the suicide bombers of the suicide squad trained and motivated by Qari Hussain Mehsud.
6. The TTP will seek to counter the offensive on three fronts---- insurgency style operations against the advancing troops in South Waziristan similar to the operations of the Afghan Taliban in Afghan territory, more suicide attacks by Pashtun suicide bombers of Qari Hussain Mehsud in Peshawar and Kohat and more terrorist attacks---some of them of a complex nature in Punjab, including Rawalpindi as well as in Islamabad. While the Pakistan Army has prepared itself well for the counter-insurgency style operations in South Waziristan, its ability to prevent attacks behind its back in the NWFP and Punjab is doubtful. Despite the spurt in suicide and commando-style terrorism in the NWFP and Punjab and even in supposedly well-guarded cantonments since the Lal Masjid raid in July,2007, the Pakistani
counter-terrorism machinery has not re-fashioned and re-tooled itself to meet this threat.
7. In South Waziristan, the Mehsuds will follow the same tactics that the Pashtuns have been following for centuries against invaders of their territory---- avoid a frontal confrontation, split into small groups and harass the strangers to a terrain which the Mehsuds know well. Their tactics will be not territorial domination, but dispersal of their presence and operational focus. They will try to deny to the Pakistan Army the advantages of a well-focused assault, by harassing it here, there and everywhere, without allowing it to get its bearings in a hostile terrain.
8. As the Army carries forward its offensive, US Predators will be looking for Serajuddin Haqqani, Waliur Rehman, Hakeemullah and Qari Hussain Mehsud.If they succeed in eliminating one or some or all of them, it could be a morale-booster to the Pakistani troops. Otherwise,their difficulties could increase.
9. Pakistan's counter-terrorism mechanism is in a shambles. It does not know who is a friend and who is a foe in Punjab. It does not know who is a terrorist and who is a serving or retired serviceman. It does not know who is an ally against India and who is an adversary of the State of Pakistan. There is a danger of the NWFP and Punjab becoming the failed provinces of Pakistan if the Army's offensive does not
succeed. (17-10-09)
( 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 )
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Friday, October 16, 2009
INDIA-CHINA: NEED FOR FRESH THINKING
B.RAMAN
There are welcome indicators of some fresh-thinking in New Delhi on India's relations with China. This fresh-thinking has been reflected in the decision of the Goverment of India to bring on record its unhappiness and concern over the Chinese involvement in the construction or upgradation of some infrastructure projects in the disputed territory of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK), including the Northern Areas of Jammu & Kashmir (Gilgit & Baltistan). The Chinese, who had earlier helped Pakistan in the construction of the Karakoram Highway connecting Pakistan's Punjab with the Xinjiang province of China through Kashmiri territory occupied by Pakistan, are now helping it in its upgradation. They have also agreed to help Pakistan in the construction of a hydel project in the Kashmiri territory occupied by Pakistan.A
feasibility study has been undertaken by Pakistan for the construction of a railway line, with Chinese assistance, to connect the Chinese-constructed port of Gwadar on the Mekran coast of Balochistan with Xinjiang through Pakistan-occupied Kashmiri territory.
2. The Chinese action in helping Pakistan in integrating with Pakistan, territory which does not legally belong to Pakistan, amounts to an unfriendly act to India and is detrimental to India's territorial integrity. India was within its rights to have protested and expressed its unhappiness over the Chinese actions, which are contrary to its professions of friendship and goodwill for India. Our past hesitation to bring on record our protests over such Chinese actions has encouraged the Chinese into thinking that they could do anything vis-a-vis India,without provoking any protest from New Delhi. Our protests may not make the Chinese stop their participation in these projects, but it has to be made clear to Beijing that such Chinese actions in disregard of Indian sensitivities could come in the way of further development of the bilateral relations. Beijing should be made to realise that it cannot be business as usual between the two countries if it continues to
disregard Indian interests and sensitivities.
3. Another welcome indicator of re-thinking relates to Chinese construction companies, which have won contracts in India and which have been bringing a large number of Chinese workers---skilled and unskilled--- to work in their projects in India without employing Indian workers and engineers. This is a practice which Chinese companies have been following in African countries where there is a severe shortage of manpower, but there is no such shortage in India. It has been reported that the Government of India has taken a decision or is about to take a decision not to issue work visas to unskilled Chinese workers. Even in respect of skilled workers, the issue of work visas should be more an exception than the rule. Work visas should be issued only in those cases where the Chinese companies can demonstrate that recruits in certain skills are not available in India. There are hundreds of Western, Japanese, South Korean and South-East Asian companies which win
contracts in India. They don't bring their own labour from their countries. They employ local labour. If the Chinese executives are not able to manage with Indian labour because of their inability to communicate with the Indians in English, they should not bid for contracts in India.
4. There is also a need for a fresh look into our past decisions to allow Chinese companies in sensitive fields such as telecommunications to operate in India as collaborators of Indian companies for expanding our telecommunications network. In view of the increasingly hostile attitude being taken by the Government and party-controlled media in China towards India, the time has come to re-consider these
decisions. It would be unwise to allow a Chinese presence in sensitive fields such as telecommunications at a time when Chinese media such as the "Global Times" (October 14), which is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, has started threatening India with "dangerous consequences" if it does not concede the Chinese point of view on Arunachal Pradesh. India should not accept threatening language from
China---whether it be from the Government or from the Government and party-controlled media.
5.The Government of India should also re-consider its attitude towards His Holiness the Dalai Lama. He and thousands of his Tibetan followers have been our honoured guests for fifty years. We respect him as a Buddhist leader. Their welfare is our responsibility. Till now, in deference to Chinese sensitivities, successive Prime Ministers have been avoiding meeting His Holiness even on occasions such as the
Indian festival of Diwali. We do not give him an opportunity to meet Indian leaders to discuss the problems and welfare of the Tibetan refugees. A couple of years ago,a function was held in New Delhi to facilitate His Holiness on the award to him of the US Congressional Medal of Honour. At that time, in an unwise and unwarranted move, the then Cabinet Secretary of the Government of India was reported to have advised the Cabinet members to keep away from the function. This policy has to change. The Prime Minister should meet His Holiness from time to time in New Delhi as well as Dharamsala to discuss about the welfare of the Tibetan refugees.
6.Sino-Indian relations have steadily improved since the visit of the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to China in 1988 and his meeting with Deng Xiao-ping. Credit should go to Deng for laying the foundation for this improvement despite the pending border dispute. This improvement continued under President Jiang Zemin. India reciprocated the Chinese desire for better bilateral relations in spite of its
unhappiness and concern over the Chinese actions in giving military nuclear and missile capabilities to Pakistan, which wanted them for possible use against India.
7. Ever since Hu Jintao, who won his spurs as a political leader in Tibet, assumed charge as the President the policies of Deng and Jiang have been slowly sought to be reversed---- under pressure from the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and the hawkish elements in the party. The recent anti-India editorials in the party-controlled " Global Times" and " People's Daily" on October 14 are indicators of anti- India and
pro-Pakistan hawks in the party once again influencing the Chinese policy towards India and seeking to reverse the progress made under Deng and Jiang. We have to take note of this and re-fashion our policies accordingly.
8.India and China cannot afford a military conflict or confrontation or even sporadic trans-border incidents. It will damage their aspirations of a better life for their people and a more important role for their countries in the international stage.Misperceptions and misunderstandings over the border issue need to be handled delicately and sought to be removed by continuing the policy of engagement at the official and political levels. A war of words and hysteria and a tendency to demonise each other should be avoided. The gains made so far should be preserved. At the same time, we should not hesitate to articulate our core interests and adhere to them firmly even while trying to strengthen the bilateral relations. ( 17-10-09)
( 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 )
There are welcome indicators of some fresh-thinking in New Delhi on India's relations with China. This fresh-thinking has been reflected in the decision of the Goverment of India to bring on record its unhappiness and concern over the Chinese involvement in the construction or upgradation of some infrastructure projects in the disputed territory of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK), including the Northern Areas of Jammu & Kashmir (Gilgit & Baltistan). The Chinese, who had earlier helped Pakistan in the construction of the Karakoram Highway connecting Pakistan's Punjab with the Xinjiang province of China through Kashmiri territory occupied by Pakistan, are now helping it in its upgradation. They have also agreed to help Pakistan in the construction of a hydel project in the Kashmiri territory occupied by Pakistan.A
feasibility study has been undertaken by Pakistan for the construction of a railway line, with Chinese assistance, to connect the Chinese-constructed port of Gwadar on the Mekran coast of Balochistan with Xinjiang through Pakistan-occupied Kashmiri territory.
2. The Chinese action in helping Pakistan in integrating with Pakistan, territory which does not legally belong to Pakistan, amounts to an unfriendly act to India and is detrimental to India's territorial integrity. India was within its rights to have protested and expressed its unhappiness over the Chinese actions, which are contrary to its professions of friendship and goodwill for India. Our past hesitation to bring on record our protests over such Chinese actions has encouraged the Chinese into thinking that they could do anything vis-a-vis India,without provoking any protest from New Delhi. Our protests may not make the Chinese stop their participation in these projects, but it has to be made clear to Beijing that such Chinese actions in disregard of Indian sensitivities could come in the way of further development of the bilateral relations. Beijing should be made to realise that it cannot be business as usual between the two countries if it continues to
disregard Indian interests and sensitivities.
3. Another welcome indicator of re-thinking relates to Chinese construction companies, which have won contracts in India and which have been bringing a large number of Chinese workers---skilled and unskilled--- to work in their projects in India without employing Indian workers and engineers. This is a practice which Chinese companies have been following in African countries where there is a severe shortage of manpower, but there is no such shortage in India. It has been reported that the Government of India has taken a decision or is about to take a decision not to issue work visas to unskilled Chinese workers. Even in respect of skilled workers, the issue of work visas should be more an exception than the rule. Work visas should be issued only in those cases where the Chinese companies can demonstrate that recruits in certain skills are not available in India. There are hundreds of Western, Japanese, South Korean and South-East Asian companies which win
contracts in India. They don't bring their own labour from their countries. They employ local labour. If the Chinese executives are not able to manage with Indian labour because of their inability to communicate with the Indians in English, they should not bid for contracts in India.
4. There is also a need for a fresh look into our past decisions to allow Chinese companies in sensitive fields such as telecommunications to operate in India as collaborators of Indian companies for expanding our telecommunications network. In view of the increasingly hostile attitude being taken by the Government and party-controlled media in China towards India, the time has come to re-consider these
decisions. It would be unwise to allow a Chinese presence in sensitive fields such as telecommunications at a time when Chinese media such as the "Global Times" (October 14), which is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, has started threatening India with "dangerous consequences" if it does not concede the Chinese point of view on Arunachal Pradesh. India should not accept threatening language from
China---whether it be from the Government or from the Government and party-controlled media.
5.The Government of India should also re-consider its attitude towards His Holiness the Dalai Lama. He and thousands of his Tibetan followers have been our honoured guests for fifty years. We respect him as a Buddhist leader. Their welfare is our responsibility. Till now, in deference to Chinese sensitivities, successive Prime Ministers have been avoiding meeting His Holiness even on occasions such as the
Indian festival of Diwali. We do not give him an opportunity to meet Indian leaders to discuss the problems and welfare of the Tibetan refugees. A couple of years ago,a function was held in New Delhi to facilitate His Holiness on the award to him of the US Congressional Medal of Honour. At that time, in an unwise and unwarranted move, the then Cabinet Secretary of the Government of India was reported to have advised the Cabinet members to keep away from the function. This policy has to change. The Prime Minister should meet His Holiness from time to time in New Delhi as well as Dharamsala to discuss about the welfare of the Tibetan refugees.
6.Sino-Indian relations have steadily improved since the visit of the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to China in 1988 and his meeting with Deng Xiao-ping. Credit should go to Deng for laying the foundation for this improvement despite the pending border dispute. This improvement continued under President Jiang Zemin. India reciprocated the Chinese desire for better bilateral relations in spite of its
unhappiness and concern over the Chinese actions in giving military nuclear and missile capabilities to Pakistan, which wanted them for possible use against India.
7. Ever since Hu Jintao, who won his spurs as a political leader in Tibet, assumed charge as the President the policies of Deng and Jiang have been slowly sought to be reversed---- under pressure from the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and the hawkish elements in the party. The recent anti-India editorials in the party-controlled " Global Times" and " People's Daily" on October 14 are indicators of anti- India and
pro-Pakistan hawks in the party once again influencing the Chinese policy towards India and seeking to reverse the progress made under Deng and Jiang. We have to take note of this and re-fashion our policies accordingly.
8.India and China cannot afford a military conflict or confrontation or even sporadic trans-border incidents. It will damage their aspirations of a better life for their people and a more important role for their countries in the international stage.Misperceptions and misunderstandings over the border issue need to be handled delicately and sought to be removed by continuing the policy of engagement at the official and political levels. A war of words and hysteria and a tendency to demonise each other should be avoided. The gains made so far should be preserved. At the same time, we should not hesitate to articulate our core interests and adhere to them firmly even while trying to strengthen the bilateral relations. ( 17-10-09)
( 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 )
Thursday, October 15, 2009
PAKISTAN REELS UNDER A JIHADI GUERILLA WAR
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO.568
B.RAMAN
In the wake of the four well-orchestrated commando-style attacks launched by different terrorist groups against security establishments on October 15,2009---- three in Lahore and one in the North-West Frontier Province--- Rehman Mallick, Pakistan's Interior Minister, is reported to have aptly described the increasingly uncontrollable situation faced by Pakistan in the Pashtun tribal belt and in Punjab as a guerilla warfare launched against the State of Pakistan.
2. 149 fatalities---security forces personnel and civilians as well as terrorists--- have been reported in a relentless series of fedayeen attacks launched by different groups since October 5,2009. Among the targets of the terrorists were the highly-guarded but easily penetrated General Headquarters (GHQ)_ of the Pakistan Army in Rawalpindi, a Lahore office of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), which is
responsible for the investigation of terrorism-related cases, two training institutions in Lahore and a police station in the NWFP. Rehman Mallick used to be a senior officer of the FIA when Benazir Bhutto was the Prime Minister from 1993 to 96.
3. The attacks are more and more fedayeen (suicidal) than suicide and have involved a mix of modus operandi---use of hand-held weapons and explosives. Suicide attacks involving explosives-laden vehicles continue to take places against convoys of security forces, but commando-style attacks against well-fortified and supposedly well-guarded fixed establishments of the Army and the police are taking place with increasing frequency----to demonstrate the ability of the terrorists to attack with ferocity despite supposedly enhanced physical security.
4.Of the four attacks reported on October 15, two were against targets which were attacked earlier----the FIA office office in Lahore and the police training academy at Manawan, a Lahore suburb. They had both been attacked in March last, following which physical security was reportedly enhanced. This could not prevent the terrorists from attacking them again. About 20 terrorists split into three groups are
reported to have participated in the three attacks in the Lahore area on October 15---against the FIA office, the Manawan Police Academy and a commando school at Bedian on the outskirts of Lahore. It is not yet clear whether the Bedian commando school is of the police or of the army's Special Services Group (SSG). It is, however, noticed that the security forces personnel who participated in the fighting against
the attackers at Bedian, which reportedly lasted about four hours, were mainly from the Army and not from the police.
5. At least 10 of the attackers in Lahore perished---some were killed by the security forces and some blew themselves up. The fourth attack of the day on a police station at Kohat in the NWFP was carried out by a lone vehicle-borne suicide bomber. There were 32 fatalities in the four attacks---of security forces personnel as well as civilians caught in the firing or explosion.
6. Poor intelligence, poor investigation, poor physical security in establishments of the security forces, including in the army's GHQ, poor access control, poor road security and poor morale and motivation as seen from the failure or reluctance of the security forces personnel to give a chase to the surviving terrorists and capture them continue to be the bane of Pakistan's counter-terrorism mechanism. One saw this after the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team earlier this year when the terrorists just sauntered away after the attack without being stopped or chased and caught by the security forces.
7. While the morale, motivation, training and resilience of the terrorists belonging to different Taliban affiliates have been steadily increasing, there are worrisome signs of poor morale and motivation among the security forces. One notices also an alarming casualness and a lack of professionalism in performing their counter-terrorism tasks There is a tendency, even in the army, to avoid coming to terms with the ground reality, which is that the situation, which has already deteriorated in the Pashtun tribal belt, has now started deteriorating in the non-tribal areas of Punjab. Senior political leaders and military officers continue to behave with a certain nonchalance as if they are the masters of the situation despite the repeated attacks. Seriousness and determination in dealing with the situation are totally lacking.
8. There are more and more reasons to be worried about the security of Pakistan's nuclear establishments---if not of its nuclear arsenal. If the terrorists can lay hands on Pakistan's nuclear waste, which is stored in the NWFP, they could threaten the international community with the use of dirty bombs.Even if one feels that the fatalities due to the use of nuclear waste may not be much, the psychological effect on the general population could be high. ( 15-10-09)
( 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
In the wake of the four well-orchestrated commando-style attacks launched by different terrorist groups against security establishments on October 15,2009---- three in Lahore and one in the North-West Frontier Province--- Rehman Mallick, Pakistan's Interior Minister, is reported to have aptly described the increasingly uncontrollable situation faced by Pakistan in the Pashtun tribal belt and in Punjab as a guerilla warfare launched against the State of Pakistan.
2. 149 fatalities---security forces personnel and civilians as well as terrorists--- have been reported in a relentless series of fedayeen attacks launched by different groups since October 5,2009. Among the targets of the terrorists were the highly-guarded but easily penetrated General Headquarters (GHQ)_ of the Pakistan Army in Rawalpindi, a Lahore office of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), which is
responsible for the investigation of terrorism-related cases, two training institutions in Lahore and a police station in the NWFP. Rehman Mallick used to be a senior officer of the FIA when Benazir Bhutto was the Prime Minister from 1993 to 96.
3. The attacks are more and more fedayeen (suicidal) than suicide and have involved a mix of modus operandi---use of hand-held weapons and explosives. Suicide attacks involving explosives-laden vehicles continue to take places against convoys of security forces, but commando-style attacks against well-fortified and supposedly well-guarded fixed establishments of the Army and the police are taking place with increasing frequency----to demonstrate the ability of the terrorists to attack with ferocity despite supposedly enhanced physical security.
4.Of the four attacks reported on October 15, two were against targets which were attacked earlier----the FIA office office in Lahore and the police training academy at Manawan, a Lahore suburb. They had both been attacked in March last, following which physical security was reportedly enhanced. This could not prevent the terrorists from attacking them again. About 20 terrorists split into three groups are
reported to have participated in the three attacks in the Lahore area on October 15---against the FIA office, the Manawan Police Academy and a commando school at Bedian on the outskirts of Lahore. It is not yet clear whether the Bedian commando school is of the police or of the army's Special Services Group (SSG). It is, however, noticed that the security forces personnel who participated in the fighting against
the attackers at Bedian, which reportedly lasted about four hours, were mainly from the Army and not from the police.
5. At least 10 of the attackers in Lahore perished---some were killed by the security forces and some blew themselves up. The fourth attack of the day on a police station at Kohat in the NWFP was carried out by a lone vehicle-borne suicide bomber. There were 32 fatalities in the four attacks---of security forces personnel as well as civilians caught in the firing or explosion.
6. Poor intelligence, poor investigation, poor physical security in establishments of the security forces, including in the army's GHQ, poor access control, poor road security and poor morale and motivation as seen from the failure or reluctance of the security forces personnel to give a chase to the surviving terrorists and capture them continue to be the bane of Pakistan's counter-terrorism mechanism. One saw this after the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team earlier this year when the terrorists just sauntered away after the attack without being stopped or chased and caught by the security forces.
7. While the morale, motivation, training and resilience of the terrorists belonging to different Taliban affiliates have been steadily increasing, there are worrisome signs of poor morale and motivation among the security forces. One notices also an alarming casualness and a lack of professionalism in performing their counter-terrorism tasks There is a tendency, even in the army, to avoid coming to terms with the ground reality, which is that the situation, which has already deteriorated in the Pashtun tribal belt, has now started deteriorating in the non-tribal areas of Punjab. Senior political leaders and military officers continue to behave with a certain nonchalance as if they are the masters of the situation despite the repeated attacks. Seriousness and determination in dealing with the situation are totally lacking.
8. There are more and more reasons to be worried about the security of Pakistan's nuclear establishments---if not of its nuclear arsenal. If the terrorists can lay hands on Pakistan's nuclear waste, which is stored in the NWFP, they could threaten the international community with the use of dirty bombs.Even if one feels that the fatalities due to the use of nuclear waste may not be much, the psychological effect on the general population could be high. ( 15-10-09)
( 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 )
PAKISTAN'S HAFEEZ MOHAMMAD SAYEED CHARADE
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO. 567
B.RAMAN
One should not be surprised by the Lahore High Court's dismissal on October 12,2009, of the two cases under the Anti-Terrorism Act registered against Hafeez Mohammed Sayeed, the Amir of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD), the political wing of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET ), by the Faislabad Police in the Pakistani province of Punjab. The cases were registered following two inflammatory speeches delivered by him glorifying jihad and for collecting funds for a supposedly banned terrorist organisation. His speeches were interpreted as amounting to incitement to terrorism.
2. The dismissal of the cases was ordered by the Lahore High Court after it was admitted by the prosecution that the JUD was not a banned organisation. While there is a notified ban on the LET as a terrorist organisation since January 2002, there is no notified ban on the JUD.Sayeed and his aides have been maintaining since the JUD was formed after the January 2002 ban on the LET that the JUD had nothing
to do with the LET. This argument has not been successfully challenged in any Pakistani court.
3. Ever since the Mumbai terrorist attack of November 2008, Pakistani authorities have been repeatedly saying that whatever action they took or sought to take against Sayeed and the JUD such as arresting some of their cadres, seizing their funds etc was in pursuance of the decision of the anti-terrorism sanctions committee of the UN Security Council calling for action against the JUD and Sayeed and not based
on their own evidence.
4.The lawyers for Sayeed have been repeatedly arguing before different courts---with some success--- that no action can be taken against Sayeed and the JUD purely on the basis of a resolution of the UN Committee without any independent evidence supporting such action collected by the Pakistani investigation agencies. The Pakistani authorities have shown no interest in collecting such evidence.
5.Two actions by the Pakistani authorities are required in the wake of the involvement of the LET in the Mumbai terrorist attack. The first is action against the JUD and Hafeez for orchestrating the attack as has come out during the investigation by the Mumbai Police. The second is prosecution of those members of the LET in Pakistan involved in planning the attack and having it carried out.
6. The Pakistani authorities have shown some interest---one does not know how sincere they are--- only in the second action. They have been repeatedly dragging their feet in respect of the first. They are encouraged by the fact that the international pressure ---including US pressure--- on them is only in respect of the second. There is only seeming pressure in respect of the first --- even from the US.
7. A careful reading of the observations by judges of different courts----even by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhury of the Pakistan Supreme Court--- before which the lawyers of Sayeed had challenged on different occasions the action sought to be taken against Sayeed clearly shows that there is considerable judicial sympathy for Sayeed ---if not for the JUD. These observations have mainly related to two points. Firstly, that the action against him is being taken purely on the basis of a resolution of the UN committee, which has no relevance for the judicial proceedings against him. Secondly, that the action was also under Indian pressure.
8.Instead of reacting to the goings-on in Pakistani courts on a day-to-day basis through the media, the Government of India should carefully examine the various observations made by the Pakistani courts, decide how to counter them and then pressure Pakistan in a low-profile manner instead of through the media to pursue the cases against him. The high-profile campaign through the media against Sayeed seems
to be proving counter-productive. It is being exploited by his lawyers to contend that the Indian pressure--- and not legal evidence--- is making the Pakistan Govt. act against him. ( 15-10-09)
( 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
One should not be surprised by the Lahore High Court's dismissal on October 12,2009, of the two cases under the Anti-Terrorism Act registered against Hafeez Mohammed Sayeed, the Amir of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD), the political wing of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET ), by the Faislabad Police in the Pakistani province of Punjab. The cases were registered following two inflammatory speeches delivered by him glorifying jihad and for collecting funds for a supposedly banned terrorist organisation. His speeches were interpreted as amounting to incitement to terrorism.
2. The dismissal of the cases was ordered by the Lahore High Court after it was admitted by the prosecution that the JUD was not a banned organisation. While there is a notified ban on the LET as a terrorist organisation since January 2002, there is no notified ban on the JUD.Sayeed and his aides have been maintaining since the JUD was formed after the January 2002 ban on the LET that the JUD had nothing
to do with the LET. This argument has not been successfully challenged in any Pakistani court.
3. Ever since the Mumbai terrorist attack of November 2008, Pakistani authorities have been repeatedly saying that whatever action they took or sought to take against Sayeed and the JUD such as arresting some of their cadres, seizing their funds etc was in pursuance of the decision of the anti-terrorism sanctions committee of the UN Security Council calling for action against the JUD and Sayeed and not based
on their own evidence.
4.The lawyers for Sayeed have been repeatedly arguing before different courts---with some success--- that no action can be taken against Sayeed and the JUD purely on the basis of a resolution of the UN Committee without any independent evidence supporting such action collected by the Pakistani investigation agencies. The Pakistani authorities have shown no interest in collecting such evidence.
5.Two actions by the Pakistani authorities are required in the wake of the involvement of the LET in the Mumbai terrorist attack. The first is action against the JUD and Hafeez for orchestrating the attack as has come out during the investigation by the Mumbai Police. The second is prosecution of those members of the LET in Pakistan involved in planning the attack and having it carried out.
6. The Pakistani authorities have shown some interest---one does not know how sincere they are--- only in the second action. They have been repeatedly dragging their feet in respect of the first. They are encouraged by the fact that the international pressure ---including US pressure--- on them is only in respect of the second. There is only seeming pressure in respect of the first --- even from the US.
7. A careful reading of the observations by judges of different courts----even by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhury of the Pakistan Supreme Court--- before which the lawyers of Sayeed had challenged on different occasions the action sought to be taken against Sayeed clearly shows that there is considerable judicial sympathy for Sayeed ---if not for the JUD. These observations have mainly related to two points. Firstly, that the action against him is being taken purely on the basis of a resolution of the UN committee, which has no relevance for the judicial proceedings against him. Secondly, that the action was also under Indian pressure.
8.Instead of reacting to the goings-on in Pakistani courts on a day-to-day basis through the media, the Government of India should carefully examine the various observations made by the Pakistani courts, decide how to counter them and then pressure Pakistan in a low-profile manner instead of through the media to pursue the cases against him. The high-profile campaign through the media against Sayeed seems
to be proving counter-productive. It is being exploited by his lawyers to contend that the Indian pressure--- and not legal evidence--- is making the Pakistan Govt. act against him. ( 15-10-09)
( 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 )
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
CHINESE MEDIA REVERT TO PRE-DENG RHETORIC ON INDIA
B.RAMAN
Simultaneously with the publication of a strong anti-India editorial by the " Global Times" of China on October 14,2009, the party-run "People's Daily", has come out with an equally-strong anti-India editorial the same day under the title "Indian hegemony continues to harm relations with neighbors." The text of the editorial is annexed.
2.The "Global Times" belongs to the "People's Daily" group of publications of the Communist Party of China. While the "Global Times" seeks to project itself as an independent newspaper not necessarily voicing the opinion of the party,the "People's Daily" continues to be the voice of the party. It is generally believed that the editorials and op-ed articles carried by it have been pre-approved by the party before publication.
3. Ever since the 'Global Times" started coming out with editorials and articles critical of India and making derogatory references to India after April this year, the "People's Daily" followed the policy of occasionally reproducing some of the comments of the "Global Times" without identifying itself with those comments. It did carry opinion pieces on Tibet and His Holiness the Dalai Lama, but they were largely free of any negative references to India.
4.Thus, till recently, one saw a three-pronged approach by Beijing in matters relating to relations with India.Governmental spokespersons continued to be conciliatory while referring to issues relating to India. the "Global Times" was increasingly critical of India---even virulently sometimes--- and the "People's Daily" sometimes reproduced the comments of the "Global Times" without any anti-India comments of its own editorial department.
5. This policy seems to have changed from October 13. The comments of the spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry on the recent electoral visit of Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh to Arunachal Pradesh are anything but conciliatory. Instead of following its past policy of seeking to lower down the rhetoric in the local media, the Foreign Ministry itself seems to have taken the initiative in stepping up the rhetoric. Taking the cue from the Foreign Ministry, the"Global Times" and the "People's Daily" have come out with no-holds-barred criticism
of India.
6.Whereas the editorial of the "Global Times" was Arunachal Pradesh-centric in the context of our Prime Minister's visit to that Indian State,the "People's Daily's" criticism is focussed on the general directions of the Indian policy towards its neighbours. It tends to be critical as well as derogatory. It does not contain the kind of warnings to India that one noticed in the editorial of the "Global Times", but the bluntness of its depiction of India and its attitude to its neighbours recalls to one's mind the similar depiction of India by the Chinese media and party
circles before Deng Xiao-ping introduced a more nuanced and a more conciliatory policy towards India starting ftrom 1978.
7.The "People's Daily's" projection of India as a hegemonistic power, its underlining of the common experiences and common difficulties of China and Pakistan in dealing with India with which both have pending border disputes and its references to India's war with China and Pakistan disturbingly indicate a reversal to the pre-Deng projection of India in negative terms and to the pre-1978 rhetoric.
8. Its description of India's policy of "befriending the far and attacking the near" is unmistakably a reference to the developing strategic relations between India and the US the foundation for which was laid by the previous US President George Bush. Since President Barack Obama assumed office, he has been trying to exclude from this relationship aspects which could cause concern to China. Despite the positive attitude of the Obama Administration to China, Beijing continues to view the India-US strategic relations with suspicion and continues to suspect a common Indo-US objective of countering China.
9. The anti-India rhetoric in the party-controlled media and even from the Foreign Ministry has come at a time when there has been speculation of a weakening of the position of President Hu Jintao following the July outbreak of violence in Urumqi, the capital of the Xinjiang province, which forced him to cancel his participation in the G-8 summit in Italy and return ahead of schedule to Beijing to handle
the situation in Xinjiang.
10. Reports from Tibet and Xinjiang indicate that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) has been increasingly in the driving seat of decision-making in matters relating to these two provinces and China's relations with India. The more hawkish line adopted by the Chinese Foreign Ministry and the party media indicate that the hawks in the PLA and the party have started influencing the policy towards India.
11. It is important for the leaders of the two countries to get in touch with each other to eliminate the possibility of trans-border incidents caused by a misreading and misinterpretation of each other's intentions and moves.
12. It is clear from the present campaign against India that Beijing has come to the conclusion that it has made whatever concessions it could to India and that it is India's turn to make concessions to China in the negotiations on the border dispute. (15-10-09)
( 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
"People's Daily" editorial of October 14,2009
Indian hegemony continues to harm relations with neighbors.
Nobody can deny that today's India is a power. In recent years, Indians have become more narrow-minded and intolerable of outside criticism as nationalism sentiment rises, with some of them even turning to hegemony. It can be proved by India's recent provocation on border issues with China.
Given the country's history, hegemony is a hundred-percent result of British colonialism. Dating back to the era of British India, the country covered a vast territory including present-day India, Pakistan, Myanmar, Bangladesh as well as Nepal. India took it for granted that it could continue to rule the large area when Britain ended its colonialism in South Asia. A previous victim of colonialism and hegemony started to dream about developing its own hegemony. Obsessed with such mentality, India turned a blind eye to the concessions China had repeatedly made over the disputed border issues, and refused to drop the pretentious airs when dealing with neighbors like Pakistan.
Many Indians didn't know that Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, had once said that India could not play an inferior role in the world, and it should either be a superpower or disappear.
Although the pursuit of being a superpower is justifiable, the dream of being a superpower held by Indians appears impetuous. The dream of superpower is mingled with the thought of hegemony, which places the South Asian giant in an awkward situation and results in repeated failure.
Throughout the history, India has constantly been under foreign rule. The essence for the rise of India lies in how to be an independent country, to learn to solve the complicated ethnic and religious issues, to protect the country from terrorist attacks, to boost economic development as well as to put more efforts on poverty alleviation.
Additionally, the hegemony can also be harmful in terms of geopolitical environment. The expansion of India is restricted by its geographic locations. It has Himalaya Mountain to its north, a natural barrier for northward expansion; it has Pakistan to the west, a neighbor it is always at odds over the disputed border issues.
To everyone's disappointment, India pursued a foreign policy of "befriend the far and attack the near". It engaged in the war separately with China and Pakistan and the resentment still simmers. If India really wants to be a superpower, such a policy is shortsighted and immature.
India, which vows to be a superpower, needs to have its eyes on relations with neighbors and abandon the recklessness and arrogance as the world is undergoing earthshaking changes. For India, the ease of tension with China and Pakistan is the only way to become a superpower. At present, China is proactively engaging in negotiations with India for the early settlement of border dispute and India should
give a positive response.
Simultaneously with the publication of a strong anti-India editorial by the " Global Times" of China on October 14,2009, the party-run "People's Daily", has come out with an equally-strong anti-India editorial the same day under the title "Indian hegemony continues to harm relations with neighbors." The text of the editorial is annexed.
2.The "Global Times" belongs to the "People's Daily" group of publications of the Communist Party of China. While the "Global Times" seeks to project itself as an independent newspaper not necessarily voicing the opinion of the party,the "People's Daily" continues to be the voice of the party. It is generally believed that the editorials and op-ed articles carried by it have been pre-approved by the party before publication.
3. Ever since the 'Global Times" started coming out with editorials and articles critical of India and making derogatory references to India after April this year, the "People's Daily" followed the policy of occasionally reproducing some of the comments of the "Global Times" without identifying itself with those comments. It did carry opinion pieces on Tibet and His Holiness the Dalai Lama, but they were largely free of any negative references to India.
4.Thus, till recently, one saw a three-pronged approach by Beijing in matters relating to relations with India.Governmental spokespersons continued to be conciliatory while referring to issues relating to India. the "Global Times" was increasingly critical of India---even virulently sometimes--- and the "People's Daily" sometimes reproduced the comments of the "Global Times" without any anti-India comments of its own editorial department.
5. This policy seems to have changed from October 13. The comments of the spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry on the recent electoral visit of Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh to Arunachal Pradesh are anything but conciliatory. Instead of following its past policy of seeking to lower down the rhetoric in the local media, the Foreign Ministry itself seems to have taken the initiative in stepping up the rhetoric. Taking the cue from the Foreign Ministry, the"Global Times" and the "People's Daily" have come out with no-holds-barred criticism
of India.
6.Whereas the editorial of the "Global Times" was Arunachal Pradesh-centric in the context of our Prime Minister's visit to that Indian State,the "People's Daily's" criticism is focussed on the general directions of the Indian policy towards its neighbours. It tends to be critical as well as derogatory. It does not contain the kind of warnings to India that one noticed in the editorial of the "Global Times", but the bluntness of its depiction of India and its attitude to its neighbours recalls to one's mind the similar depiction of India by the Chinese media and party
circles before Deng Xiao-ping introduced a more nuanced and a more conciliatory policy towards India starting ftrom 1978.
7.The "People's Daily's" projection of India as a hegemonistic power, its underlining of the common experiences and common difficulties of China and Pakistan in dealing with India with which both have pending border disputes and its references to India's war with China and Pakistan disturbingly indicate a reversal to the pre-Deng projection of India in negative terms and to the pre-1978 rhetoric.
8. Its description of India's policy of "befriending the far and attacking the near" is unmistakably a reference to the developing strategic relations between India and the US the foundation for which was laid by the previous US President George Bush. Since President Barack Obama assumed office, he has been trying to exclude from this relationship aspects which could cause concern to China. Despite the positive attitude of the Obama Administration to China, Beijing continues to view the India-US strategic relations with suspicion and continues to suspect a common Indo-US objective of countering China.
9. The anti-India rhetoric in the party-controlled media and even from the Foreign Ministry has come at a time when there has been speculation of a weakening of the position of President Hu Jintao following the July outbreak of violence in Urumqi, the capital of the Xinjiang province, which forced him to cancel his participation in the G-8 summit in Italy and return ahead of schedule to Beijing to handle
the situation in Xinjiang.
10. Reports from Tibet and Xinjiang indicate that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) has been increasingly in the driving seat of decision-making in matters relating to these two provinces and China's relations with India. The more hawkish line adopted by the Chinese Foreign Ministry and the party media indicate that the hawks in the PLA and the party have started influencing the policy towards India.
11. It is important for the leaders of the two countries to get in touch with each other to eliminate the possibility of trans-border incidents caused by a misreading and misinterpretation of each other's intentions and moves.
12. It is clear from the present campaign against India that Beijing has come to the conclusion that it has made whatever concessions it could to India and that it is India's turn to make concessions to China in the negotiations on the border dispute. (15-10-09)
( 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
"People's Daily" editorial of October 14,2009
Indian hegemony continues to harm relations with neighbors.
Nobody can deny that today's India is a power. In recent years, Indians have become more narrow-minded and intolerable of outside criticism as nationalism sentiment rises, with some of them even turning to hegemony. It can be proved by India's recent provocation on border issues with China.
Given the country's history, hegemony is a hundred-percent result of British colonialism. Dating back to the era of British India, the country covered a vast territory including present-day India, Pakistan, Myanmar, Bangladesh as well as Nepal. India took it for granted that it could continue to rule the large area when Britain ended its colonialism in South Asia. A previous victim of colonialism and hegemony started to dream about developing its own hegemony. Obsessed with such mentality, India turned a blind eye to the concessions China had repeatedly made over the disputed border issues, and refused to drop the pretentious airs when dealing with neighbors like Pakistan.
Many Indians didn't know that Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, had once said that India could not play an inferior role in the world, and it should either be a superpower or disappear.
Although the pursuit of being a superpower is justifiable, the dream of being a superpower held by Indians appears impetuous. The dream of superpower is mingled with the thought of hegemony, which places the South Asian giant in an awkward situation and results in repeated failure.
Throughout the history, India has constantly been under foreign rule. The essence for the rise of India lies in how to be an independent country, to learn to solve the complicated ethnic and religious issues, to protect the country from terrorist attacks, to boost economic development as well as to put more efforts on poverty alleviation.
Additionally, the hegemony can also be harmful in terms of geopolitical environment. The expansion of India is restricted by its geographic locations. It has Himalaya Mountain to its north, a natural barrier for northward expansion; it has Pakistan to the west, a neighbor it is always at odds over the disputed border issues.
To everyone's disappointment, India pursued a foreign policy of "befriend the far and attack the near". It engaged in the war separately with China and Pakistan and the resentment still simmers. If India really wants to be a superpower, such a policy is shortsighted and immature.
India, which vows to be a superpower, needs to have its eyes on relations with neighbors and abandon the recklessness and arrogance as the world is undergoing earthshaking changes. For India, the ease of tension with China and Pakistan is the only way to become a superpower. At present, China is proactively engaging in negotiations with India for the early settlement of border dispute and India should
give a positive response.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
CHINA ACCUSES INDIA OF PROVOCATION, ITS MEDIA ALLEGES DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES IN ARUNACHAL PRADESH
B.RAMAN
As the time approaches for the proposed visit of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh next month to declare open a hospital built with contributions from the Tibetan exile community, China has stepped up its rhetoric against India. The recent visit of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Arunachal Pradesh to canvass for the candidates of his party in the just concluded elections to the State Assembly of Arunachal Pradesh on October 12 has been used as a pretext for the renewed criticism of the Indian policy on Arunachal Pradesh. Dr.Manmohan Singh's visit to Arunachal Pradesh has been projected as his visit to the so-called Southern Tibet.
2. China never fails to bring on record its protests and concerns over the visits of Indian leaders to Arunachal Pradesh for whatever purpose.The fact that it has done so after the recent electoral visit of Dr.Manmohan Singh should not, therefore, have been a matter of surprise and undue concern. What is disturbing is the kind of language used by a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Office in commenting on the visit and the even stronger language used by the "Global Times", in an editorial on the subject on October 14,2009. The "Global Times" is a sister publication of the Party-controlled "People's Daily".
3. The fresh campaign against India on the subject was triggered off by the comments of a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.Ma Zhaoxu, the spokesperson, was quoted by the "Global Times" as saying on October 13 that China was "seriously dissatisfied" by the visit of the Indian Prime Minister, who was accused of "ignoring China's concerns by visiting southern Tibet". The "Global Times" quoted the spokesperson as saying further as follows: "China and India have not reached any formal agreement on the border issue.We demand that the Indian side pay attention to the serious and just concerns of the Chinese side and not provoke incidents in the disputed region, in order to facilitate the healthy development of China-Indian relations."
4.There has been a difference in the translation into English of the spokesperson's remarks by the BBC and the "Global Times". While the BBC quoted the spokesperson as telling India "not to trigger disturbances in the disputed region", the "Global Times" spoke of the spokesperson telling India " not to not provoke incidents in the disputed region."
5.The editorial of the "Global Times" titled "Indian PM's visit a provocative move" described the Indian Prime Minister's visit as a "provocative and dangerous move" and alleged that the visit was designed to put the area under India's de facto administration. It accuses India of encouraging the "immigration of more than one million Indians to the region" and warns: "India, however, will make a fatal error if it mistakes China's approach for weakness. The Chinese government and public regard territorial integrity as a core national interest, one that must be defended with every means......The disputed border area is of strategic importance, and hence, India's recent moves – including Singh's trip and approving past visits to the region by the Dalai Lama – send the wrong signal. That could have dangerous consequences."
6. The text of the editorial is annexed.
7. The conventional wisdom is that since any military confrontation could affect China's economic development and its aspirations of rising as a major power on par with the US, Beijing will restrict itself to angry rhetoric and will not indulge in any ground action in the Arunachal Pradesh area. This wisdom has some validity, but overlooks the fact that China is feeling increasingly insecure in its peripheral areas because of the recent violent uprisings by the Tibetans last year and the Uighurs this year. Its increasing nervousness and feelings of insecurity in its border areas could lead to irrational and unpredictable reflexes vis-a-vis the Arunachal Pradesh issue.
8. We should avoid countering China's renewed rhetoric with our own rhetoric. While maintaining our cool, we should press ahead with the construction of the infrastructure in the Arunachal Pradesh area and strengthening our defensive capabilities there without talking about them from the roof-top. We should not advise His Holiness not to visit Tawang. When he visits Tawang, we should pay close attention to his personal security. The period before and after the visit of His Holiness to Tawang should call for extra vigilance from our side. China may not
indulge in any ground action till the visit of President Barack Obama to China next month is over. What it might do after Obama's visit is a matter which needs close monitoring. (14-10-09)
( 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
"Global Times" editorial of October 14,2009
Indian PM's visit a provocative move
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh made another provocative and dangerous move by visiting the East Section of the China-India Boundary, which India calls Arunachal Pradesh, on October 3 ahead of a local legislative election.
The visit is designed to put the area, a disputed border region between China and India, under the de facto administration of India.
China has completed land border demarcation with all of its neighboring countries but India.
Territorial disputes stand as a seemingly intractable issue between the two largest emerging economies in the world.
Though in similar developmental circumstances, China and India seem to have more confrontations than common ground.In the past decades, more than 10 rounds of negotiations held at various levels and through different mechanisms
The 120,000 square kilometers of the so-called Arunachal Pradesh, around the size of South China's Fujian Province, is at the center of the controversy. India currently occupies 90,000 square kilometers of the area.
Over the years, India has intensified its effective control over the area by encouraging the immigration of more than 1 million Indians to the region, and applying for loans from international bodies for public facilities projects in the region.
India is also increasing military deployment, along with sophisticated equipment, in the area. India's hawks are dangerously fanning public sentiment fearing a "China threat."
China favors peaceful resolution of territorial disputes through negotiation and consultation with its neighbors.
In the past the Chinese government has sought to build consensus in border negotiations through making concessions in exchange for reciprocal action.
China has maintained that same approach with India. India, however, will make a fatal error if it mistakes China's approach for weakness.
The Chinese government and public regard territorial integrity as a core national interest, one that must be defended with every means.
A stable border is crucial to the economic development of both China and India.
The disputed border area is of strategic importance, and hence, India's recent moves – including Singh's trip and approving past visits to the region by the Dalai Lama – send the wrong signal. That could have dangerous consequences.
Furthermore, India's actions add to the difficulties that have stalled negotiations on the region in the past.
It looks as if a breakthrough in talks is unlikely to happen any time soon.
As the time approaches for the proposed visit of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh next month to declare open a hospital built with contributions from the Tibetan exile community, China has stepped up its rhetoric against India. The recent visit of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Arunachal Pradesh to canvass for the candidates of his party in the just concluded elections to the State Assembly of Arunachal Pradesh on October 12 has been used as a pretext for the renewed criticism of the Indian policy on Arunachal Pradesh. Dr.Manmohan Singh's visit to Arunachal Pradesh has been projected as his visit to the so-called Southern Tibet.
2. China never fails to bring on record its protests and concerns over the visits of Indian leaders to Arunachal Pradesh for whatever purpose.The fact that it has done so after the recent electoral visit of Dr.Manmohan Singh should not, therefore, have been a matter of surprise and undue concern. What is disturbing is the kind of language used by a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Office in commenting on the visit and the even stronger language used by the "Global Times", in an editorial on the subject on October 14,2009. The "Global Times" is a sister publication of the Party-controlled "People's Daily".
3. The fresh campaign against India on the subject was triggered off by the comments of a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.Ma Zhaoxu, the spokesperson, was quoted by the "Global Times" as saying on October 13 that China was "seriously dissatisfied" by the visit of the Indian Prime Minister, who was accused of "ignoring China's concerns by visiting southern Tibet". The "Global Times" quoted the spokesperson as saying further as follows: "China and India have not reached any formal agreement on the border issue.We demand that the Indian side pay attention to the serious and just concerns of the Chinese side and not provoke incidents in the disputed region, in order to facilitate the healthy development of China-Indian relations."
4.There has been a difference in the translation into English of the spokesperson's remarks by the BBC and the "Global Times". While the BBC quoted the spokesperson as telling India "not to trigger disturbances in the disputed region", the "Global Times" spoke of the spokesperson telling India " not to not provoke incidents in the disputed region."
5.The editorial of the "Global Times" titled "Indian PM's visit a provocative move" described the Indian Prime Minister's visit as a "provocative and dangerous move" and alleged that the visit was designed to put the area under India's de facto administration. It accuses India of encouraging the "immigration of more than one million Indians to the region" and warns: "India, however, will make a fatal error if it mistakes China's approach for weakness. The Chinese government and public regard territorial integrity as a core national interest, one that must be defended with every means......The disputed border area is of strategic importance, and hence, India's recent moves – including Singh's trip and approving past visits to the region by the Dalai Lama – send the wrong signal. That could have dangerous consequences."
6. The text of the editorial is annexed.
7. The conventional wisdom is that since any military confrontation could affect China's economic development and its aspirations of rising as a major power on par with the US, Beijing will restrict itself to angry rhetoric and will not indulge in any ground action in the Arunachal Pradesh area. This wisdom has some validity, but overlooks the fact that China is feeling increasingly insecure in its peripheral areas because of the recent violent uprisings by the Tibetans last year and the Uighurs this year. Its increasing nervousness and feelings of insecurity in its border areas could lead to irrational and unpredictable reflexes vis-a-vis the Arunachal Pradesh issue.
8. We should avoid countering China's renewed rhetoric with our own rhetoric. While maintaining our cool, we should press ahead with the construction of the infrastructure in the Arunachal Pradesh area and strengthening our defensive capabilities there without talking about them from the roof-top. We should not advise His Holiness not to visit Tawang. When he visits Tawang, we should pay close attention to his personal security. The period before and after the visit of His Holiness to Tawang should call for extra vigilance from our side. China may not
indulge in any ground action till the visit of President Barack Obama to China next month is over. What it might do after Obama's visit is a matter which needs close monitoring. (14-10-09)
( 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
"Global Times" editorial of October 14,2009
Indian PM's visit a provocative move
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh made another provocative and dangerous move by visiting the East Section of the China-India Boundary, which India calls Arunachal Pradesh, on October 3 ahead of a local legislative election.
The visit is designed to put the area, a disputed border region between China and India, under the de facto administration of India.
China has completed land border demarcation with all of its neighboring countries but India.
Territorial disputes stand as a seemingly intractable issue between the two largest emerging economies in the world.
Though in similar developmental circumstances, China and India seem to have more confrontations than common ground.In the past decades, more than 10 rounds of negotiations held at various levels and through different mechanisms
The 120,000 square kilometers of the so-called Arunachal Pradesh, around the size of South China's Fujian Province, is at the center of the controversy. India currently occupies 90,000 square kilometers of the area.
Over the years, India has intensified its effective control over the area by encouraging the immigration of more than 1 million Indians to the region, and applying for loans from international bodies for public facilities projects in the region.
India is also increasing military deployment, along with sophisticated equipment, in the area. India's hawks are dangerously fanning public sentiment fearing a "China threat."
China favors peaceful resolution of territorial disputes through negotiation and consultation with its neighbors.
In the past the Chinese government has sought to build consensus in border negotiations through making concessions in exchange for reciprocal action.
China has maintained that same approach with India. India, however, will make a fatal error if it mistakes China's approach for weakness.
The Chinese government and public regard territorial integrity as a core national interest, one that must be defended with every means.
A stable border is crucial to the economic development of both China and India.
The disputed border area is of strategic importance, and hence, India's recent moves – including Singh's trip and approving past visits to the region by the Dalai Lama – send the wrong signal. That could have dangerous consequences.
Furthermore, India's actions add to the difficulties that have stalled negotiations on the region in the past.
It looks as if a breakthrough in talks is unlikely to happen any time soon.
Monday, October 12, 2009
THE PUNJABI TALIBAN
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR--PAPER NO. 566
B.RAMAN
The interrogation of Muhammed Aquil alias Dr.Usman, the only surviving member of the group of nine terrorists, which launched a commando-style attack on the Pakistan Army's General Headquarters (GHQ) at Rawalpindi on October 10,2009, which lasted a little over 20 hours, has not yet started. He is reported to have been seriously injured, when he tried to blow himself up inside the GHQ to avoid being captured. He is presently under treatment in a military hospital, where army doctors are desperately trying to save his life. The Pakistani authorities now believe that he was the leader of the commando group, which attacked the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore in March last and the GHQ on October 10-11.
2. On the basis of a record check, Pakistani investigators say that he is a Punjabi from the Kahuta Tehsil of the Rawalpindi District. He had served as a sepoy in the Army Medical Corps. He resigned from the Army after some years and joined the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ). When the Pashtun-dominated Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) came into existence after the Pakistani Army commando raid in the Lal Masjiid of Islamabad in July,2007, some of the Punjabi members of the LEJ , including Aquil, floated a new organisation called the Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab. Its leader's name is given as Farooq. Not much is known about him.
3. In the 1990s, the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP), which came into existence with the encouragement of the late Zia-ul-Haq, floated the LEJ. The SSP and the LEJ projected themselves as different organisations with no links, but Pakistani police officials believed that the SSP was the political wing of the clandestine LEJ. They further believe that the Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab is a newly-created united front of theLEJ, which seeks to bring together the various anti-Shia and pro-Al Qaeda groups of Punjab to act against the Army as well as the Shias.While the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM) is part of this united front, the Laashkar-e-Toiba (LET) is not.
4.The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), now headed by Hakimullah Mehsud, and the Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab share a Wahabist ideology and a common objective of fighting against the Pakistan Army's co-operation with the US. The two organisations share each other's training facilities and sanctuaries. They keep using each other's trained and motivated cadres for their operations. However, the operations of the
Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab are largely confined to the non-tribal belt. The LEJ Sometimes acts as the fighting arm of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab and sometimes independently. Al Qaeda acts as the mentor and motivator of all these organisations.
5. Police sources say that Aquil's name had earlier figured in the investigations into the assassination of the Surgeon General of the Pakistan Army Hafiz Mirza Muhammad Mushtaq Baig last year, the firing of a rocket at a plane carrying Pervez Musharraf in July,2007, and the attack on the SL cricket team in Lahore in March last.
6. Both the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and the LEJ are members of Osama bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF) for Jihad Against the Crusaders and the Jewish People. Both are strongly Wahabi organisations, but whereas the LEJ is strongly anti-US, anti-Israel, anti-India,anti-Iran and anti-Shia, the LET is only anti-US, anti-Israel and anti-India, but not anti-Iran or anti-Shia.
7.There is no confirmed instance of the LET indulging in planned anti-Shia violence in Pakistan or Afghanistan, but the LEJ has been responsible for most of the targeted attacks on Shias and their places of worship in Pakistan and on the Hazaras---who are Shias---in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
8. The Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM), the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), which are also members of the IIF,strongly share the anti-Shia feelings of the LEJ, but they do not indulge in targeted attacks on Shias and their places of worship. Many of the leaders of these organisations, including Maulana Masood Azhar, the Amir of the JEM, started their jihadi career in the SSP, but later drifted away from it since they felt uncomfortable with its targeted attacks on Shias and their places of worship. Despite being separate now, they
do co-operate with the LEJ in its operations directed against US interests and the Pakistani armed forces. The LET prefers to operate independently without getting involved with the SSP or the LEJ. The LET avoids attacks on Pakistani security forces.
9.The strong action taken by the international community against known and suspected Arab members of Al Qaeda created difficulties for them in travelling freely and in carrying out operations in non-Muslim countries. Consequently, it started depending increasingly on the Pakistani members of the LET for its operations. Post-9/11, the LET opened its sleeper cells in countries such as Australia, Singapore, the UK, France and the US to help Al Qaeda in its operations by collecting information, motivating the members of the Pakistani diaspora and other means.
10. The discovery of LET sleeper cells in the Western countries post-2002 brought increased focus on the LET in the West.Next to the Arab members of Al Qaeda, suspected Pakistani members of the LET were placed under close surveillance in many countries. This created difficulties in the movement and activities of the LET. The LET is no longer able to operate outside the Indian sub-continent and the Gulf
countries as freely as it used to do in the past.
11.Moreover, the LET started feeling uncomfortable over the anti-Shia violence unleashed by Al Qaeda and its surrogates in Iraq. While continuing to be a member of the IIF, it tried to avoid being associated with Al Qaeda's anti-Shia and anti-Saudi policies. Saudi charity organisations have been one of the main funders of the LET, which has an active branch in Saudi Arabia to recruit members from the Indian
Muslim diaspora in the Gulf countries.
12.In view of these developments, Al Qaeda has started increasingly using the LEJ for its operations in Pakistan itself as well as in the non-Muslim countries. The LEJ was actively involved in supporting the students of the two madrasas of the Lal Masjid of Islamabad before they were raided by Pakistani military commandoes in July, 2007. Many of the women, who were targeted by the girl students for allegedly
running a call girl racket, were reportedly Shias. It has been actively backing the tribals, who have taken to arms against the Pakistani security forces in North and South Waziristan and in the Swat Valley in the Provincially-Administered Tribal Areas (PATA) of the North-West Frontier Province. Under the influence of the LEJ, the tribals have been beheading or otherwise killing only the Shias among the security forces personnel captured by them. Well-informed Police sources say that all the para-military personnel beheaded so far by the tribals were Shias. According to them, there has not been a single instance of the beheading of a Sunni member of the security forces though many Sunnis have been killed in explosions.
13. The JEM is also actively involved in supporting the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM) in its fight against the security forces in the Swat Valley. There have been targeted attacks on members of the local Shia community. The anti-Shia dimension of the current violence in the tribal areas was also corroborated by the well-informed "Daily Times" of Lahore in an editorial titled "Two Oppressions"
carried by it on November 10, 2007. The editorial said: ' The latest news from Waziristan is that a well-known Shia personality has been gunned down. This is a part of the sectarian violence that Al Qaeda commits in the territories it captures. Earlier, Shias among the captured Pakistani troops were casually beheaded while the Sunnis were returned. In the Shia-majority Parachinar in the Kurram Agency,
suicide-bombers have been killing indiscriminately."
14.Al Qaeda's use of the LEJ is not confined to Pakistani territory. Police sources say that in view of the difficulties now faced by suspected LET members in Western countries and in South-east Asia, Al Qaeda is encouraging the SSP and the LEJ to gradually take over the role of the LET as the motivators and mobilisers of members of the overseas Pakistani diaspora for assisting Al Qaeda in its operations.
They claim that some sleeper cells of the SSP and the LEJ have already come up in the US, the UK, Spain, Portugal, France, Singapore and Australia. Since the foreign intelligence agencies do not have much information about the SSP and the LEJ, they are able to operate without creating suspicions about them. ( 12-10-09)
( 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 interrogation of Muhammed Aquil alias Dr.Usman, the only surviving member of the group of nine terrorists, which launched a commando-style attack on the Pakistan Army's General Headquarters (GHQ) at Rawalpindi on October 10,2009, which lasted a little over 20 hours, has not yet started. He is reported to have been seriously injured, when he tried to blow himself up inside the GHQ to avoid being captured. He is presently under treatment in a military hospital, where army doctors are desperately trying to save his life. The Pakistani authorities now believe that he was the leader of the commando group, which attacked the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore in March last and the GHQ on October 10-11.
2. On the basis of a record check, Pakistani investigators say that he is a Punjabi from the Kahuta Tehsil of the Rawalpindi District. He had served as a sepoy in the Army Medical Corps. He resigned from the Army after some years and joined the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ). When the Pashtun-dominated Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) came into existence after the Pakistani Army commando raid in the Lal Masjiid of Islamabad in July,2007, some of the Punjabi members of the LEJ , including Aquil, floated a new organisation called the Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab. Its leader's name is given as Farooq. Not much is known about him.
3. In the 1990s, the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP), which came into existence with the encouragement of the late Zia-ul-Haq, floated the LEJ. The SSP and the LEJ projected themselves as different organisations with no links, but Pakistani police officials believed that the SSP was the political wing of the clandestine LEJ. They further believe that the Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab is a newly-created united front of theLEJ, which seeks to bring together the various anti-Shia and pro-Al Qaeda groups of Punjab to act against the Army as well as the Shias.While the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM) is part of this united front, the Laashkar-e-Toiba (LET) is not.
4.The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), now headed by Hakimullah Mehsud, and the Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab share a Wahabist ideology and a common objective of fighting against the Pakistan Army's co-operation with the US. The two organisations share each other's training facilities and sanctuaries. They keep using each other's trained and motivated cadres for their operations. However, the operations of the
Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab are largely confined to the non-tribal belt. The LEJ Sometimes acts as the fighting arm of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Punjab and sometimes independently. Al Qaeda acts as the mentor and motivator of all these organisations.
5. Police sources say that Aquil's name had earlier figured in the investigations into the assassination of the Surgeon General of the Pakistan Army Hafiz Mirza Muhammad Mushtaq Baig last year, the firing of a rocket at a plane carrying Pervez Musharraf in July,2007, and the attack on the SL cricket team in Lahore in March last.
6. Both the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and the LEJ are members of Osama bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF) for Jihad Against the Crusaders and the Jewish People. Both are strongly Wahabi organisations, but whereas the LEJ is strongly anti-US, anti-Israel, anti-India,anti-Iran and anti-Shia, the LET is only anti-US, anti-Israel and anti-India, but not anti-Iran or anti-Shia.
7.There is no confirmed instance of the LET indulging in planned anti-Shia violence in Pakistan or Afghanistan, but the LEJ has been responsible for most of the targeted attacks on Shias and their places of worship in Pakistan and on the Hazaras---who are Shias---in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
8. The Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM), the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), which are also members of the IIF,strongly share the anti-Shia feelings of the LEJ, but they do not indulge in targeted attacks on Shias and their places of worship. Many of the leaders of these organisations, including Maulana Masood Azhar, the Amir of the JEM, started their jihadi career in the SSP, but later drifted away from it since they felt uncomfortable with its targeted attacks on Shias and their places of worship. Despite being separate now, they
do co-operate with the LEJ in its operations directed against US interests and the Pakistani armed forces. The LET prefers to operate independently without getting involved with the SSP or the LEJ. The LET avoids attacks on Pakistani security forces.
9.The strong action taken by the international community against known and suspected Arab members of Al Qaeda created difficulties for them in travelling freely and in carrying out operations in non-Muslim countries. Consequently, it started depending increasingly on the Pakistani members of the LET for its operations. Post-9/11, the LET opened its sleeper cells in countries such as Australia, Singapore, the UK, France and the US to help Al Qaeda in its operations by collecting information, motivating the members of the Pakistani diaspora and other means.
10. The discovery of LET sleeper cells in the Western countries post-2002 brought increased focus on the LET in the West.Next to the Arab members of Al Qaeda, suspected Pakistani members of the LET were placed under close surveillance in many countries. This created difficulties in the movement and activities of the LET. The LET is no longer able to operate outside the Indian sub-continent and the Gulf
countries as freely as it used to do in the past.
11.Moreover, the LET started feeling uncomfortable over the anti-Shia violence unleashed by Al Qaeda and its surrogates in Iraq. While continuing to be a member of the IIF, it tried to avoid being associated with Al Qaeda's anti-Shia and anti-Saudi policies. Saudi charity organisations have been one of the main funders of the LET, which has an active branch in Saudi Arabia to recruit members from the Indian
Muslim diaspora in the Gulf countries.
12.In view of these developments, Al Qaeda has started increasingly using the LEJ for its operations in Pakistan itself as well as in the non-Muslim countries. The LEJ was actively involved in supporting the students of the two madrasas of the Lal Masjid of Islamabad before they were raided by Pakistani military commandoes in July, 2007. Many of the women, who were targeted by the girl students for allegedly
running a call girl racket, were reportedly Shias. It has been actively backing the tribals, who have taken to arms against the Pakistani security forces in North and South Waziristan and in the Swat Valley in the Provincially-Administered Tribal Areas (PATA) of the North-West Frontier Province. Under the influence of the LEJ, the tribals have been beheading or otherwise killing only the Shias among the security forces personnel captured by them. Well-informed Police sources say that all the para-military personnel beheaded so far by the tribals were Shias. According to them, there has not been a single instance of the beheading of a Sunni member of the security forces though many Sunnis have been killed in explosions.
13. The JEM is also actively involved in supporting the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM) in its fight against the security forces in the Swat Valley. There have been targeted attacks on members of the local Shia community. The anti-Shia dimension of the current violence in the tribal areas was also corroborated by the well-informed "Daily Times" of Lahore in an editorial titled "Two Oppressions"
carried by it on November 10, 2007. The editorial said: ' The latest news from Waziristan is that a well-known Shia personality has been gunned down. This is a part of the sectarian violence that Al Qaeda commits in the territories it captures. Earlier, Shias among the captured Pakistani troops were casually beheaded while the Sunnis were returned. In the Shia-majority Parachinar in the Kurram Agency,
suicide-bombers have been killing indiscriminately."
14.Al Qaeda's use of the LEJ is not confined to Pakistani territory. Police sources say that in view of the difficulties now faced by suspected LET members in Western countries and in South-east Asia, Al Qaeda is encouraging the SSP and the LEJ to gradually take over the role of the LET as the motivators and mobilisers of members of the overseas Pakistani diaspora for assisting Al Qaeda in its operations.
They claim that some sleeper cells of the SSP and the LEJ have already come up in the US, the UK, Spain, Portugal, France, Singapore and Australia. Since the foreign intelligence agencies do not have much information about the SSP and the LEJ, they are able to operate without creating suspicions about them. ( 12-10-09)
( 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)