INDIA, THE US & CHINA

B.RAMAN

The following are the comments given by me in response to queries from an American analyst in connection with the forthcoming visit of Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, to the US, from November 23 to 26,2009:

(a). No thinking has been ever done in India as to what it expects out of a long-term strategic relationship with the US. It is always the US which decides what it will give to India and it is New Delhi which accepts. It was so with the nuclear deal which was offered by Bush in July 2005.Manmohan Singh was pleasantly surprised when Bush offered it and then we followed it up.India's expectations from the US in the past were limited to US pressure on Pakistan to stop using terrorism against India, removal of restrictions on the supply of modern dual-use technology to India and US support for India's permanent membership of the UNSC. They remain the same.Any strategic relationship has to be a quid pro quo relationship. Since the US has hardly any dependence on India in any matter, there is no scope for any quid pro quo.

(b). India visualises itself as an Asian power on par with China. Beijing does not see it this way.China views India as a sub-regional Asian power and wants to keep its influence restricted to its immediate neighbourhood. Obama's visit to China has uncomfortably brought out to India that there is a convergence of perceptions between China and the Obama Administration on the limited regional role of India.China's pre-eminence has been recognised by Obama. Obama has re-hyphenated India-Pakistan relations and quietly relegated India to the role of a sub-regional power whose aspirations of having a status on par with China are unrealistic.

(c).In geopolitical matters, there is no futuristic thinking in India. The quality of Indian thinking and analysis----strategic and tactical----is poor. What passes for analysis in India is just wishful-thinking. Nobody in India has realised and brought out that for the first time the US, Japan and Australia have a leadership which does not rate highly India's potential as an emerging power. There is less and less talk of Chindia.Even today, many in India are not aware that the new Japanese Govt is not as enthusiastic about India as its predecessor Govt.was.There has been no exercise in India to analyse future scenarios in US-Japan relationship..

(d).Someone ( was it Henry Kissinger?) once said that power and influence are not given. They are taken. China has shown how to take it. India does not have the political will and courage to fight for it and take it. It is hoping that the US will give it. Bush and Condolleezza Rice seemed inclined to bestow on India the status of an Asian power on par with China. The Obama Administration does not seem to be so inclined.

( 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 )

OBAMA FAILS TO UNDERSTAND INDIA'S DISTRUST OF CHINA

B.RAMAN

The failure of President Barack Obama to understand the distrust of China in large sections of the Indian civil society has landed the US in a situation in which the considerable goodwill between India and the US created during the administration of his predecessor George Bush stands in danger of being diluted by his unthinking words and actions.

2. The distrust of China in the Indian civil society is much deeper than even the distrust of Pakistan. Even today, despite Pakistan's continued use of terrorism against India, there is some goodwill for the people of Pakistan in many sections of the Indian civil society. As against this, outside the traditional communist and other leftist circles, one would hardly find any section which trusts China ---its Government as well as its people.

3. The Indian distrust of China arises mainly from three factors. First, the Sino-Indian war of 1962. Second, China's role in giving Pakistan a military nuclear and missile capability for use against India. Third, the Chinese blockage of the pre 26/11 efforts in the sanctions committee of the UN Security Council to declare the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD), the parent organisation of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), as a terrorist organisation and its subsequent opposition for a similar declaration against the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JED).

4. The dubious Chinese stand on the issue of Pakistani use of terrorism against India is viewed by many in India as amounting to collusion.

5. The Indian suspicions of China have been magnified in recent years by Beijing's Look South policy. China is not a South Asian power, but it has sought to create for itself a large South Asian presence by developing a military supply relationship with the countries of the region, by helping India's neighbours in the development of their infrastructure of strategic importance such as ports and by supporting the Maoists of Nepal.

6. At a time when concerns in India over the increasing Chinese strategic presence and influence in India's neigbourhood have been increasing, it is an amazingly shocking act of insensitivity on the part of Obama and his policy advisers to project China as a benign power with a benevolent role in South Asia---- whether for promoting understanding between India and Pakistan or for influencing developments in other countries of the region.

7. It is politically naive on the part of Obama to expect that Indian political and public opinion will accept any role for China in South Asia in matters which impact on India's core interests. Bush's China policy had favourable vibrations in India by highlighting the threats that are likely to be posed by its military modernisation made possible by its economic power. A convergence of concerns over China between Washington and New Delhi laid the foundation for the strategic relationship between the countries.

8. Obama's projection of China as a trustworthy partner of the US in jointly tackling long-standing contentious issues in South Asia shows a shocking ignorance of the fact that China was one of the causes of the persistence of these issues. Its effort has always been not to promote mutual understanding and harmony in South Asia, but to keep India isolated by keeping alive the old distrusts and animosities and creating new ones.

9. At a time when Indian public opinion was looking forward to fruitful results from the forthcoming visit of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to the US, reports from Beijing on Obama's visit to China would strengthen the impression that Obama is not India's cup of tea. (19-11-09)

( 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 )

OBAMA & CHINA: THE COMING SHOCKS ( WHAT I WROTE ON OCTOBER 6,2009)

B.RAMAN

Extracts from my article at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers35/paper3445.html

The Obama Administration is showing signs of greater sensitivity to the concerns and interests of China than those of India. Reliable reports indicate that it is veering towards a policy of neutrality on the issue of Arunachal Pradesh, which has been a major bone of contention between India and China. It is believed to be dragging its feet on the implementation of the understanding reached between the preceding Bush Administration and the Govt. of India for the US Air Force to undertake searches in Arunachal Pradesh territory for US Air Force personnel, who were missing in action during the Second World War.

It is learnt that the formats of the joint exercices between the three wings of the Armed Forces of the two countries, which were agreed upon during the Bush Administration, are being reviewed in order to delete elements, which could cause concern to not only China, but also Pakistan--- such as joint exercises between the two armies in the Siachen area to enable US Army personnel to get exposed to high altitude conditions, joint naval exercises in the seas to the east of India etc.

While the Obama Administration wants to go ahead with the over-all format of the strategic relationship with India as laid down by the Bush Administration, it wants to have a second look at those aspects, which could cause concern to China.

There was one joint naval exercise off Japan involving ships of the navies of India, the US and Japan after Obama assumed office. Such exercises are likely to be avoided in future.

There is also a possibility of the US abstaining when the specific proposal for assistance from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for a flood control project in Arunachal Pradesh comes up for approval before the ADB.The ADB's Board of Governors had earlier this year, after Obama came to office, approved a basket of projects proposed by India despite opposition ftrom China. It is learnt that ADB officials have been saying that approval for the package as a whole did not mean approval of each individual item in the package and that each individual item has to be approved separately. Efforts are being made to scuttle ADB support for the individual proposal relating to Arunachal Pradesh.

The Obama Administration seems to be thinking that all that it needs to do to humour India and soften the blow due to its steady reversal of the pro-India policies initiated by the Bush Administration is to accord the honours of a State visit to Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh in November and play up the ceremonial honours accorded to him. In the last few days, officials of the US State Department have been briefing the media about the kind of honours which will be accorded to Dr.Manmohan Singh when he visits Washington. These are meant to show that there has been no change in the US policies towards India under the Obama Administration. The reality is that on every matter, which is of concern to India, greater attention is being paid to China's sensitivities and concerns.

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institite For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

GEN. FONSEKA DEVALUES HIMSELF

B.RAMAN

The Khalistani terrorism in India and the terrorism of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in Sri Lanka are two unique instances in the history of terrorism where the State prevailed over the terrorists without conceding their demands.

2. The threat faced by Sri Lanka was more complex and difficult to handle than the threat faced by India. Sri Lanka was confronted with a ruthless mix of a full-blown insurgency seeking territorial control and terrorism seeking to intimidate the civil society. The Khalistani terrorism was a purely terrorist movement with no mix of an insurgency.

3. The situation, which Sri Lanka faced, was similar to that faced by the US and other NATO forces and the Afghan National Army in Afghanistan. They have not yet been able to find an effective answer to the complex mix of insurgent and terrorist tactics used by the Neo Taliban.

4. It goes to the credit of the counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism machinery of Sri Lanka that after having struggled against the LTTE for nearly 23 years till 2006, they were able to fashion an appropriate mix of tactics to prevail over the LTTE.

5. This mix had a number of components. The political component, which was handled by President Mahinda Rajapaksa himself, focussed on giving the security forces and the intelligence agencies the resources and capacities needed by them to prevail over the LTTE and at the same time, ensuring that the counter-terrorist and counter-insurgency operations of the security forces did not drive more Tamils into the arms of the LTTE.

6. The diplomatic component, which was handled by Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama, ensured the diplomatic isolation of the LTTE. In fact, it was the success of the Sri Lankan diplomacy in getting the LTTE declared as a terrorist organisation by the European Union countries and in persuading the US, the EU countries and the Governments in South-East Asia to act energetically against the flow of money and weapons to the LTTE, which laid the foundation for the ultimate success of the Army on the ground.

7. If Sri Lankan diplomacy had not acted as energetically as it did in getting the sources of weapons supply to the LTTE choked off, the LTTE might not have collapsed as completely as it did.

8. It also goes to the credit of Rajapaksa and his Foreign Office that they realised the importance of India in any effective strategy to defeat the LTTE. China and Pakistan might have supplied arms and ammunition to the SL security forces, but what really helped the security forces was the assistance rendered by the Indian Navy, Coast Guard and intelligence to their SL counterparts in ensuring that the LTTE was not able to smuggle in fresh stocks of weapons from abroad. Another contribution made by the Government of India was in the handling of any political fall-out in Tamil Nadu to prevent any backlash against the Sri Lankan operations in Indian territory.

9. It is the political and diplomatic handling of the counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency campaign by Rajapaksa and his political aides such as his Foreign Minister and professional aides such as his brother Gothbaya Rajapaksa, who as the Defence Secretary was the Chief Co-ordinator, that paved the way for the ultimate success of the armed forces.

10. The Armed Forces fought bravely. The credit for working out a ground strategy, which will prevail against the LTTE, should go to Gen.Sarath Fonseka, the chief of the Army, who subsequently became the Chief of the Defence Staff after the victory over the LTTE. The victory of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces over the LTTE was even more remarkable than that of the Indian security forces over the Khalistani terrorists, who were as ruthless as the LTTE.

11. We were not able to neutralise the command and control and leadership of the Khalistani terrorists as completely as the Sri Lankan Armed Forces under the leadership of Fonseka were able to do in respect of the LTTE. In any history of counter-terrorism, the way the entire Sri Lankan counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency machinery under Rajapaksa fought against the LTTE and prevailed over it would form an important chapter.

12. In his newly-assumed post of the Chief of the Defence Staff, Fonseka would have been able to do a retrospective analysis of the entire evolution of the LTTE and the way different SL Governments had handled the threat in order to draw lessons for the future. Such an exercise would have been of immense benefit to his own country as well as to India and others who face similar problems.

13. instead of doing so, he has allowed his pique over perceived slights by the Government to get the better of him and has resigned from his post as the CDS after making a series of allegations against the Government. A perusal of his letter to Rajapaksa does not speak well of his intellectual maturity as an individual. He was a brilliant professional, but professionalism alone does not make a good leader.

14.Media reports say that he has developed political ambitions of contesting the next Presidential elections against Rajapaksa. He has every right to do so as a Sri Lankan citizen. Unfortunately, his letter to Rajapaksa does not bring out any latent political acumen in him. They only bring out his huge ego and his pique. The message which comes out of the letter is: " I am the super hero of the success against the LTTE. My role in the triumph has not been sufficiently recognised."

15. As one reads his letter, one's mind goes back to our triumph against Khalistani terrorism. The success was achieved when K.P.S.Gill was the Director-General of Police of Punjab. He has never projected himself as the super hero of the success. He is always the first to admit that the success of the Punjab Police under his leadership would not have been possible without the political leadership and guidance of Narasimha Rao as the Prime Minister and Beant Singh as the Chief Minister of Punjab, without the team work put in by the police, the armed forces, the intelligence agencies and the Foreign Office and without the co-operation of foreign intelligence agencies which gave a lot of valuable intelligence.

16. Punjab is the most important of our successes against terrorism and insurgency, but not the only one. We have had other successes in Nagaland, Tripura, Mizoram and Kashmir.The professionals--- whether from the Armed Forces, the police or the intelligence agencies--- who were instrumental in making those successes possible, did not go around projecting themselves as super heroes. They recognised the role of others and maintained their sense of balance.

17. By failing to maintain his sense of balance and by allowing his pique to get the better of him, Fonseka has only devalued himself. The political forces in Sri Lanka which are exploiting his pique as a stick to beat Rajapaksa with are playing an unwise game. They may end up by diluting the professionalism of the SL Army. (17-11-2009)

( 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 )

THE 313 BRIGADE

INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR: PAPER NO. 579

B.RAMAN

There are two jihadi terrorist organisations by the name the 313 Brigade. The first is Kashmir-centric and is associated with the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) of Qari Saifullah Akhtar. It has been in existence since at least 1999 and is a member of the United Jihad Council, based in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir, which is headed by Syed Salahuddin of the Hizbul Mujahideen. It looks upon India as its main enemy and is not against the Government of Pakistsan, its Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

2.On December 15,1999, a Rashtriya Rifles unit in Jammu & Kashmir had killed one Sher Khan, who was described as the chief commander of a newly formed 313 Brigade and a HUJI commander called Nadeem Khan during an encounter in the Marot forest area of Surankote. The "Excelsior", a daily newspaper published from Jammu, had quoted Indian defence sources as saying that the 313 Brigade had been formed by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) a few days earlier.They claimed to have killed its leader within a few days of its formation and infiltration into J&K.

3. Thereafter, from to time, there were references to the activities of the 313 Brigade in the Surankote area of J & K. In October 2004, a Rashtriya Rifles unit captured one Sabzar Ahmed, a resident of the Surankote area, who was described as a member of the 313 Brigade.

4. On March 17,2006, "The Nation", the Pakistani daily, had carried a report on a letter jointly written to Pervez Musharraf by the members of the United Jihad Council of Kashmir protesting against his Government succumbing to pressure from the George Bush administration to discontinue support to the Kashmir-related jihadi organisations. Among those who had signed the letter was one Munir Ahmed of the 313 Brigade.

5.In April 2006, the US State Department issued the 2006 "Country Reports on Terrorism," which listed a number of designated "foreign terrorist organizations" and also listed "other selected terrorist groups also deemed to be of relevance to the global war on terrorism." The HUJI was listed in the latter category. The report noted the group's "links to al Qaeda," and that the "HUJI's operations in Kashmir were led by Commander Ilyas Kashmiri, a former commander in the Afghan jihad, .... who was arrested in October2005 on charges of attacks against President Musharraf in 2003."

6. Reports in the Pakistani media indicated that Ilyas Kashmiri, who headed the 313 Brigade of the HUJI in J&K, was released by the Pakistani authorities on the intervention of Syed Salahuddin and had shifted from Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK), where he was previously based, to the Waziristan area of the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).

7. A second organisation also known as the 313 Brigade is Pakistan-centric and is the fighting arm of the International Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Crusaders and the Jewish People formed by Osama bin Laden in 1998 in association with a number of terrorist organisations of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan and other countries. It came into existence after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. It looks upon the US and Israel as its main enemies. It is strongly against the Pakistan Govt, its Army and the ISI because of their alleged co-operation with the US in Afghanistan.

8. While the Kashmir-centric 313 Brigade claims responsibility for its actions in Jammu & Kashmir, the Pakistan-centric 313 Brigade does not admit its operations in Pakistan. Till 2007, the responsibility for the attacks on Pakistani army and ISI officers was claimed by organisations with names such as the Islambouli Brigade, the Jundullah etc. After the raid by the Special Services Group (SSG) of the Pakistan Army into the Lal Masjid of Islamabad in July,2007, the responsibility for many of the attacks on military establishments and personnel has been claimed by the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

9. Among the terrorist attacks in Pakistani territory in which the Pakistan-centric 313 Brigade was suspected were:

(a). The two attempts to kill Pervez Musharraf in Rawalpindi in December,2003.

(b). The attempts to kill the Corps Commander of Karachi and Shaukat Aziz, the then Finance Minister who had been nominated by Musharraf to take over as the Prime Minister, at Fateh Jang in the Attock constituency of Punjab in 2004. Shaukat Aziz escaped an assassination attempt while he was canvassing a bye-election campaign.

(c). The murder of two officers of the Intelligence Bureau at Kohat in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) in 2004.

(d). The attack on the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad in September 2008.The Danish diplomatic staff were functioning from there.

(e).The November 19,2008,assassination of Maj-Gen Amir Faisal Alvi, who headed the SSG in 2003-2005 before he was removed by Musharraf for unworthy conduct.

10. Immediately after the attempt on Shaukat Aziz, an Islamic web site had quoted a group calling itself the Islambouli Brigade as claiming that it had targeted one of the men of the "American infidel group in Pakistan". Lt Khaled Islambouli was the leader of the group of soldiers, who assassinated Egyptian President Anwar Sadat during a military parade in Cairo in 1981.Though the statement did not mention Aziz by name, it was apparent the reference was to him. It said: "One of our blessed battalions tried to hunt a head of one of America’s infidels in Pakistan while he was returning from Fateh Jang, but God wanted him to survive. With this blow, we are delivering a message to the Pakistani Government and its head Pervez Musharraf, who is still extraditing the Mujahideen to America to appease it." . It accused the person targetted at Fateh Jang of being "a follower of the wicked Bush and his cronies."

11."Yesterday’s attack will be followed by more painful blows if you do not stop blindly obeying the orders of that Bush. If you don’t stop, the Mujahideen will wage a bloody war in Pakistan," it added. It said it was giving the Musharraf Government a "period of truce" to stop handing over arrested persons to the US, failing which the brigade "will behave in a different way." The statement did not say how long the truce would last, but it warned that its message was "the last warning. "Within the coming few days, our brigade will speak with the language of blood which is the only language you understand," it further warned.

12.In an interview to the "News", the prestigious Pakistani daily, apparently given after the attempt to kill Aziz, the 45-year-old Haji Mohammad Omar, who had succeeded Nek Mohammad as the leader of the pro-Taliban elements in South Waziristan, warned: "The rulers would not be safe if the Pakistan Government with US assistance targets our leaders. We are convinced that commander Nek Muhammad was killed by the US military with the connivance of our own government.The rocket attacks on Pakistan Army and Frontier Corps camps and assets in South Waziristan and the resistance being put up by the militants there are largely fuelled by the US military involvement in the so-called campaign against al-Qaeda and Taliban in Pakistan.The militants target only those places where US military personnel and spies are stationed. Our men take maximum care not to harm Pakistani soldiers and militiamen."He alleged that hundreds of US troops and intelligence agents had been secretly deployed in South Waziristan and that US military planes and helicopter gunships were operating in Pakistani territory and air space.

13. The attack came at a time when there were reports that the so-called 313 Brigade of the International Islamic Front (IIF), as distinguished from the 313 Brigade of the HUJI in J&K, had stepped up its campaign against the Pervez Musharraf Government in Pakistan and the Islam Karimov Government in Uzbekistan for co-operating with the USA in its war against terrorism.

14. The attack also come at a time when the Iraqi resistance and foreign jihadi terrorist groups in Iraq had stepped up their campaign against Saudi Arabia and Pakistan for allegedly letting themselves be used by the Bush administration for suppressing the Iraqi people. They were virulently criticising Jehangir Ashraf Qazi, the Pakistani diplomat, for agreeing to work as the UN Representative in Iraq and warning Pakistan against sending its troops to Iraq to protect the UN office.

15. Two Kashmiris from the POK, who had gone to Iraq to work for a US contractor, were captured by unidentified elements and beheaded as a warning to people in Pakistan not to volunteer to work for US contractors in Iraq. The responsibility for the beheading was claimed in the name of an organisation called the Jaish-e-Islam (Army of Islam).

16. These attacks followed after a statement issued by Osama bin Laden in 2003 calling Pakistan an apostate State for co-operating with the US and a virulent statement by his No.2 Ayman al-Zawahiri calling for action against Musharraf. In the meanwhile, the investigation into the two attempts to kill Musharrafr reportedly brought out the involvement of some junior officers of the Army and the Air Force in the conspiracy along with members of the HUJI, the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM) and the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ).

17. The various reports received during this period indicated that at the instance of Al Qaeda, the IIF had revamped its 313 Brigade by including in it select volunteers from not only the Pakistani jihadi organisations, but also sympathetic military personnel for carrying out reprisal attacks to protest against the Pakistani , co-operation with the US.

18. After the attacks on Musharraf, Qari Saifullah Akhtar, the Amir of the HUJI, ran away from Pakistan. He was arrested by the Dubai Police on August 6,2004, and handed over to the Pakistani authorities. Surprisingly, the Pakistani authorities did not prosecute him just as they did not prosecute Ilyas Kashmiri. They released him after keeping him under informal detention for some months. After the failed attempt to kill her at Karachi on October 17,2007, Benazir Bhutto had named the Qari as the principal suspect. He was again arrested, but released after some weeks without being prosecuted.

19. The 313 Brigade of the IIF, which has been focussing on attacking Pakistani targets as distinguished from the 313 Brigade in J&K which attacks Indian targets, is a shadowy organisation. Media reports project Ilyas Kashmiri as the head of the 313 Brigade of the IIF. In a press interview, Ilyas himself has sought to give the impression that he heads it. He has been saying that unless the US and its collaborators in Pakistan are defeated, the so-called struggle against India in J&K will not progress. He thus now gives primacy to the jihadi campaign against the US and its alleged collaborators in Pakistan.

20. Ilyas sees himself as another Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and wants to carry out a spectacular terrorist strike in a Western country. The purpose of his trying to use David Coleman Headley, of Chicago arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation at Chicago on October 3, 2009, was for an attack on the Danish journal, which carried caricatures of the Prophet in 2005. A perusal of the FBI's affidavit against Headley shows that while Ilyas wanted a Mumbai--26/11 style attack in Copenhagen, Headley felt that a more feasible option would be to assassinate the cartoonist and his Editor.

21. Where do the statements of the TTP claiming responsibility for attacks on Pakistani military personnel fit in? What is the relationship between the TTP, Ilyas and his 313 Brigade? What happened to the 313 Brigade of J&K? Does it continue its separate existence? Answers to these questions are not available.

22. The jihadi picture in Pakistan is getting murkier and murkier. Nobody----neither Pakistan's political and military leaders nor the US intelligence agencies and military leadership nor the mushrooming community of terrorism analysts all over the world---- seems to understand what the hell is going on in Pakistan, which is inexorably becoming a country beyond understanding and beyond redemption. (16-11-09)

( 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 )

RE-VISITING MUMBAI 26/11 INVESTIGATION

INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO. 577

B.RAMAN

" The Mumbai Police and the Maharashtra Government continue to assert on the basis of the interrogation of the arrested perpetrator that only 10 terrorists were involved. The operation involved detailed intelligence collection, reconnoitering the places to be attacked and the final planning and execution. It is difficult to accept that the same 10 persons performed all these tasks. There definitely must have been more people involved in the conspiracy on the ground in India, in addition to the Pakistan-based conspirators mentioned in the final invstigation report of the police---- at least performing peripheral roles such as intelligence collection and reconnoitering."

------ Extract from my latest book titled " Mumbai 26/11---A Day of Infamy"

--------------------------------------------

The Mumbai Police, who were all along insisting that the case relating to the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai had been thoroughly investigated and that there were no more missing links or gaps in the investigation, have been embarrassed by the discovery by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of the US that David Coleman Headley, previously known till 2006 as Daood Gilani, a US citizen of Pakistani origin, arrested by them on October 3,2009, at a Chicago airport while he was about to leave for Pakistan, had been visiting India off and on ever since he joined the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in 2006 and had been trained by it.

2. The FBI was not aware of his LET background, his contacts with Ilyas Kashmiri, a former officer of the Special Services Group (SSG), who subsequently joined the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) and his frequent visits to India from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) till October,2008, when they noticed a posting made by him in an internet chat group advocating an act of reprisal against a Danish journal which had published in 2005 caricatures of the Prophet.

3. The FBI obtained a warrant from a Chicago court permitting them to intercept his telephone and e-mail communications. Systematic interception of the communications led to their discovering his contacts with the LET and Ilyas Kashmiri and details of his two visits to Denmark to collect preparatory intelligence before mounting a terrorist attack on the Danish paper and his links with Tahawwur Hussain Rana, a Chicago-based Canadian businessman of Pakistani origin, who was running an immigration services agency, which provided a cover for Headley's two visits to Denmark as a representative of the agency. Headley told the people whom he met in Denmark that Rana's immigration services agency was interested in opening a branch in Copenhagen.

4. What sounded the wake-up call in the FBI was that neither Headley nor Rana had initiated any of the legal and procedural formalities which were required to be taken before Rana's agency could open an overseas office in Denmark. It is this, which made the FBI realise that Headley's two visits to Denmark were not for opening an immigration consultancy office, but for preparing the ground for mounting a terrorist attack on the Danish journal. The FBI arrested Headley as he was about to leave for Pakistan on October 3,2009, with the video-recordings made by him in Denmark.

5. Interceptions of his communications before his arrest and his interrogation after his arrest brought out details of his visits to India and the plans of the LET to use him for another terrorist strike in India. The kind of alarm bell, which rang in the FBI offices in Chicago, when Headley and Rana showed an interest in opening a branch of Rana's immigration services agency in Denmark, did not seem to have rung in the Indian intelligence agencies when Headley and Rana showed an interest in 2006 in opening an office of an immigration services agency in Mumbai.

6.Headley managed to come to India at least nine times (according to media reports) and open an office of an immigration services company in Mumbai to be used as a cover for his activities. He also developed a network of contacts, one of which was with Rahul, son of film producer/director Mahesh Bhatt.

7. Rahul is presently a material witness in the case for a number of reasons. Firstly, he is the only Indian met by Headley during his visits to India whose name figured on more than one occasion in the E-mail communications between Headley and his LET controller in Pakistan. Secondly, when the LET sought Headley's help for mounting another terrorist attack in India it thought of Headley's past contacts with Rahul.

8. During Headley's nine visits to India, he must have developed contacts with dozens of Indians. Why did the LET and Headley remember and recall only his contacts with Rahul? That is a question to which the Mumbai Police must be looking for an answer. Rahul has done well in taking the initiative in contacting the police and briefing them on how he came into contact with Headley. His statement will now be verified by the police in order to determine whether he has told all that needed to be told. If he has, he will remain purely a material witness. If he has not, he will become from a witness to a suspect. Till the verification of his statement is completed beyond reasonable doubt, the question of the police giving a clean chit to him will be premature.

9. Since 2003, the LET has been thinking of mounting a terrorist strike in India from US territory. An LET cell in the US consisting of Pakistani-origin people and white converts to Islam was detected and neutralised by the FBI in 2003. Despite this, the LET has not given up the idea of using US passport holders for a terrorist strike in India.

10. What is new and worrisome in the Headley case is that the LET recruited a Muslim member of the Pakistani diaspora in the US and made him assume a Christian or a Jewish identity in order to infiltrate into India without creating suspicion. It would be important to get from the FBI copies of the original papers relating to his name change in 2006 and his obtaining a new passport under the name David Coleman Headley. It is interesting to note that among the places reportedly visited by Headley in India was Kochi, which used to have a large Jewish presence and has an ancient synagogue. His itinerary in India has had an anti-Indian and anti-Jewish angle.

11. A perusal of the FBI's affidavits against Headley and Rana shows that Rana paid his air fare for his travels to Denmark and Pakistan. Rana does not appear to have paid the air fare for Headley's travels to India. In Denmark, Headley was staying in shoe-string budget hotels. He had been spending money more liberally in India as evidenced by his two stays in the expensive Taj Mahal hotel in Mumbai, his visiting a local gym frequented by film stars, his hiring an office accommodation and a flat etc. Who was paying for all this?

12.Headley's visits to India coincided with two acts of mass casualty terrorism ---- the July 2006 explosions in some suburban trains of Mumbai and the 26/11 attacks. Did Headley play a role in the planning and execution of these attacks? Were there others who had helped him?

13. To find answers to such questions and identify the missing links, the Indian, the US, the Canadian and the Danish investigation agencies should work closely together. Our being totally taken by surprise by the activities of Headley in our territory, which had continued even after 26/11, clearly shows that the Government of India has not been able to identify and remove the major deficiencies in our counter-terrorism set-up.

14.We continue to be taken by surprise again and again despite the claims of a significant improvement made by the Government. ( 14-11-09)

( 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 )

THE CHICAGO CONSPIRACY: ROLE OF TAHAWWUR HUSSAIN RANA

INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR: PAPER NO.576

B.RAMAN

Give below are extracts from the affidavit filed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) against Tahawwur Hussain Rana, a Canadian national of Pakistani origin, who was running an immigration consultancy firm, a company for the supply of meat to Muslims and a grocery shop in Chicago. He was arrested by the FBI at Chicago on October 18,2009, on a charge of being an accomplice of David Coleman Headley in plans to carry out terrorist strikes in Denmark and India. Headley had earlier been arrested on October 3,2009, when he was about to leave on a visit to Pakistan to discuss the plans for the Denmark attack with Ilyas Kashmiri of the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) in Pakistan. The FBI recovered from his checked-in baggage video recordings made by Headley during two preparatory visits to Denmark after October 2008. The affidavit was filed by the FBI in the Northern District court of Illinois.

2. According to the affidavit, after his arrest, Rana made the following confessions to the FBI:

(1) He was aware that Headley had been affiliated with the Lashkar-e-Toiba terrorist organization for the past few years.

(2) He was aware that Headley had received training from the LET.

(3) He was aware that Headley had met with Ilyas Kashmiri within the past year,

(4) He was aware that Headley communicated with Individual A and LeT Member A. (both not identified in the affidavits against Headley and Rana)

(5) He was aware that Headley was angry about the cartoon depictions of the Prophet Mohammed,

(6) He (Rana) was offended by the cartoon depictions of the Prophet Mohammed.

(7) He had discussed the cartoonist and editor of the Jyllands-Posten of Denmark, which had published the cartoons, with Headley.

3. A perusal of the affidavit against Rana indicates the following:

(a). He enabled Headley to travel twice to Denmark as a representative of his immigration consultancy company.

(b). He arranged air tickets for the overseas travels of Headley.

(c). He interceded with the Pakistani Consul-General in Chicago in an attempt to get a five-year visa for Headley whom he falsely described as a White American. The Consul-General, Rana and Headley had attended the army cadet school of the Punjab Government at Hasan Abdal. The Consul-General had known Headley by his pre-2006 Pakistani name of Dawood Gilani. He did not know that Gilani, whom he had known, and Headley, "the white American" about whom Rana had spoken to him over telephone were one and the same. Rana wanted a five-year visa to be issued to Headley without Headley having to visit the Consulate.

(d). Most of the contacts of Individual A and LET member A were with Headley and not with Rana. Rana did have some contacts with Individual A, but not with LET member A.

(e). In the FBI affidavit against Headley, there are indications that he had visited India in the past---between 2006 and 2008. In the affidavit against Rana, there are no references to any visits made by him to India.

(f). In one of the conversations between Headley and Rana, one "Defence College" had figured as a possible target. It was not referred to as the "National Defence College". Nor was there any reference to its location. It needs to be underlined that additional information obtained during the interrogations of Headley and Rana does not figure in the two affidavits. The two affidavits largely summarise technical intelligence, which justified the two arrests.

(g). When the FBI checked the baggage of Headley after his arrest on October 3,2009, they found video-recordings of landmarks in Copenhagen made by him during his two visits to Denmark. There is no reference to any video-recordings made by him in India.

(h). The affidavit against Headley contains references to his past visits to Pakistan. The affidavit against Rana has no reference to any past visits to Pakistan.

4. The identities of the two Pakistanis referred to by the FBI affidavit against Headley as Individual A and LET member A remain unclear. The only clue figuring in the two affidavits is that Individual A was close to Major Haroon Ashiq, the principal accused in the case relating to the November 2008, assassination of Major-General Amir Faisal Alvi, who headed the Special Services Group (SSG) till 2005. He was sacked by Musharraf on a charge of unworthy conduct, which has not been specified so far. The two affidavits also indicate that Individual A was also arrested during the investigation of the case, but was released subsequently.

5. A check of past Pakistani media reports relating to the case indicates that one Maj. (retd) Abdul Basit of Karachi was arrested during the investigation into the activities of Haroon on behalf of Ilyas Kashmiri, but was not prosecuted. It is not clear whether Maj.Basit and Individual A could be one and the same. Another likely figure is Qari Saifullah Akhtar, Amir of the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI), whom Benazir Bhutto had suspected as behind the failed attempt to kill her at Karachi when she returned from political exile on October 17,2007, but there were no Pakistani media reports of his having been arrested and released during the investigation of Alvi's murder.

6. It is, however, clear that Individual A is an important person, who enjoys the confidence of Ilyas Kashmiri and could speak with authority on behalf of Ilyas. Headley's conversations with Individual A clearly bring out his admiration for Ilyas Kashmiri and his preference for working with Ilyas than with the LET. He describes the LET as an organisation with "rotten guts", which is not prepared to take risks. This is apparently because the LET is interested only in a terrorist attack in India and does not want to get involved in a terrorist attack in Denmark or in sany other Western country.

EXTRACTS FROM AFFIDAVIT AGAINST TAHAWWUR HUSSAIN RANA

RANA, who operated an immigration services business with offices in Chicago and elsewhere for which Headley at times claimed to work, among other things helped arrange and conceal Headley's travels to surveil potential targets for terrorist attacks and meet with others involved in planning acts of terrorism, discussed targets for terrorist attacks with Headley and helped to conceal the nature and purposes of Headley's travels.

In October 2008, Headley had posted a message to an internet discussion group – to which RANA also belonged – stating, with respect to the Danish cartoonists and others he identified as “making fun of Islam,” that “I feel disposed towards violence for the offending parties.”

In January 2009, after extensive correspondence with Individual A, in the course of which Individual A urged Headley to “try to go as early as possible" Headley traveled to Copenhagen, Denmark, but only after advising Individual A that he needed to consult with RANA first. RANA arranged portions of Headley's travel.

During that trip, Headley visited two different offices of the Jyllands-Posten – in Copenhagen and in Arhus, Denmark. As cover for his visits to the Jyllands-Posten offices, Headley falsely represented that he was visiting on behalf of RANA’s immigration services business, First World Immigration Services ; that First World was considering opening up offices in Denmark; and that he was interested in advertising the business in the Jyllands-Posten. While in Denmark, Headley instructed RANA to be alert for email from a Jyllands-Posten sales representative, and to ask First World’s Toronto and New York offices to “remember me,” in case a representative of the Jyllands-Posten called. To further the cover story of Headley, RANA, while in Chicago, replied to an email from the newspaper staff pretending to be Headley, who was overseas.

After visiting Denmark in January 2009, Headley traveled to Pakistan to meet with Individual A. During this trip, he traveled with Individual A to the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) region in northwestern Pakistan and met with Ilyas Kashmiri. Headley returned to Chicago in mid-June 2009. During his trip to Pakistan, Headley sent his will to RANA. RANA responded by sending a coded message to establish a new email account.

In late July 2009, Headley traveled again to Copenhagen, Denmark, and to other locations in Europe. RANA again arranged portions of his travel. When Headley returned to the United States, he told a Customs and Border Patrol Inspector that he was traveling on business as a representative of RANA’s business, First World Immigration. Individual A’s luggage contained no papers or other documents relating to First World.

Following Headley's return to Chicago in August 2009, he kept RANA apprised of the developments concerning the lack of communication with Ilyas Kashmiri.In early September 2009, Headley and RANA took a lengthy car ride during which they discussed, among other things, the general activities of Individual A, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and ( Ilyas) Kashmiri, including past terrorist acts, and Headley discussed with RANA five actions involving targets, including “Denmark.”

Headley kept RANA apprised of reports of Kashmiri’s death and advised Individual A that RANA was very upset at Kashmiri’s death.On or about September 20, 2009, Headley told an associate in Pakistan in a recorded telephone conversation words to the effect that he had spoken to RANA and they agreed that “business must go on.”

Defendant TAHAWWUR HUSSAIN RANA was born in Pakistan and is now a Canadian citizen who primarily resides in Chicago, Illinois. RANA, who has received medical training, is the owner of several businesses, including First World Immigration Services,which has offices in Chicago, New York, and Canada. RANA also owns a farm in Kinsman, Illinois, which is used to provide halal meat for Muslim customers, as well as a grocery store in Chicago.

Postings to a Yahoo group for graduates of a military school located in the Pakistani town of Hasan Abdal (a group that refers to itself as “abdalians”),reflect that both Headley and RANA have participated in the group and referred to their attendance at that school.

Headley at times has claimed to be a consultant with or representative of the First World Immigration Services, a company owned and operated by RANA. Surveillance of Headley's activities, as well as his phone conversations and email exchanges, reflect that Headley performs few services for First World. Headley has no known or reported employment other than with First World.

As discussed throughout this affidavit, Headley,RANA, Individual A and Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A have frequently used coded language and changed their methods of communications in order to conceal the nature and content of their communications. For example, on or about March 4, 2009, after acknowledging receipt of an email from Headley, RANA sent a response with the following pertinent content:"One of my brothers is Brigadier Movadat Hussain Rana and the other is Sibte Hassan Rana . They are in Rawalpindi. I really admire emails making it instant half mulaquat especially yahoo as it seems superior to hotmail. Talk to you later."

Records reveal that the email account “mov.monie@yahoo” was created on or about March 6, 2009, at a particular internet protocol address, the user of which was located at the Chicago business address of First World Immigration. That same day, Headley accessed the mov.monie@yahoo account from an internet protocol address in the United Arab Emirates, and sent an email from mov.monie@yahoo to RANA at his personal email address, asking RANA to contact Individual A.On or about October 3, 2009, as Headley was preparing to travel to Pakistan, he spoke to RANA in a conversation that was recorded. He asked RANA to create an email account using the Gmail service with the user name“liaqatbin11.” Headley instructed RANA to change the email account name after using it two or three times, and gave him directions for changing the name. Headley stated that the “liaqatbin” portion of the name would remain, but that the number 11 would change, and that to determine the second number, RANA should start by multiplying by two and subtracting two. Headley explained that the number used to multiply 11 would increase by one with each new account. Headley provided an example, and RANA worked the math out loud for determining several numbers.

Based on my (FBI agent's) review of communications between Headley and Individual A, I understand the references to “dr” and “doc” in the exchange to be references to RANA because, in part, Headley states in one of the messages that “doctor has gone to Canada,” and records demonstrate that RANA re-entered the United States from Canada near Detroit on or about January 1, 2009. In addition, as noted above, RANA has received medical training .I understand that the expression “Zihan saazi” refers to the act of one person [RANA] preparing someone else [ Headley] to perform an act.

In the December 25, 2008 email, Individual A asked Headley about RANA: “how’s the dr’s reaction on what all is happening, is he terrified or relaxed?”The next day, on or about December 26, 2008, Headley responded to Individual A,“Doc [RANA] is very relaxed.” Further, Headley related that RANA was providing direction to Headley, RANA is “trying to do Zihan saazi asking if this happens you should act like this and if that happens you should do that and fear nothing except God.” Additionally, in the same December 26, 2008, email, Headley related to Individual A that, prior to departing for the Mickey Mouse project ( in Denmark), he needed to consult with RANA:"Yes I am ready for MMP but I think it will be better to go after new year as everything is shut down from Christmas to new year. Also doctor [RANA] has gone to Canada with his family till new year so I need to consult him [RANA] as well."

On or about Sunday, January 12, 2009, Headley emailed Individual A concerning his upcoming travel. Headley stated: “I am leaving WED night your time and will be at the location Thursday [January 15] night your time. Pray that I make a lot of money on the project.” RANA arranged for at least a portion of Headley's travel through Expedia, an online travel agency. On or about January 13, 2009, RANA received a confirmation email from Expedia relating to the first leg of Headley's travel from Chicago to New York through Philadelphia.

On or about January 15, 2009, Headley arrived in Frankfurt,Germany.On or about January 19, 2009, Headley emailed RANA, the subject of which was“Copenhagen”:Dear Doc,Sorry I missed your calls last night. . . . I checked out business opportunities here.They seem quite promising. I am going right now to see if I can put an ad for our company and also check the feasibility to open up an office here. . . .Bye for now".

The same day, RANA responded, stating “Booking is for 24th at 10p.m.. Good luck, . . . Tahawwur.” Based on Headley's subsequent departure from Europe on January 24, 2009, I (FBI agent) understand that RANA told Headley that he had booked him on a flight on January 24, 2009.On or about January 20, 2009, Headley sent an email to RANA, the subject of which was described “Copenhagen Important.” Headley stated in relevant part:"Dear Doc, Everything is fine here. I went to a newspaper to find out about advertising our company. I gave him my card so they might call any of the 3 offices to verify.Ask NY and Toronto offices to remember me. The rates are pretty steep, like 3000 dollars for the front page, for one time. The sales guy's name was [name omitted] and he asked for our email to give detailed prices. I gave our business email, so keep alert for his mail." I (FBI agent) understand Headley's statement “Ask NY and Toronto offices to remember me” to be a request to RANA to take additional steps to preserve the cover story for Headley's visit to the newspaper.Later that same day, on or about January 20, 2009, Headley sent another email to defendant RANA, the subject of which was described “Copenhagen.” Headley remained concerned that an employee from the newspaper would contact First World Immigration. Headley asked RANA to “please confirm on the receipt of these emails.” Further, Headley reminded RANA to alert First World’s employees to the possibility of incoming communications resulting from his contacts with the newspaper. Headley wrote: "I will leave this hotel Thursday morning and go to another city in this country for my vacation. I haven’t decided which one, maybe Arhus. So please tell ALL our offices if they receive a call about me, to please confirm my job there."

On or about January 23, 2009, Headley visited the Jyllands Posten office in Arhaus,Denmark, again under the auspices of checking rates for advertising in this newspaper.That same day, Headley sent an email to defendant RANA, the subject of which was described as “Copenhagen and Arhaus.” Headley wrote:"Ok Doc, . . . I checked for our office ad in Arhus as well. You might be receiving price quotes in your other email address. Did the Copenhagen guy, [name omitted] send you any mail yet? I think our company has a really bright future here. We will become rich or should I say richer."On or about January 26, 2009, consistent with Headley's statement to RANA that he had given “our business email,” an email was received at an email address subscribed to the address of First World Immigration and used by RANA, from a sales coordinator at the Jyllands-Posten.. The email stated: "Dear [ Headley],thank you for your visit at Jyllands-Posten Friday last week [January 23, 2009] concerning advertising in our newspaper."On or about January 29, 2009, RANA, posing as Headley, responded to the email, stating: "Thank you for your reply. I will be in touch soon. I am trying to coordinate with a local attorney in Denmark for taking care of our clients locally. I intend to visit you in the coming spring."Records reflecting the internet protocol address from which this email was sent reveal that it was sent from Chicago, Illinois, and, more specifically, the address of RANA’s residence. As of the date of this email, Headley remained overseas.

Headley's representations that his travel to Denmark was for the purposes of opening an office for First World Immigration in Denmark appear implausible for multiple reasons, including, among others, the following:

a.A review of phone records for both Headley's and RANA’s home and personal cell phones, as well as the phone records for five separate lines at First World Immigration, has revealed not one phone call to Denmark during 2009;

b.A search of emails originating from Headley, RANA and First World Immigration Services accounts in Chicago for 2009 has revealed no records reflecting the use of First World’s services by Danish residents;

c.Although Headley and Individual A discussed the trip to Denmark for the Mickey Mouse project extensively in email exchanges and by telephone, their recorded conversations and emails did not touch on the immigration services business, efforts to establish an office for First World in Denmark or expand its business in Europe, or the need for advertising;

d.Likewise, although Headley's email exchanges with RANA during Headley's visit to Denmark discussed Headley's communications with the Jyllands-Posten about purported plans to advertise for First World, those communications did not discuss in any detail other aspects of establishing a new branch of First World in Denmark. Although Headley advised RANA that a representative of the Jyllands-Posten might call First World’s offices, he did not suggest that First World would be receiving similar calls from other potential business partners or vendors in Denmark;

e.Had Individual A and RANA been interested in obtaining information about advertising in the Jyllands-Posten, such information is readily available on the newspaper’s web site, as is the name and phone number of the newspaper’s sales representative;

f.Prior to his visit to Denmark, Headley had expressed his displeasure at the Jyllands-Posten cartoonists “who slandered our prophet,” and said that “I feel disposed towards violence for the offending parties,” making it unlikely that Headley would seek to patronize the Jyllands-Posten as a business advertiser;

g.The list of items that Headley prepared and emailed to himself relating to the Mickey Mouse Project on December 7, 2008, contains multiple references that do not appear consistent with plans to open an immigration office,including “Route Design (train, bus, air)”; “Cross (Cover Authenticator)”;“Counter surveillance (magic eye)”; “Security (armed)?”; “Zoom”; and “Entry and exit method in the house.” Based on my ( FBI agent's) training and experience, I believe that these notations, particularly in the context of the other information related in this Affidavit, are consistent with planning for a terrorist attack. The list also includes a reference to “Residence for clients.” In my experience, it is unnecessary for the typical immigration services business to provide a residence for its clients; by contrast, a team assigned to carry out a terrorist attack in a city where the team’s members did not reside would need one or more locations to live while preparing to carry out the attack;

h.To date, no advertisements have been placed in the Jyllands-Posten for First World Immigration Services.

On January 24, 2009, Headley departed from Frankfort, Germany, to the United Arab Emirates. From there, he subsequently traveled to Pakistan. On or about March 3, 2009, Headley sent an email to RANA stating that: “As I am traveling and things are so bad these days, I would like to leave a few instructions with you in case of my death or in case I am incapacitated for some reason.” He continued in detail, providing instructions to RANA on how to handle his affairs, including his wishes for his family. In an email response the same day,RANA stated “I acknowledge receipt of this will.” Then, in coded language, RANA directed Headley to communicate with him in a separate email account.

On or about June 11, 2009, Headley returned to Chicago. Once again, RANA arranged for this travel. More specifically, on June 8, 2009, RANA booked the last leg of Headley's travel, a flight from New York to Chicago, on JetBlue Airlines. On or about June 9, 2009, RANA received an email containing a response to a request for travel insurance information for Headley. Further, on or about June 10, 2009, RANA received a confirmation email from JetBlue Airways concerning the last leg of Headley's return to Chicago, his flight from New York to Chicago.While Headley was in Copenhagen, on August 2, 2009, RANA arranged through a travel agency located at an office building once owned by RANA for airfare for Headley to travel from Copenhagen to Chicago through Atlanta. On August 3, 2009,RANA received an email confirmation from this travel agency, which, in part, forwarded an email from Expedia, an online travel agency. The email stated : “The itinerary is attached below. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to be of service.” A review of the email reveals that the flight booked by RANA was“Copenhagen to Chicago”, the traveler name was Headley and the date of travel was August 5, 2009.On or about August 5, 2009, Headley arrived in Atlanta, Georgia, on a flight from Copenhagen.

On or about August 7, 2009, Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A sent an email asking Headley why he had not been responding. That same day, Headley responded: "Sorry, I just don’t check my mail daily if I don’t expect anyone will write me. I am working at a retaurant owned by Dr. Rana and his friend as a manager.Last week they sent me to Germany to buy some butchery equipment and guess where else I went for 3 days (just for a vacation ) on Dr. Rana’s expense." I (FBI agent) understand that in this message Headley is referring to Copenhagen (inaccurately referenced in the email as Germany) as the place of his “vacation,” the same term that he used in his January 23, 2009 email to RANA during his first trip to Denmark. Further, I (FBI agent) understand that Headley is informing Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A that RANA paid for his travel to Copenhagen.

On or about September 4, 2009, RANA and Individual A spoke by telephone. In coded language, RANA asked Individual A about his earlier arrest: “okay, you remember when you had fever during that time – did you ever faint due to the fever?” Individual A responded, “no, no, no, no, no, no. Th-th-that all was fine, there wasn’t any problem.”RANA then commented, “okay, that is very good.”

On or about September 7, 2009, Headley reported to RANA on the lack of contact between “Doctor [Kashmiri]” and Individual A. Headley expressed concern that his “reports” and “notes” would not be delivered. The pertinent part of the exchange was as follows: Headley:"And, gathering together, whatever reports I had given to [Individual A], he has not been able to pass on the report to him (Kashmiri). It’s been months. There is action going on, you know." Although this conversation was in the Urdu language, RANA used the English word “target.” Based on my (FBI agent's) review of this and other conversations, I understand “defense college” to refer to another overseas target.

Headley:"Today, in the north, after many weeks, there was an attack in the north. It hadn’t happened in months. And, it is in the north, where he live[s]."

RANA:"I see".

Headley: "In any case, I don’t know much, God will help."

RANA:"Whatever happens, hope it is for the best."

Headley: "Yes."

RANA:"When you know that he received the notes, then."

Headley: "God willing, he’ll find a solution."

In this same recorded conversation on September 7, 2009, Headley and RANA discussed and named multiple targets of their planning. More specifically, Headley listed four targets, one of which was “Denmark,” then commented “[a]fter that if I will pray for any other action.God may help me complete this task.” Later in this same conversation, RANA asked Headley to “pass along a message” to Individual A. RANA then stated words to the effect that “top class” was a “befitting” name for Individual A.

RANA and Headley then discussed a fifth target. More specifically, Headley referred to the earlier discussion, and stated words to the effect of “oh my friend, not four, five, five.” While RANA laughed, Headley stated“Defense College” twice, and RANA commented “right, this is it. I knew already.”After other discussion, RANA continued “That one, uh, I thought that was the target.” Headley responded, “I don’t know but once he comes then it will be known, but I am going to ask him to do that one first.” RANA responded, “In this matter – defense .”

On September 14, 2009, Headley telephoned RANA and advised him of his telephone call with Individual A and advised RANA that Individual A had asked them to pray for “the doctor.” Headley explained that “so far it is a rumor, it is not confirmed yet,” but he may have gotten “married.” Headley continued with words to the effect of “pray that this should not have happened,” and RANA responded “we will talk about this.”

Headley informed Individual A that he would be coming to Pakistan soon “but now there is nothing to do there. Now let us collect unemployment from the company . . . when a company lays off in case of bankruptcy, it discharges employees.” When Individual A tried to assure Headley that Kashmiri’s death was a “small loss,” Headley disagreed and responded: “no, it is not a small loss, it is a major loss.” In this same conversation, Headley told Individual A that in light of Kashmiri’s reported death, “Now I think you better go back towards him, towards [Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A].”

Headley complained to Individual A that “[Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A] and others, and this [an identified individual] and all of them – again they are – their eyes are again in that direction.” He added that Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A and the identified individual were unwilling to take risk and “have rotten guts.”

Individual A said: “When in business a person wants to do something, there is risk factor also. They do not want to take risk and they want to be praised also.”

Headley responded, “then there will be no profit because when you have high aim, as much an investment will be risky as much is the chance of profits and at the same time there is chance of loss.”

In the same telephone conversation, Individual A stated that “This is business, sir. These type of things happen.”

Headley responded: “I am just telling you that the companies in your competition they have started handling themselves in a far better way, that is why they all are running in losses profit-wise and market-wise. There are continuous losses and it does not seem that they will recover. In these conditions it looks that there will be bankruptcy in approximately six months, my estimate within . . . six to twelve months is that our companies will be done the way things are going on.”

Individual A responded, “it is as it usually happens that if one company fails then another company will come up.”

On or about September 20, 2009, Headley spoke with a different associate in Pakistan in a recorded telephone conversation. Headley related words to the effect that he had discussed with RANA the fact that “business must go on.” Headley continued: “Main thing that I have an income...make some money. I don’t care that if I am working for Microsoft or I am working for a...any...GE or Philips, I don’t care. As long as I am making money, I don’t give a shit.”

Based on my (FBI agent's) review of this and other conversations involving Headley, I believe that Headley is indicating that he does not care whether he works for Kashmiri’s group or Lashkar-e-Taiba, as long as he helps carry out attacks.

On or about September 21, 2009, Headley spoke with Individual A by telephone:Individual A: "Buddy, the reports that are com-coming in, by the grace of God, he (Kashmiri) is doing well."Headley: "God willing – uh, uh – you mean the Doctor?"Individual A: "Yes, yes."Headley: "Uh, I, Buddy if this is true, then I will say 100 prayers, 100 prayers."

Four days later, on or about September 25, 2009, RANA spoke by telephone with the Consul General at the Pakistani Consulate in Chicago in an effort to obtain a 5-year visa for Headley to travel to Pakistan. It is clear from email traffic unrelated to terrorist plotting that the Consul General knows RANA and Headley personally as all three attended the same high school. However, the Consul General knows Headley by a different name. In seeking a visa for Headley, RANA stated that he wished to obtain the visa for a white American named Headley who did not have any Pakistani background at all. When the Consul General suggested that RANA send this friend to the consulate,RANA explained that he had sent his friend elsewhere to take care of some unspecified business so that someone else would visit the consulate. It is clear from the foregoing conversation that RANA was attempting to deceive the Consul General into granting a visa for Headley without the Consul General knowing for whom the visa would be issued.

On or about September 30, 2009, Headley and Individual A again spoke by telephone. Individual A informed Headley that “Pir Sahib” is “absolutely all right.”Headley asked Individual A to “swear” several times, and Individual A responded “I swear, I am telling the truth.” Headley added, “so he does not get married,” and asked “so, then, I will be able to meet him upon returning?” Individual A responded words to the effect of “absolutely, right, and he – just today – just today, was asking about you.”

Based on my (FBI agent's) review of this conversation, as well as preceding conversations, I believe that the reference to “Pir Sahib” is Kashmiri. Shortly after speaking with Individual A, Headley spoke to RANA by telephone.He informed RANA that “Pir Sahab is alive.” RANA responded, “wow, all praise be to God.”

Based on recorded conversations with associates and other third parties, Headley intended to travel to Pakistan in early October 2009. Before doing so, Headley intended to travel to Philadelphia from Chicago. Headley received an email confirmation from Orbitz, an online travel agency,reflecting the purchase of airfare from Chicago to Philadelphia on October 3, 2009.

On October 3, 2009, Headley was arrested at O'Hare Airport in Chicago before boarding his scheduled flight to Philadelphia. Agents searched his checked luggage pursuant to a search warrant issued by United States Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys on October 2, 2009. Among other items recovered from Headley's checked luggage were

(1) A photocopy of the front page of an August 1, 2009 issue of the Jyllands-Posten;


(2) a street guide for Copenhagen, Denmark; and

(3) a list of phone numbers, including a Pakistani telephone number Headley had used to contact Individual A.

Also contained in the luggage was a memory stick. Contained on this memory stick were approximately ten short videos, including videos taken of King’s Square (Copenhagen) both during the day and at night. The day-time video of King’s Square includes close-up shots of the entrance to the Jyllands-Posten office. The videos also include shots of what appears to be the entrance to a military barracks, a close-up of a guard stationed near the entrance to that location, and of the exterior and interior of Copenhagen’s central train station.

On October 18, 2009, RANA was arrested. After being advised of and waiving his rights, RANA provided the following statements:

(1) he was aware that Headley had been affiliated with the Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist organization for the past few years,

(2) he was aware that Headley had received training from the Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist organization,

(3) he was aware that Headley had met with Ilyas Kashmiri within the past year,

(4) he was aware that Headley communicated with Individual A and LeT Member A,

(5) he was aware that Headley was angry about the cartoon depictions of the Prophet Mohammed,

(6) he was offended by the cartoon depictions of the Prophet Mohammed and would not have done business with the newspaper that published them, and

(7) he had discussed the cartoonist and editor from the Jyllands-Posten with Headley.

This is not intended to be an exhaustive account of statements that RANA has made, but a summary for purposes of this affidavit.

( 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 )