Terrorism: A global challenge

Indians were angry after the Mumbai attacks and demanded retribution. In response, the Pakistanis ordered troop mobilisation on their eastern front. The US predictably sent in Condoleezza Rice on another mission to hold and stay India’s hand. Presidential candidate McCain had preceded her and Adm Mullen did the same circuit later. Their immediate purpose has been served in as much as the Indians did not go in for reprisals.
At the same time, there is a distinct toughening of the US posture. The usual US reaction in the past has been to first contain the immediate crisis and then begin backtracking on various issues that there is not enough evidence about the Pakistani involvement, and that these were the acts of non-state actors. This time, the terrorists have not been described as freedom fighters, but if the past is any guide, attempts to say that there were some elements acting on their own and that there may be renegade elements in the ISI are untenable. The US cannot expect India to restrain itself and then do nothing to restrict Pakistan. There is thus still hope that this time it would be different.

The truth is that the ISI and the LeT have been planning joint operations for long.
Saleem Shahzad, in his latest article in the Asia Times online, said that an old ISI-LeT plan has been dusted off the shelves and put into operation. This is more or less similar to what Musharraf did in Kargil in 1998. This is as plausible as it is difficult to believe that in a country where the army is supreme there would be such renegade elements who can carry out a major operation of this magnitude without the army at least encouraging this or looking the other way.

Successive US administrations have opted for the policy that merely seemed to reward Pakistan’s rulers for each delinquency. There was more aid each time they blackmailed and raised the stakes. This policy has not worked. Unending military and economic supplies have only emboldened the military rulers to greater adventurism. This flawed policy has always upset India as it felt deprived of its good boy bonus for being a ‘responsible’ democracy even when under stress with no punishment to the delinquent. 

Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment has suggested that there should be an international force that takes out the terrorist camps in Pakistan as only this would convince the Indians that the rest of the world takes attacks on India seriously. His argument is very persuasive when he says that nations should not be able to claim sovereign rights when they cannot control territory from which terrorist attacks are launched.

WHAT NEXT
The main fears would now be — how many were they and have we accounted for all of them. The fear is that some may have escaped and gone into hiding in India with their local support. The other worry would be that if they could move into Mumbai with such ease, they could have occupied any one of our uninhabited islands in the Arabian Sea or the Bay of Bengal from where to launch more attacks. They could slip into India along the vast and unguarded coastline and then disappeared into the hinterland.

The Mumbai attack has been followed by a massive attack on the transport depots of the Nato in Peshawar, where the terrorists burnt 160 transport vehicles. It is too early to say that this was a coincidence, but there is also an uneasy feeling that this could be a reaction to the hardening US stance in Pakistan. It has come a day after senator McCain threatened the Pakistanis with joint action by India and the US.

The continuing violence with the almost daily bombings in NWFP resulting in the Pakistan’s gradual retreat from these areas, the Kabul bombings on the Indian Embassy and the Marriott bombings against the US, are part of a larger battle. It is a battle between the ambitions of some seeking to impose their creed globally against a power striving to retain its declining global supremacy.

DEALING WITH PAK
Internationally, we need to show the world that the danger from Pakistan is now global. The LeT uses the diaspora in the UK, has links in the US and operates indirectly in Europe. In Afghanistan, terrorists have run autonomous private enterprises that a weak government has been unable to control. In Pakistan, the state has been actively involved in this enterprise. The LeT is thus better equipped, controlled and direction comes from the Centre which for form’s sake may be Muridke, the LeT headquarters but in reality Rawalpindi is the army headquarters and Islamabad is where the ISI executes these orders.

Meanwhile, as they say, get real. Pakistan has always played for high stakes and understands the language of strength. It should not be allowed to get away with the impression that India will not retaliate for fear of a nuclear reaction. It is true that the US would be extremely concerned about an India-Pakistan confrontation with its troops deployed in the region and this would have been one of the calculations in the timing of the Mumbai attack. But an immediate reprisal strike should always be an option and the US must accept this possibility. India must revive its covert capabilities and be able to take deniable covert actions inside Pakistan.

At the same time, dealing with Pakistan today also means dealing with this phenomenon of international jehad emanating from there. It may not be enough to detect, deter and destroy terrorism. It is no longer a purely intelligence-military-counter terror solution. A truly global approach where the earlier principle of — my terrorist is more important than yours, has to be abandoned. The moderates must be given a voice. The sponsors of terrorism have to be punished; their financiers, in many cases, states and their front organisations, singled out and ostracised. Terrorists have to be denied access to territory, sanctuaries and the media. Terrorists went global a long time ago. It is time the rest of the world took this on as a truly global challenge.

The author is a former chief of Research & Analysis Wing