Author: Seshadri Chari
Publication: The Organiser
Date: October 14, 2001
Introduction: The CIA and the other
departments concerned have all the locations and details about the terrorist
training camps inside Pakistan. Not one has closed shop so far. The US
State Department has a list of all Islamic terrorist organisations. Not
one of them has been banned as unlawful outfit or their huge bank accounts
frozen. The US may be planning her own strategy, no doubt. But it would
be interesting to know if it has worked so far, and worked in the right
direction.
It is about a month now that the
Islamic jehadis brought down the twin WTC towers in New York. The USA is
still finding the right kind of words to describe the war-like situation.
In an article in the New York Times, US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld
has said that President Bush is rallying the nation for a war against terrorism
attack on "our way of life". Needless to say, the American way of life
is certainly not the world's way of life, not all the civilised world's.
It is sad that the US does not consider the terrorist attack on her as
an attack on world civilisation. It is still us versus the US.
Going by reports and the general
thinking in the State Department and 'Defence establishment in the US,
the American President has not yet given his green signal for an all-out
war to strike at the root cause. The greens and the anti-nuke lobby could
be happy but the anti-terrorism coalition and countries like Israel and
India, who have been targets of Islamic terrorism for long, are the ones
who are going about with long and sullen faces.
The US does not seem to be interested
in a full-scale war with the Islamic terrorists. One reason could be that
it is difficult to trace the mastermind down, nab him-alive, take him to
the US an punish him. Only the naive would believe that either Afghanistan
or Pakistan would hand over Osama on a platter to the US. The US could
be planning to win over the trust of Pakistan and totally isolate Afghanistan.
But till date it has not been able to convince Pakistan to derecognise
Afghanistan.
The CIA and the other' departments
concerned have all the locations and details about the terrorist training
camps inside Pakistan. Not one has closed shop so far. The US State Department
has a list of all Islamic terrorist organisations. Not one of them has
been banned as unlawful outfit or their huge bank accounts frozen. The
US may be planning her own strategy, no doubt. But it would be interesting
to know if it worked so far, and worked in the right direction.
According to Donald Rumsfeld, the
present war on terrorism will not necessarily be one in which the US would
pore over military targets and man forces to seize those targets. The US
plan seems to be to use military force as one of the many tools and instead
use 'other' methods. So far these 'other' methods have not been spelled
out. In an effort to explain this method, the US Secretary of Defence has
said that the new global war on terrorism will not be waged by a "grand
alliance united for the single purpose of defeating an axis of hostile
powers". Instead it will involve floating coalitions of countries that
may change and evolve. Countries, according to Rumsfeld, will have different
roles and contribute differently.
The US has welcomed the decision
of the UAE and Saudi Arabia to break their ties with the Taliban regime.
But at the same time they don't consider these countries as part of any
action that the US may take on terrorism.
For the US, the vocabulary of this
war seems to be different. "When we 'invade the enemy's territory' we may
well be invading his cyberspace says Donald Rumsfeld. One only hopes that
the US is not planning to supply tonnes of computers to the poor illiterate
Afghans in exchange of the Kalashnikova hanging around their shoulders.
Whatever it may be, for the first
time, it gives one a feeling that somewhere somebody in the US is confused.
When a country like the US takes upon itself the responsibility of fighting
terrorism, especially when that country has been specifically targeted
for an attack, the world expects them to understand the global situation
better. The US needs to work out a global strategy and get the best of
the world to put together a concerted act. The words of the chairman of
the US House of Representative, Harry Hyde are clearer: "The choice is
clear: we can either shape the future or simply accept what a capricious
fate may deal us."
India has so far handled the situation
very rightly. The Prime Minister has used every considerable occasion to
draw world opinion and attention to the fact that we have been the worst
victims of from across the border. We have backed Washington to the hilt.
Notwithstanding criticism from' the Leftist corner, marginal though, the
NDA Government has shown no hesitation in offering all possible help in
eradicating terrorism totally. And we have been punished severely by the
terrorists too. Contrary to the wishful thinking of a select few, the Afghani
mujahideens and ISI agents did not vacate their bunkers in PoK and run
away to safety in Pakistan or Afghanistan. They seem to have regrouped
and decided to strike their enemy nearer home-India, the oldest civilisation
on the earth.
It is not a surprise that the chief
sponsor of terrorism, Pakistan, appears to be on the forefront to waging
a war on terrorism. But what certainly is not understandable is the US
response to Pakistan's move. Nobody expects the US to - spell out the war
strategy in public. But going by the plans unveiled so far, the action
taken by the US, the response to terrorist attack, seems to be poor, to
say the least.
The war against terrorism cannot
be fought with words alone. The strategy to involve the Northern Alliance
and bring back the ruling family of Afghanistan seems to be working, but
rather slowly. The perpetrators of terrorism could be planning a few more
attacks well in advance. The element of surprise is the strongest weapon
in a war.
The US was not at all adequately
prepared for an attack on WTC and Pentagon. Are they prepared for the second
round of attack? If they want to avoid it, they have to act fast, act first
and act now. This is the time to act.
