Author: P. M. Kamath
Publication: The Free Press Journal
Date: June 1, 2002
The May 4 massacres of innocent
civilians that included women and children in Jammu has once again raised
the war clouds in India - Pakistan relations. Ironically, India is a victim
of international terrorism promoted by Pakistan while Pakistan is the epicentre
of international terrorism. But both are valued allies of the US in its
war against global terrorism! As Frank Pallone said Pakistan globally fights
terrorism while locally promoting it.
George Bush, US President has a
different goal when he fights terrorism aimed at the US interests. While
he equates it with international terrorism, his immediate aim is to capture
'dead or alive' the brain behind 9/11 terrorist attacks-Osama bin Laden.
In this direction, he needs complete cooperation from military dictator
of Pakistan- General Pervez Musharraf. After all Al Qaida Islamic terrorists
and their sympathisers in Pakistan can destabilise his regime as well.
That President Bush is not interested
in finding an end to cross- border terrorism affecting India and India
is not a priority in his mental screen is evident during his visit to Europe
on May 23. He said in Berlin: "Even though we had some initial successes,
there is still (terrorist) danger for countries such as ours or Germany,
France, Russia or Italy."
Getting Bin Laden has acquired added
urgency. Domestic leaks indicate that there was ample evidence within the
intelligence agencies to conclude that Al Qaida terrorists were planning
to use hijacking as a part of their attack on the US. Though Bush administration
admits it, they argue that hijacking was expected in "the traditional sense"
and not as a missile to hit the targets like the Pentagon or the World
Trade Centre (WTC).
The opposition controlled Senate
is proceeding to hold public enquiries to establish the truth. The truth
could be politically blurred to some extent if Pakistan is able to help
the US in tracking Bin Laden. And Bush knows it well that Musharraf is
ready to betray Bin Laden as he betrayed Taliban if only that can get some
economic benefit to Pakistan and help him to survive in office for the
time being.
It does not mean that Indian troop
mobilisation since the December 13 attack on Indian Parliament has been
of no consequence. The US has come round to accept terrorism anywhere-
and not merely against it- is an evil. It is US pressure that made some
say that it was the US Secretary of State Colin Powell who wrote the main
skeleton - Musharraf to deliver January 12 speech.
Now again with India informing the
world community that her patience is running out for the first time, the
US has publicly accepted that Pakistan is involved in promotion of cross-border
terrorism. In his media briefing, on May 23 state department spokesman,
Joseph Reeker repeated often-stated US plea for "all sides in Kashmir to
exercise restraint" and called for a "productive dialogue." But what is
new is his admission that an important component in "dialogue process is
an end to infiltration into Kashmir."
But Reeker repeated Musharraf's
proforma statement that Pakistan will not allow its territory to be used
by terrorists for attacks anywhere. Musharraf is trying to fool the world.
Is the territory of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) Pak territory or disputed
territory? Since Pakistanis can move freely into POK, does Musharraf promises
to prevent movement of Pakistani persons into POK and from there to Jammu
and Kashmir (J&K)?
Many of the present problems in
relation to Kashmir are of the US origin as a part of Cold War in the 1940s
and 1950s. The US considers entire territory of J & K as a disputed
territory. If the US is unwilling to accept the accession J&K as legal,
why should India accept creation of Pakistan as legal, since both the processes
were laid down by the same Act of British Parliament. Even today American
newspapers refer to J&K as "Indian administered Kashmir." It is necessary
for the US to give up its Cold War reasoning and rhetoric in favour of
historic reality.
Thus India is in a dilemma. Moment
she talks of a decisive war against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, the leader
of the international coalition-the US, asks India to exercise "restraint."
Though US is itching to fight another war against Iraq. What explains this?
After all Saddam Hussain poses no threat to regional powers like Saudi
Arabia or Iran. These two are also against the US fighting another war
against Iraq in the name of a fight against international terrorism. The
only explanation that can figure is: Father Bush had promised to dethrone
Saddam Hussain. But he left the task unfinished. So Son Bush wants to complete
it.
But the US cannot be expected to
do anything other than pursue its own national interest. India cannot expect
the US to fight her war against international terrorism. India has to decide
to fight her own war in her own way. Now Prime Minister Vajpayee says that
India should have fought it soon after the December 13 attack on Indian
Parliament. One can ask: What prevented him to do so? Wars however, are
not fought by public announcement.
India has lost over 70 thousand
innocent lives in Pakistan- sponsored terrorism in Punjab and J & K
in contrast to 3 thousand lives lost in the Al Qaida attacks of 9/11. But
then, the US announced its intention to punish the perpetrators of crime.
Afghanistan had no role in sending the suicide bombers to attack WTC and
the Pentagon. Their only crime was that of harbouring Al Qaida leaders
including Bin Laden. Pakistan's Musharraf harbours not only well-known
Indian criminals wanted in Bombay Bomb blast cases of March 1993 but Pakistani
terrorists involved in hijacking IA flight from Kathmandu in December 1999,
like Maulana Masood Azhar. India says infiltration from across the border
from POK continues unabated. But the perpetrator of international terrorism
is armed with nuclear weapons. But this should not affect an attack on
terrorist bases in POK- disputed territory for Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied
territory for India.
However, the government must decide
and act. In case it thinks even an attack on terrorist bases in POK would
backfire - a risk not worth taking - the government should continue to
bring pressure on major powers of the world to see that Musharraf cannot
be a promoter and fighter of terrorism at the same time.
