Author:
Publication: Sify News
Date: June 5, 2002
URL: http://headlines.sify.com/916news2.html
An Indo-Pak war which leads to the
destruction of Pakistan would be attractive to al-Qaeda, according to a
global strategic forecasting firm.
Strategic Forecasting (Stratfor)
said in its latest analysis on the situation in the Indian subcontinent
that al-Qaeda , which has used Pakistan as an ongoing base for its command
and control and training functions, has a deep interest in Pakistan's future.
But paradoxically, al-Qaeda's and
Pakistan's national security interests are not at all the same, it said.
From al-Qaeda's point of view, a
war with India -- even one that led to the destruction of an independent
Pakistan -- might be attractive, Stratfor said, and there are several reasons
for this: It said that al-Qaeda is convinced the government of President
Pervez Musharraf has become a tool of the United States, supporting US
efforts to destroy al-Qaeda in Pakistan.
While Musharraf's support has been
far from wholehearted, al-Qaeda is aware that Musharraf cannot be relied
upon to protect the network, particularly while under heavy pressure from
the United States and India, Stratfor said.
Also, a stable Pakistan with a strong
central government poses a threat to al- Qaeda's security. Since a strong
government is less manipulable, it is also less predictable. It can turn
its power against al-Qaeda quite easily.
On the other hand, a Pakistan whose
military has been smashed and whose government ceases to function creates
a situation in which al-Qaeda can stake out and defend remote areas of
the country from encroachment, Stratfor said.
From a geographic point of view,
India has the ability to smash Pakistan. Occupying and pacifying the country,
particularly the regions that al-Qaeda uses for its bases, is far more
difficult if not impossible.
With an Indian army stretched to
the limit and no meaningful Pakistani force to face, al-Qaeda becomes more
secure. Even US operations against al Qaeda in remote areas without Pakistani
collaboration would become extremely difficult, it pointed out.
Strafor said that al Qaeda has,
as its core argument, the idea that Islam is under attack from other religions.
If India were to attack Pakistan, al Qaeda would be able to make the argument
-- convincingly in the Islamic world -- that the Jews, the Christian West
and the Hindus have allied to strangle Islam.
The plausibility of this argument
would, al-Qaeda hopes, galvanise the Islamic world into united resistance.
That unification is al-Qaeda's goal.
From al-Qaeda's viewpoint, Stratfor
said, an Indian attack on Pakistan would be highly desirable. Even an attack
involving nuclear weapons would be acceptable, particularly if it served
to isolate and protect regions in which al-Qaeda dominates.
That is why Pakistani-based Islamic
militants aligned with al-Qaeda have persistently exacerbated the crisis
between the two countries.
"In the long run, they see a war,
even one that is ruinous to Pakistan, as an acceptable price to pay for
their ultimate goals. What is unacceptable is a settlement between India
and Pakistan that would leave the United States in a dominant position
in both countries as broker and arbiter."
US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
is heading to the region with intentions of establishing the United States
as just that, Stratfor said, pointing out that Washington has not been
unhappy with the Indian threats against Pakistan, precisely because they
compounded Musharraf's dependency on the United States and increased the
likelihood that he would cooperate against al-Qaeda in return for the United
States holding India back.
"Ideally, the United States would
like to create a situation in which Musharraf's only defence against India
is the United States," it said.
Al-Qaeda needs to disrupt Rumsfeld's
mission, the analysis said, because a US- brokered reduction in tensions
would be unacceptable.
"Islamic militants have done everything
possible to foment a conflict. It is not unreasonable to see the Rumsfeld
mission as the last major barrier to war -- one that could make things
far worse for al-Qaeda. Therefore, al Qaeda must somehow disrupt the US
diplomatic initiative."
UNI
