The Perfect Murder

An Indian summer

By Edward Luce

Published: July 1 2002 20:59 | Last Updated: July 1 2002 20:59





American diplomacy has averted the imminent threat of war between India and Pakistan. But senior members of the Bush administration know that it is only a matter of time before military tensions flare up again between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.

The prospects of renewed tension were underlined at the weekend with the appointment of L. K Advani as India`s deputy prime minister. Although Mr Advani was already seen as the successor to Atal Behari Vajpayee, the prime minister, his new title is a timely reminder of the hardline, anti-Pakistani elements that surround the ageing - and increasingly frail - prime minister.

``It might be three months, it might be nine months, but we all know that India and Pakistan will go back to the brink again,`` says a senior US official in Washington. ``Maybe next time they will go over the brink.``

Until now, the US has consistently respected India`s adamant refusal of third-party mediation on its core dispute with Pakistan over the divided state of Kashmir. But having sweated through the latest and most intense bout of nuclear brinksmanship, the US and its allies are quietly revising their long-held position.

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1025534365666&p=1012571727282

A setback for Pakistan`s position on Kashmir. It will extremely difficult for Pakistan to sponsor more terrorism in Indian Kashmir.

--

Hard-line Islamic political party in Kashmir breaks links with Pakistan, militants in political shock

Sun Jun 30, 1:41 PM ET

By MUJTABA ALI AHMAD, Associated Press Writer

SRINAGAR, India - The most influential and hardline Islamic political party in Indian-controlled Kashmir ( news - web sites) announced on Sunday it had severed ties with Muslim militants and Pakistan, into which it has long proposed a merger of the Himalayan region.



Analysts described the announcement as one of the most significant political developments in years in Kashmir — the cause of five decades of tensions between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan and two wars. It was also a major win for New Delhi.

The reason behind the dramatic turnaround by the Jama`at-e-Islami party was not immediately apparent.

``I want to make it clear that we have no connection with the militants or militancy, particularly with the Hezb-ul-Mujahedeen,`` Jama`at`s president, Ghulam Mohammad Bhat, told The Associated Press.

The Hezb-ul Mujahedeen is the biggest of the dozen militant groups which have been fighting India`s military since 1989 to separate Kashmir, or merge it with Pakistan, which also controls part of Kashmir.

An Indian intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Sunday that Jama`at has had close links in the past with the Hezb-ul Mujahedeen, and was suspected of being the militant group`s political face. Many Jama`at members have been arrested or detained over the decade on the suspicion that they were working secretly for the Hezb, the official said.

Jama`at also expressed differences with the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, a group of 24 Muslim religious and political groups in Kashmir to which it belongs. The Conference, which opposes Indian control of the region, has boycotted the last elections in the Indian state of Jammu-Kashmir and called for voters to resist going to the polls.

Indian officials have for months asked Kashmiri separatist parties to take part in the elections planned for September or October if they want to prove that they are the true representatives of Kashmiris.

Hurriyat has said it will boycott the upcoming elections, and its leader was not available to comment on Bhat`s announcement.

Bhat said that ``right now`` Jama`at has ``no plans of participating in the polls, but anything can happen in the future.``

He added that his party would not call for a boycott of the elections, which he said would be ``unlawful.``

For five decades, Jama`at has struggled politically for a merger of Jammu-Kashmir, India`s only Muslim-majority state, into Islamic Pakistan.

The Jama`at is the only one of the hard-line Islamic parties in Jammu-Kashmir that has an organized, disciplined, region-wide network and thousands of members spread across the Kashmir Valley.

Its announcement Sunday appeared to reverse all that the party has stood for, for five decades.

One of the group`s longtime senior leaders, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, has publicly described himself as a ``proud Pakistani.``

However, on Sunday in Srinagar, the summer capital of Jammu-Kashmir state, Bhat seemed to dismiss the party`s links with Pakistan.

``There is no mention of Kashmir`s accession to Pakistan in our party constitution. We didn`t ever even pass a resolution demanding accession since we have been working here,`` he told reporters.

The ramifications of Bhat`s announcement were unclear. Geelani is in a prison in the eastern Indian city of Ranchi, charged under a tough anti-terrorism law.

In the past, groups or leaders in Kashmir have made announcements, only to reverse them later, sometime the next day. At other times, new factions have formed, or other leaders have said the announcement did not reflect the view of the whole organization.

If Jama`at holds to Bhat`s announcement, it would be a blow to militant groups in the Kashmir Valley, and raise the possibility of the participation by some separatists in the state elections — a huge public relations victory for India.

India accuses Pakistan of sponsoring the 12-year insurgency, which has left more than 60,000 people dead. Islamabad denies the allegation.

Referring to Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf`s regime, Bhat said: ``There is no dictatorship (allowed) in Islam. The people of Pakistan are trying to install a democratic government in the country.``

Musharraf recently proposed changing Pakistan`s constitution to grant himself sweeping additional powers.

Indian political scientist Haseeb Ahmad described the news as ``the biggest gain for the government of India since the onset of the militancy.``

``This is a clear indication that the Jama`at wants to reaccept ... the basic framework of the Indian democratic setup in Kashmir,`` he told The Associated Press. ``This has shaken the edifice on which the secessionist movement rests and is bound to cause more than ripples in the political scenario of Kashmir.``

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020630/ap_wo_en_po/kashmir_political_surprise_2

Watch What You Say

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

NEW YORK TIMES

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan — Before recounting how President Clinton burned alive dozens of Christians (this feint is known in the column trade as baiting the right), let me offer a quick historical quiz: What religion were Muhammad`s parents?

You might think that they, like most people in Arabia in the sixth century, probably worshiped tribal gods and idols. It might seem difficult for anyone to have been a Muslim before Muhammad.

If that`s what you think, bite your tongue — if you visit Pakistan.

Dr. Younus Shaikh, a teacher at a medical college, sits in a brick prison here, after being sentenced to death for blasphemy last year. I couldn`t interview him because the warden caught me trying to slip into the prison as a visitor (I didn`t look like a family member). But the issues are clear.

....more at

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=213153

Claude Arpi

Homelands in Pakistan

One form of relaxation for me is watching sports programmes on television. On the same sports channel, Pakistan TV beams its daily news and very often I watch it for a short time. The music programmes and the serials, I must say, are not very different from Hindi serials aired on the Sahara channel. If a test were conducted and any foreigner asked which of the two countries a particular programme belonged to, very few would guess right.



The same holds true for the ads. This is no doubt normal for two nations which share 5,000 years (minus 50) of history.

But one thing is radically different and nobody can miss it: the news.

Whatever relaxation I may have enjoyed on the sports channel quickly fades away when I hear (and see) the systematic and constant anti-India propaganda. It seems that this nation (or at least its government) has had for the past 50 years only one obsession: India.

Within this obsession, there is another: Kashmir. You cannot watch a single news bulletin or debate without hearing about the `excesses of the Indian security forces` on the people of Kashmir `struggling for their self-determination`, though it is usually the same footage of security forces facing a mob during one of the Srinagar bandhs shown again and again.

Now, a new topic has recently appeared on PTV: the regrettable riots in Gujarat, which followed the Godhra incident. Since Gujarat saw an outburst of violence, PTV News seems full of delectation. The tone is, `did we not tell you that they would do this?` It is so excessive that it makes one feel Pakistan may not be fully innocent of the incident.

It is not only television but also other media who are enjoying this new occasion for India-bashing. For example, a Pakistani news Web site, Paknews.com, wrote an article titled Thank God we have Pakistan last month.

Not only did they declare that ``genocide against minorities is nothing new in India or in Indian-occupied areas``, but went one step further and announced a partition of India. For the purpose they quote some US media: ``This has led to vocal calls from Information Times, an American Media in Washington DC for the breakup of India into smaller countries where minorities are in the government and are able to protect their rights. This idea of partition has again come up after 55 years because the underlying argument of `Two-Nation Theory`, which was basis of creation of Pakistan, a home and safe haven for Muslims is once again valid and applicable on India. However, this time around, rather than creation of disparity in countries, India is eight times bigger than Pakistan, creation of smaller countries of equal area and resources should be carved out of India.

``In Pakistan as well as overseas, every Pakistani is praying for safety of fellow Muslims in India, and is thinking, `Thank God we have Pakistan`, `Thank God for the farsightedness of Iqbal and Jinnah for creating our homeland`.``

While it is not certain that all Pakistanis are praying for the breakup of India, this article raises a very interesting point: is it not Pakistan which is on the brink of breaking up?

Recently, Fortune magazine published a long article entitled `Kidnapped Nation` by Richard Behar, which is an in-depth look into the catastrophic economic situation in Pakistan. There is no doubt that Pakistan is close to an economic collapse.

Behar was told in Quetta by one of the leaders of the jihadi outfit Sipah-e-Sahaba: ``Sept 11 was all the fault of Jews, God will destroy Bush.`` He also blamed Musharraf for the Taliban`s defeat and happily provided Fortune details about the cash, supplies and soldiers Sipah had slipped across the porous border to aid the Taliban.

Behar analysed: ``Pearl`s death and the mid-March bombing of a Protestant church in Islamabad are only the most visible signs of a dysfunctional nation -- call it Problemistan -- a country that professes to be an ally of the US in its war on terrorism, but probably harbors more terrorists than any place on earth.``

This is only one of the many journalists who have begun to see that the best ally of the US in the region is in fact the largest nest of world terrorism and that Musharraf, despite all his declarations to the contrary, cannot do anything even if he wanted to (and it is not certain at all that he wants to).

Another example of the country`s bankruptcy is Musharraf`s dramatic speech on January 12 when he announced that jihadi groups would no longer be able to operate from Pakistani soil. To give his American mentors proof of his good faith, he arrested 2,000 militants (out of a few millions). Most of them are now free.

It appears that when the Lahore high court directed the Punjab government to furnish details of the records of cases against those who were picked up, the government was unable to substantiate the cases. For example, the leader of the banned Lashkar-e-Tayiba, Prof Hafeez Mohammad Saeed, who had been detained under the Maintenance of Public Order on charges of making inflammatory speeches, has been released as the MPO empowers the government to detain a person for only 90 days.

But more serious problems are in stock for Musharraf; he may pray for India`s breakup, but there are today strong possibilities that it may happen to Pakistan.

First, he has no control over very large regions of his territory, one of the worse being the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan. A few of weeks ago, a news item reported the arrest of Osama bin Laden`s senior aide Abu Zubaydah in Faislabad. It appears that the US intelligence agencies had arrested some Pakistanis in Kabul, who tipped off the Americans about bin Laden`s aide.

Another story surfaced a couple of days later: bin Laden himself had been staying in the same house a day or so earlier and had just left (probably informed by one of his contacts in the ISI) when the combined raid by the Pakistani security forces and the Federal Bureau of Investigation flew down to Faislabad. One can imagine the situation in the border areas renowned for their porousness if bin Laden could hide in the heart of the Punjab! (By the way, Musharraf had been announcing for months that bin Laden was dead, but this time he did not comment.)

The district known as the Federally Administrated Tribal Agencies has had a long history of lawlessness. It dates even before the 19th century when the British were the masters of the subcontinent ... except for a piece of land: the land of the Pushtoons (or Pathans). But the empire was always resourceful: a senior British diplomat, Sir Mortimer Durand, was requested to divide this land into two. He did so with a pen and the Pushtoons found themselves in two different countries: Afghanistan and British India. But to this day, the Pushtoon tribes on both sides of Durand`s border do not accept the existence of this stroke of his pen. It is even said that the bonds of tribe and ethnicity amongst the Pushtoons are more important than their Islamic faith.

The division did not help the British much and they had no option but to grant autonomy to these areas. It did not deter the population from dreaming of a reunification of the Pushtoon land. In the first years after the independence of Pakistan, the Government of Afghanistan took up the matter with Pakistan through Washington, which first was in two minds about the validity of the Durand Line. But the US administration knew that if Kabul`s claims were accepted, it would be the end of Pakistan as a state; it was not in their strategic interests to do so.

Apart from the fact that Musharraf has very little control over the area, the return of King Zahir Shah in Kabul leaves very little doubt that the issue of Pushtoonistan will resurface. The struggle between the Northern Alliance mainly composed of Uzbeks and Tajiks (like Ahmed Shah Masoud) against the Pathan regimes in Kabul is also to be seen in this perspective. It was certainly one of the reasons why Islamabad had to `control` Kabul`s regime and why the ISI with the help of the CIA installed the Taliban.

After `Problemistan` and `Pushtoonistan`, the other headache for the Pakistani general is `Sindhistan`. Though a few days ago the Mohajir leader Altaf Hussain said he was `neutral` about the referendum proposed by Musharraf, he has not always been neutral and the separatist tendencies of Sindh are very much present today.

In September last year, Hussain delivered a fiery speech by telephone from London. He said he ``will launch a struggle for self-determination`` in Pakistan`s Sindh province. He was ready to approach ``the United Nations, United States, India and other democratic countries``.

For Hussain, 54 years ``under the colonial yoke of the Punjabi establishment were enough``. He declared that it was the mission of his life to free Sindh.

Hussain, who leads the Mohajirs -- about 20 million Muslims who migrated to Pakistan from India during and after Partition -- feels that his community has received no rights in Pakistan. ``We were deceived in the name of Islam.``

He accused the Punjabi establishment of regarding the Mohajirs, the Sindhis and the Baluchis as security risks when they get government positions and concluded: ``No one will grant you your rights, you will have to take it from the usurpers.``

On top of this, Pakistan has a very serious problem in the northern areas of occupied Kashmir. An announcement from the Chinese Xinhua News Agency reported last week that the Khunjerab pass between Sinkiang and Pakistan will finally be reopened in May for the first time after September 11.

This pass is one of the most strategic regions in the world because of the old US-Pakistan-China axis. (One should not forget that it was Ayub Khan who battered the first Mao-Nixon meeting in the early 70s.) Soon after the destruction of the twin towers, it was reported that jihadi tribes had taken over the pass and no one was allowed to go through. The safest bet for China (and perhaps for Musharraf) was to close the pass.

Just before the Agra summit, the general had a series of consultations with political and religious leaders of Pakistan, including Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, but he did not invite any representative of the Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) for these discussions. The reason came to be known later: in June 2001, Gilgit and its surroundings were in a serious state of unrest due to protests from Sunni organisations over the decision of the local administration to introduce separate religious textbooks in the schools for the Shias (who are in a majority in Gilgit). Embarrassed by the incident, Musharraf stopped all movement between Gilgit and Pakistan and imposed very strict censorship.

In the ensuing riots thousands of activists from different political Sunni groups blocked the roads to the city of Gilgit to prevent Pakistani reinforcements from reaching the spot. They had finally to be rushed by helicopters and the demonstrators were ruthlessly removed. This is only one of many incidents that have occurred recently.

An attitude similar to the one adopted by Islamabad in Sindh and Baluchistan was noted by an Indian journalist who visited Gilgit in March. He was told by Ali Mardan, the editor of the local weekly Naqqara: ``If the government continues to ignore the grievances of the Northern Areas, it could even end up facing an armed struggle.`` He added: ``Pakistan does not trust the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. To date, we have never had a local chief secretary or police chief. They are either Punjabis or Pathans.`` One of the interviewed persons told the journalist: ``At least in your part of Kashmir, though he is a puppet, a Kashmiri Muslim is at the helm.``

For 50 years these areas have never been administrated by a Kashmiri and even the National Kashmir Committee, recently created by Islamabad under the chairmanship of Abdul Qayyum Khan, has very few Kashmiri members.

Certain quarters in Pakistan may continue to `thank God for the farsightedness of Iqbal and Jinnah for creating our homeland`, but the fact remains that there are today several `homelands` in Pakistan. One does not see how the general, even if he gets a five-year new lease as the master of Pakistan, will be able to contain the centrifugal forces with his cosmetic reforms and grandiloquent anti-India speeches.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/apr/26guest.htm

Kashmir: From earthly paradise to potential Armageddon

The Arizona Republic

http://www.arizonarepublic.com/opinions/articles/0618thomas18.html

June 18, 2002

Just before the sun dipped below the horizon, it touched the surface of Dal Lake, turning it into molten gold.

A fragrant breeze rolled off the pavilions and cascading waterfalls of the mountaintop Hanging Gardens of Kashmir and ruffled the placid surface, releasing a million shards of light and sending a ripple through the floating fields of lotus blossoms.

No wonder Mughal Emperor Jahangir had said, ``If there is paradise on Earth it is this, it is this, it is this.``

I remember the scene as if it was yesterday. I was 16 and Kashmir was a pristine paradise. Today it is an armed camp, teetering on the brink of nuclear war with roadblocks, rumbling army trucks, Indian commandos in black, suicide bombers, a dying economy and shell-shocked civilians. How did paradise turn into potential Armageddon?

Pakistan and India have fought three wars over the disputed territory of Kashmir, each holding their positions at the Line of Control.

Today a fourth war - perhaps even a nuclear war - seems to be looming large. Apart from the damage it would do to the two countries (estimates range from 12 million dead from a direct hit, to a 100 million in peripheral damage from fires, starvation and disease) it would break the international taboo of using weapons of mass destruction. Ideally these are only a deterrent, not weapons of choice.

It is estimated that India has about 25 nuclear weapons and that Pakistan has about half that many. This imbalance is inherently dangerous; military strategists predict that the losing side in a conventional war would be tempted to use nuclear weapons to reverse the advantage.

The two countries have been fighting over Kashmir since 1947, when India achieved freedom from British rule and the new state of Pakistan was formed from parts of India. The Hindu maharaja of Kashmir opted at the time to sign an instrument of accession to join the Indian Union - though the population of Kashmir was predominantly Muslim - and not Pakistan. Ever since, a relentless campaign to ``liberate`` Kashmir from India has been waged from across the Indian border.

Janak Singh, a native of Kashmir and a former bureau chief of the Times of India, says, ``Extremist organizations operating under the guidance of Pakistan`s intelligence agency, the ISI, are engaged in staging relentless acts of violence all over India. Trained militants continually cross over the Line of Control into Jammu and Kashmir.``

In winter 2000 I met with the Pakistani high commissioner to India. While waiting in his New Delhi embassy, I noticed a number of pro-Islamic, anti-Indian brochures neatly stacked on a shelf.

I asked, ``Does Pakistan support Muslim militants operating in India?`` ``No, no, that is just Indian propaganda,`` the commissioner replied. When I indicated the brochures, he said, ``Oh, they (fundamentalists) just leave those here.``

According to Singh, intelligence sources reveal that there are about 30,000 Pakistani operatives in India. It is widely known that in the past the ISI has had a cozy relationship with Muslim fundamentalists, but it now seeks to distance itself from the stigma of terrorism.

About 400,000 Hindus have been driven out of Kashmir, according to the Kashmiri Overseas Association USA. They wait for someone to restore peace to Kashmir, so they can return to their ``Paradise on Earth`` as the destitute Muslim population of Kashmir awaits the same ephemeral peace.

Mantoshe Singh Devji is a Phoenix writer whose new book is ``The Mad Messiah - Osama bin Laden, and the Seeds of Terror.`` She was born in Lahore, which is now Pakistan, and is of Indian origin. She has lived in the United States for 35 years.

Kashmir: From earthly paradise to potential Armageddon

The Arizona Republic

http://www.arizonarepublic.com/opinions/articles/0618thomas18.html

June 18, 2002

Just before the sun dipped below the horizon, it touched the surface of Dal Lake, turning it into molten gold.

A fragrant breeze rolled off the pavilions and cascading waterfalls of the mountaintop Hanging Gardens of Kashmir and ruffled the placid surface, releasing a million shards of light and sending a ripple through the floating fields of lotus blossoms.

No wonder Mughal Emperor Jahangir had said, ``If there is paradise on Earth it is this, it is this, it is this.``

I remember the scene as if it was yesterday. I was 16 and Kashmir was a pristine paradise. Today it is an armed camp, teetering on the brink of nuclear war with roadblocks, rumbling army trucks, Indian commandos in black, suicide bombers, a dying economy and shell-shocked civilians. How did paradise turn into potential Armageddon?

Pakistan and India have fought three wars over the disputed territory of Kashmir, each holding their positions at the Line of Control.

Today a fourth war - perhaps even a nuclear war - seems to be looming large. Apart from the damage it would do to the two countries (estimates range from 12 million dead from a direct hit, to a 100 million in peripheral damage from fires, starvation and disease) it would break the international taboo of using weapons of mass destruction. Ideally these are only a deterrent, not weapons of choice.

It is estimated that India has about 25 nuclear weapons and that Pakistan has about half that many. This imbalance is inherently dangerous; military strategists predict that the losing side in a conventional war would be tempted to use nuclear weapons to reverse the advantage.

The two countries have been fighting over Kashmir since 1947, when India achieved freedom from British rule and the new state of Pakistan was formed from parts of India. The Hindu maharaja of Kashmir opted at the time to sign an instrument of accession to join the Indian Union - though the population of Kashmir was predominantly Muslim - and not Pakistan. Ever since, a relentless campaign to ``liberate`` Kashmir from India has been waged from across the Indian border.

Janak Singh, a native of Kashmir and a former bureau chief of the Times of India, says, ``Extremist organizations operating under the guidance of Pakistan`s intelligence agency, the ISI, are engaged in staging relentless acts of violence all over India. Trained militants continually cross over the Line of Control into Jammu and Kashmir.``

In winter 2000 I met with the Pakistani high commissioner to India. While waiting in his New Delhi embassy, I noticed a number of pro-Islamic, anti-Indian brochures neatly stacked on a shelf.

I asked, ``Does Pakistan support Muslim militants operating in India?`` ``No, no, that is just Indian propaganda,`` the commissioner replied. When I indicated the brochures, he said, ``Oh, they (fundamentalists) just leave those here.``

According to Singh, intelligence sources reveal that there are about 30,000 Pakistani operatives in India. It is widely known that in the past the ISI has had a cozy relationship with Muslim fundamentalists, but it now seeks to distance itself from the stigma of terrorism.

About 400,000 Hindus have been driven out of Kashmir, according to the Kashmiri Overseas Association USA. They wait for someone to restore peace to Kashmir, so they can return to their ``Paradise on Earth`` as the destitute Muslim population of Kashmir awaits the same ephemeral peace.

Mantoshe Singh Devji is a Phoenix writer whose new book is ``The Mad Messiah - Osama bin Laden, and the Seeds of Terror.`` She was born in Lahore, which is now Pakistan, and is of Indian origin. She has lived in the United States for 35 years.

re:Reply #: 600

Kafir K khan,

A good comparison. Agree with most of what you say though i dare say i am not sure if ABV`s personal life details are true. I also read about some such rumors. You seem to know the gory details. Why not post a refernce to your source? Anyway, why we desis are so enamoured by what our leaders do in their spare time beats me.

Comparing the 2 personalities, Kalam surely towers over ABV. He, howeer, lacks a political base. Sometimes i think instead of agreeing to be the President, he should have floated a political party and invited good men to join the party. He has a large number of admirers who would have supported such a move. I, however also know he would not do anything like that. He is basically apolitical and avoids unpleasant publicities. He did not speak out against the Gujarat carnage. He is supposed to have asked for revision of his latest book in order to delete some pages which would have caused some controversies.

Sridhar

Kafir K Khan::

Are you a Pakistani or an Indian?

If you are a Pakistani, can you inform us what your stance is on Kashmir, and India in general?

I am sorry, I dont want to sound like I am interviewing you. Its just that I have been VERY intrigued by your posts in your current and previous stints on Chowk.

Thanks in advance.

Satyavadi

Toehold on a Long Trek to Heal India-Pakistan Rift

By SETH MYDANS

ARACHI, Pakistan, June 16 — American diplomacy in Pakistan and India this month has produced a tiny victory for each side in the struggle over Kashmir, a toehold on which to proceed. But the car bomb that killed 11 people outside the American Consulate here on Friday made clear that the road to any long-term solution will be difficult and dangerous.

High-level visits to both countries this month succeeded in pulling them back from the brink of war. They opened the way for tentative steps that could address the roots of their long-running conflict over Kashmir.

But a total of one million soldiers remain on alert on both sides of the frontier of the two countries. Shelling and gunfire continue in that disputed Himalayan territory. In a worst-case scenario, both countries have nuclear weapons.

In Pakistan, Islamic militants who feel betrayed by the government`s abandonment of the Taliban in Afghanistan and now by its clampdown in Kashmir are fighting back with the only weapon they have, more violence.

If they can destabilize the government of President Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan or provoke retaliation by India, they could undermine the fragile process begun with the visits of Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

In concrete terms, those visits produced only modest gestures and assurances. But analysts said both sides seemed now to be seeking a way to end the confrontation that, as Mr. Rumsfeld emphasized, is exhausting both of them militarily and economically.

``It could be that this is just a pause in what would be seen as a perpetual crisis in South Asia,`` said Philip Cohen, a South Asia expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

On the other hand, he said, ``Sometimes out of a crisis you get a moment when both sides can move freely.

``Let`s hope this is such a moment,`` he added. ``The United States is uniquely placed now, as never in history, to do something.``

Its close economic and military relations with both countries have put it in a position to act as an impartial broker, or at least as an honest messenger between them.

The small victories won by each side addressed important concerns.

India won the support of the United States, as well as other nations, for its position that Pakistan has actively been aiding the infiltration of militants across the border and that General Musharraf could therefore cut them off.

``India has squeezed him and been successful in turning the rest of the world against him,`` said Pervez Hoodbhoy, a leader in Pakistan`s antiwar movement. ``So he`s really feeling the heat.``

As the American officials shuttled back and forth between the capitals, Pakistan gained too. Without any formal declaration, a foreshadowing of the dialogue it had been seeking over Kashmir had begun.

India has ruled out negotiation, saying the subject of Kashmir was already closed. The large portion of Kashmir that it controls, it insists, is part of India and neither Pakistan nor any other country has any role to play there.

But it is precisely this delicate game of message-carrying that opens the possibility of an eventual resolution to a deadlock of counterclaims over mostly Muslim Kashmir that has persisted since Pakistan and India were partitioned in 1947, and has already caused two wars between them.

``If left to themselves, given the personal animosities on both sides, it is hard to imagine Indian and Pakistani leaders getting together and making serious progress,`` said George Perkovich, a South Asia expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

Two weeks ago, General Musharraf and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee of India were at an international conference in Kazakhstan and refused not only to shake hands but even to look at each other.

Days later, Mr. Armitage visited both leaders and carried statements of their positions back and forth between them.

``This is not mediation,`` Mr. Perkovich said. ``Let`s be clear about that. Does a telephone wire mediate? No. It basically carries messages. That`s the kind of role the United States can play.``

Part of this role will be to assure India that Pakistan is keeping its word to halt infiltration by militant groups over the border into the Indian part of Kashmir. Both countries are considering an American offer to provide technical surveillance that could include motion sensors, satellite images and observation by unmanned aircraft.

If he keeps his pledge to seal the border — to move from the military to the diplomatic arena — General Musharraf risks accusations at home that he has betrayed the Kashmir cause.

To survive a domestic backlash, from opposition parties or disaffected military men, he needs to be able to show that he has won concessions from India — a softening of its military posture and a dialogue on Kashmir.

A first hint came today that India might relax its alert status along the border. Even though there have been attacks in Kashmir in the last 24 hours that have killed a dozen people, Indian military officials said that for the first time since their Kashmir buildup began in December, some soldiers and officers would be permitted to go on leave.

As both sides maneuver delicately, they both must watch the calendar.

The crucial month is October, when local elections will be held in the Indian portion of Kashmir and national parliamentary elections will be held in Pakistan.

Indian officials have said they do not expect to remove their troops from the border before then, guarding against violence by Pakistan-backed militants bent on disrupting the Kashmir vote.

Analysts said India was determined to complete the election before opening any real dialogue with Pakistan and to use what it expected to be a favorable vote as a bargaining piece.

If war can be averted until then, Kashmir`s early snows will be likely to delay it further, making both infiltration and military action difficult and unlikely.

In that case, the next crisis may come as it did this year — or be averted by a new era of statesmanship — when the snows melt next spring.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/17/international/asia/17STAN.html

An Honest Broker`s Reward

By Jim Hoagland

Sunday, June 16, 2002; Page B07

American diplomacy centered on a single word has led to a fragile truce between India and Pakistan. By persuading Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to add the word ``permanently`` to his promises to stop aiding cross-border terrorism against India, the United States has averted immediate catastrophe and may have opened the way for a strategic realignment in Asia.

Defining precisely what permanently means -- which is an indirect way of establishing the guarantees India needs to relax its still-threatening mobilization of troops and weapons -- is a work in progress. But Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage has initially coaxed enough specifics out of Musharraf about dismantling terror camps in Kashmir to allow the two adversaries to move back from the brink.

Effective diplomacy, if belated. A clearer and more insistent engagement by Washington in March or April to get Musharraf to stop double-dealing on terrorism might have averted the crisis altogether. And for the truce to hold and lead to greater reductions in tension, the United States must remain deeply engaged in the region.

But there is an existential quality to the new commitments Musharraf has given. If he follows through, the general will abandon more than the grisly tactic of murder by proxy. He will sacrifice a fundamental lie that he and his nation have told themselves about Kashmir since he seized power in October 1999.

The lie was that terrorism in Kashmir would significantly affect the outcome of Pakistan`s multiple disputes with India. Pakistan has no other visible hope of getting its larger, more powerful and prosperous neighbor to end its control over two-thirds of Muslim-majority Kashmir. So Musharraf has pretended that he had an answer -- one written in the blood of the Indian occupation force -- and Pakistanis pretended to believe it.

But terrorism against a billion people lacks the force of terrorism against a few million Israelis. Nor does Kashmir resemble Jerusalem as a coveted, cherished goal. What is important to both India and Pakistan is that the other not have Kashmir. Their national identities are bound up in denying possession of it to the enemy. This is a conflict even more artificial -- therefore more unyielding to reason, and savage -- than most such struggles.

Without the myth of an effective terror war, Pakistan accepts, at least implicitly, a status quo that will gradually become the final outcome: an international frontier along the present line of control in Kashmir.

Armitage did not have to dwell on the immediate risks the Pakistani general faced when they met in Islamabad on June 6. The United States had already told Musharraf it would not be able to stop the Indians from attacking if he offered no movement. Washington would not come to his aid if that happened. And China, pursuing better relations with India, had also let Pakistan know it would not intervene if war came.

Against this bleak horizon Musharraf took up the U.S. suggestion that a pledge to halt permanently the infiltration that has been episodic over the past six months was the only way to move the Indians off war footing. The change was announced that day not in Islamabad or in New Delhi but in Washington, as if to emphasize the American role in guaranteeing the promise.

The essential new element is Musharraf`s undertaking to close down the 50 to 60 terrorism ``camps`` the Indians have identified in Kashmir. These range from a collection of a few tents in fields to well-established urban neighborhoods that terrorists control. But Musharraf is now committed to ripping out the plumbing of the terror network created by his intelligence services.

India has offered a few immediate symbolic tension-reducing gestures in response, with more to come in July and then troop reductions in Kashmir if local elections there in October proceed peacefully. All this is contingent on Musharraf`s keeping his word, and surviving an expected Islamic fundamentalist backlash at home.

There is much to worry about in the short term. But India`s acceptance of America`s role as an honest broker in this crisis is a strategic shift worth developing.

Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee seemingly overruled his hawks not because he believed Musharraf but because he believed George W. Bush. There is now an opportunity to use this crisis to reverse decades of mutual mistrust between Washington and New Delhi, which had feared Bush was resuming the U.S. ``tilt`` toward Pakistan that prevailed during the Cold War. That is the big picture the Bush administration must keep in view.

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=211120

TAhmed:

``The latest crisis has demonstrated to the Indian government that it dress up a million troops and put them on the border, but they have nowhere to go from there; and it has demonstrated to the Pakistani government how quickly things can escalate to the doomsday situation. Both have had cold water thrown on them and hopefully things will start to improve. But I am an eternal optimist...``

Yes, you are an optimist, and I respect that. I also know that Indian Pakistani relations have not yet evolved where they are strictly business like, dependent solely on cost/benefit ratios. There are too many unknowns. Anyways, let us see how it goes. I am not an idiot. I would rather not have war as well. But, the present situation where the only victims in India seem to be the soldiers and dependents, as well as Kashmiri civillians on our side of the border, that is unacceptable. If the choice is between peace and war, I would jump at peace. If it is between proxy war and war, than war is more suitable to us.

I hope that you can understand this...I don`t speak from hatred at all. I truly get along with individuals from Pakistan, so it is not personal...more of a SWOT analysis on my part.

Al Qaeda Gathering Strength in Pakistan

Asia: Operatives are hiding in cities, with support from local extremists. The nation is the terrorists` new hub, U.S. officials say.

Los Angeles Times



http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-000042372jun16.story?null



By BOB DROGIN, JOSH MEYER and ERIC LICHTBLAU, TIMES STAFF WRITERS

WASHINGTON -- Hundreds of Al Qaeda terrorist operatives are hiding in Pakistan`s cities after forming or renewing alliances with local Muslim extremist networks that have helped provide safe houses for communications, training and logistics, U.S. officials say.

The result, they fear, is that America`s closest ally in Central Asia has in effect replaced Afghanistan as a command-and-control center for at least some of the battered remnants of Osama bin Laden`s terrorist army.

``They don`t operate with impunity there like they did in Afghanistan,`` a U.S. intelligence official said. ``But they have lots of supporters, and it`s easy for them to blend in.`` A Justice Department official agreed, saying Al Qaeda members appear to have gone ``wherever they want`` in Pakistan`s teeming cities.

``They`re hiding in plain sight,`` he said.

Brian Jenkins, a terrorism expert at the Rand Corp. think tank in Santa Monica, says Bin Laden might have viewed Pakistan as part of a ``business continuity plan to ensure survival of leadership, financing, communications and so on`` in case Al Qaeda lost its sanctuary in Afghanistan.

Authorities say that Al Qaeda has made similar efforts to regroup by merging with local Muslim extremist groups in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia. These makeshift alliances are more decentralized than the network long directed by Bin Laden, officials say, and thus might be more difficult for outsiders to penetrate.

Since last fall, the United States and its allies say they have foiled more than a dozen terrorist plots around the world and arrested more than 2,400 suspects in nearly 90 countries.

But more than half of Al Qaeda`s known leaders remain at large, including several linked to the Sept. 11 assaults and other major attacks. Officials are especially eager to catch Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, an Al Qaeda operative linked to almost every attack against the United States since the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993.

U.S. intelligence analysts still believe that Bin Laden and his top aides have found refuge somewhere along Pakistan`s long and lawless border with Afghanistan. Broad pockets of local sympathizers are said to exist in the semiautonomous tribal areas of Baluchistan and North-West Frontier Province.

But U.S. and Pakistani officials now estimate that hundreds more Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters who fled the war in Afghanistan have disappeared into Pakistan. Many are thought to have linked up with like-minded local groups opposed to secular Muslim regimes and to the Western powers that support them.

Backers Mount Attacks

Al Qaeda supporters appear to have been responsible for at least two suicide attacks on Westerners in Pakistani cities this year, U.S. officials say. Al Qaeda leaders and followers have been arrested or tracked in nearly every major Pakistani city, including Karachi in the south, Lahore and Faisalabad in the east, Peshawar in the west, and Rawalpindi and Islamabad, the capital, in the north.

In some cases, U.S. officials say, Pakistani militants and even some members of the government`s Inter-Services Intelligence agency, known as the ISI, have openly supported Al Qaeda and have used an informal underground railroad to help fleeing terrorists.

``The ISI is filled with extremists, and I don`t think they`re trying very hard to find these people,`` said a recently retired U.S. counter-terrorism official who is familiar with the manhunt. ``In fact, they`re actively trying to hide them.``

Another U.S. official downplayed ISI`s role, citing recent intelligence reports. But ``that doesn`t rule out the possibility that there are still links between rogue elements of ISI and Al Qaeda,`` he said.

Al Qaeda`s presence in Pakistan poses a growing danger and dilemma for both Washington and Islamabad.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who visited Pakistan last week, and other U.S. officials have offered strong public support for President Pervez Musharraf`s military regime, which has provided airstrips, bases, fuel, intelligence and other critical help to U.S. forces.

Privately, however, many U.S. officials are increasingly voicing concerns that Musharraf`s crackdown on local terrorist groups this year has largely failed. Several banned groups have morphed or spawned virulent offshoots that have launched several attacks against Westerners this year. Authorities haven`t solved Friday`s car bombing outside the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, which killed at least 11 Pakistanis and wounded dozens more. A previously unknown group has claimed responsibility, but U.S. officials said the FBI is investigating whether Al Qaeda might be linked to the attack.

U.S. intelligence officials now suspect that groups linked to Al Qaeda were responsible for a May 8 bus bombing in Karachi that killed 11 French engineers and a March 17 grenade attack in Islamabad that killed four Protestant International Church congregants, including a U.S. Embassy employee and her daughter.

The arrest last month of an American-born alleged Al Qaeda operative, Jose Padilla, after he flew to Chicago on what authorities called a scouting mission for a possible radioactive bomb attack, suggested just how widespread Al Qaeda may have become.

U.S. officials say that Padilla, who used the Muslim name Abdullah al Muhajir, studied bomb-making early this year at an Al Qaeda safe house in Lahore, met with senior Al Qaeda officials in March at another safe house in Karachi and traveled elsewhere in the country. Pakistani police arrested Padilla`s alleged accomplice in Rawalpindi.

Although Padilla`s role was not known at the time, U.S. and Pakistani officials raided the Lahore safe house where he had stayed as well as suspected Al Qaeda compounds in several other cities March 28. Abu Zubeida, Al Qaeda`s operations chief, and several of his senior aides were captured after a shootout that night at a house in Faisalabad.

US. authorities say Abu Zubeida approved Padilla`s proposed ``dirty bomb`` plot at a meeting in December in Afghanistan and later traveled with him in Pakistan. Abu Zubeida, U.S. officials say, had been responsible for rebuilding the Al Qaeda network inside Pakistan before his capture.

A senior intelligence official said Al Qaeda ``already had a presence`` in Pakistan ``so they don`t require other groups`` for operations.

``They have always had loose alliances with fellow travelers with similar goals and motives,`` this official added. ``The memberships are very loose. People go back and forth from one group to the other.``

*

Group`s Reach Spreads

Arrests elsewhere also point to the terrorist group`s spread. Saudi Arabia acknowledged Saturday that three men arrested in Morocco on suspicion of planning attacks on U.S. and British ships in the Strait of Gibraltar are Saudi citizens. Morocco said they claim to be Al Qaeda operatives. The attacks would have been similar to the suicide bombing of the U.S. destroyer Cole in Yemen--an operation also linked to Al Qaeda.

As for Pakistan, the State Department, in its annual report on global terrorism issued last month, said Islamabad had ``rendered unprecedented levels of cooperation to support the war on terrorism.`` The report noted that Islamabad broke ties with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan after Sept. 11, froze hundreds of thousands of dollars in suspected terrorist assets and moved to bring radical Muslim schools that served as ``breeding grounds for terrorists`` into the mainstream educational system.

Musharraf`s government also outlawed several terrorist groups and detained more than 2,000 domestic ``extremists,`` the report said. But most have now been released and might be active again.

Questions remain, the State Department warned, about whether ``Musharraf`s `get tough` policy with local militants and his stated pledge to oppose terrorism anywhere will be fully implemented and sustained.``

Part of the problem is Pakistan`s history of covert support and overt tolerance for Muslim extremist groups, starting with the Taliban.

Peter Tomsen, U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan from 1989 to 1992, said the ISI provided the ``weapons, resources and intelligence`` to the Taliban as the Islamic movement rose to power, and then was ``intimately involved`` as the Talibs forged ties with Al Qaeda.

On its other border, Pakistan provided similar support for years to Muslim zealots fighting to oust India from the disputed territory of Kashmir. Terrorist attacks against civilians in Kashmir and in India brought the two nuclear armed rivals to the brink of war in recent weeks, but the crisis eased after Musharraf moved to stop Pakistani militants from crossing into the Indian-held portion of Kashmir.

Until recently, however, little attention was paid to other Pakistani terrorist groups that share Bin Laden`s doctrinaire view of Islam and his hatred of the West. Many attended Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan, or received arms and other support from Bin Laden, even if they didn`t formally join Al Qaeda. The contacts apparently paid off after Sept. 11.

A Pakistani official said his government estimates that at least several hundred Al Qaeda fighters slipped into Pakistan`s 10 tribal territories--mostly in the so-called Pushtun Belt that runs from Quetta to north of Peshawar--last winter. But they were exposed to U.S. satellites and other forces in the open desert, he said, and the cities seemed far safer.

Many had money to buy vehicles, supplies and guides from local warlords, this official said. And many, he said, reached out to a broad underground network of Bin Laden sympathizers and ``fellow travelers,`` mostly urban Pakistani militants.

``The network is there. You have religious groups that were sanctioned for years that no one was shutting down and are operating freely,`` the Pakistani official said. ``They are providing them with sanctuary.... It is an ongoing problem. We are cracking down on them, but they are still out there.``

Two Pakistani groups in particular--Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed--have long espoused the jihad cause against non-Muslims. They now appear to have provided haven or other assistance to Al Qaeda terrorists, the official said.

Authorities say Lashkar-e-Taiba was affiliated with the safe house in Faisalabad where Abu Zubeida and his top aides were arrested. And Jaish-e-Mohammed was linked to the January kidnapping and, later, beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in Karachi.

The State Department labeled both groups as foreign terrorist organizations in December, empowering Washington to freeze any of the groups` assets in the United States and to urge other nations to block their funds.

*

`Very Worrisome` Trend

A former Clinton administration counter-terrorism official said Pakistan`s increasing tangle of terrorist groups and their spinoffs is ``very worrisome.``

``The general turmoil has made it much more attractive for all jihadists in the region to go after American targets,`` he said. The long-range danger is that local Muslim militants backed by Al Qaeda could destabilize Pakistan, overthrow the government and set a dangerous new course for the nation.

``It is entirely within the realms of possibility that Pakistan could end up with an Islamic leadership that is a lot less sympathetic to the United States,`` he said.

Tashbih Sayyed, the Pakistani-born editor of Pakistan Today, published in Southern California, said the war in Afghanistan only ``destroyed an outpost`` of terrorism. ``The main infrastructure remained intact,`` he said. And Pakistan, he warned, ``is kind of a meeting place now for all the radical forces in the world.``

Stuka #590

//...I think my view of the situation can be summed up by taking issue with the statement ``No Pakistani leader can walk away from Kashmir, just as no Indian leader can give it away.``///

Not entirely true. A right-thinking pakistani leader would have all the reasons to walk away from Kashmir because that will be him the chance to make his country.

But an indian leader cannot give it away - because that will break his country.

re:reply #: 593

Prem

Agreed. I know i did go overboard in my last post.

Sridhar

Stuka #590 I think my view of the situation can be summed up by taking issue with the statement ``No Pakistani leader can walk away from Kashmir, just as no Indian leader can give it away.``

This of course is conventional wisdom. It is not based on, say, a referendum on the issue in India or in Pakistan. If either government had much respect for the wishes of its people, they would have sought their opinion on whether the Kashmir issue, and the associated costs (military, economic as well as in terms of poor relations among neighbors) are worth it. While it is easy to stir up a demonstration against the other country in both India and Pakistan, these demonstrations mean nothing.

As for a realistic assessment of where India, Pakistan relations are headed, I am optimistic: The latest crisis has demonstrated to the Indian government that it dress up a million troops and put them on the border, but they have nowhere to go from there; and it has demonstrated to the Pakistani government how quickly things can escalate to the doomsday situation. Both have had cold water thrown on them and hopefully things will start to improve. But I am an eternal optimist...

re: rsridhar # 591

I am Dr. Kalam`s biggest fan, but the extent of adulation we Indian have lavished on him is a bit scary. Surely, he is a good man (may be even better than me) but geez...people almost worship him!

Hope some of us will channel a little of that positive energy into removing silly and distasteful intercommunal distrusts and prejudices. If that happens, that will be Dr. Kalam`s greatest miracle to date.

P.S. Surjeet and co. disappointed me. Once Dr. Kalam`s candidature was announced, all posturing should have ended.