India-Pakistan: This is not Cricket

Anything to oblige khamkhwa.

Did Musharraf Order the Hit on Pearl?

By Tom Plate
LOS ANGELES _ A new book by a major French philosopher asserts that the shocking murder of Wall Street Journal investigative reporter Daniel Pearl was not an isolated terrorist act but a well-planned assassination operation by the Pakistan government under the control of President Pervez Musharraf.

If this turns out to be true, U.S. support for Pakistan is fundamentally misconceived and dangerously immoral. Bernard-Henri Levy, author of the controversial book, is a high-profile French Left Bank philosopher, not a British historian of the just-the-facts-please empiricist school. Thus, ``Who Killed Daniel Pearl?`` is marred by speculative leaps and the kind of feral antagonism toward Pakistan (which he labels ``the house of the devil``) heretofore found mainly in India.

However cantankerously, though, the Levy book, a best-seller in France and just now released in the United States, does raise a tough issue about Pakistan: Who`s really in charge? Levy, along with official Indian authorities, contends that the gruesome hit on Pearl was the work of the Pakistani secret police (ISI). If so, Musharraf`s integrity must be questioned, because the former general claimed, during his September visit to the United States, that the ISI is now under control _ his control. As Levy writes, accurately in this passage: ``The ISI was the backer of the Taliban`s seizure of power in Afghanistan. It nurtured Islamic militants who crossed the border into Kashmir to pursue a terror war there against Indian rule. Omar Sheikh, as part of that operation, carried out kidnappings of Westerners in Kashmir.``

If Musharraf was the trigger that set off the heinous torture and assassination of Pearl, who was tracking ISI links to al-Qaida, the implications for U.S. policy would be terrifying. Pakistan, an Islamic nation of 151 million bordering on giant India, is far more strategically vital than neighboring Afghanistan or even occupied Iraq, now so draining on the U.S. military. And were the governance of Pakistan _ a nuclear power _ to fall into the hands of militant Islamicists, it would destabilize South Asia overnight. China and India would not like that _ they both want regional stability.

To their credit, they have recently held, for the first time, high-level negotiations to dampen their long-smoldering border dispute. The talks were positive and should continue until they are successful. Both New Delhi and Beijing _ with their daunting economic problems _ have no desire to see the region deteriorate.

And both also regard Pakistan as a problem. ``Pakistan is on the top 10 threat list,`` flatly says nuclear proliferation specialist Joseph Cirincione, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, ``and people are not talking about it.`` An especially frustrated India believes the United States is in dangerous denial about Musharraf and Pakistan, which experts believe has stockpiled about 30-50 nuclear bombs.

It has also sent nuclear technology to North Korea and probably Iran (Pakistan denies the allegations). Even if innocent of Levy`s charges, Musharraf knows more than he`s telling about Pakistan`s dark side and may not be doing all he can in return for the greatly increased Western aid.

At the same time, the alternatives to a Musharraf government are extremely unsatisfactory. The prior parliamentary ``democracy`` was a rotted house of corruption, and a right-wing religious government would be threatening to everyone, including India.

Reducing U.S. support for Musharraf politically as well as economically could plunge South Asia into serious turmoil. The general may not be the ideal leader _ but he is the best available option at the moment. While Pakistan is a serious problem, removing Musharraf is not the solution.

As Levy writes, ``The great fight of our time is between moderate Islam and radical Islam. And the front line of this fight goes right through the middle of Musharraf`s brain.`` Now is not the time to attempt diplomatic brain surgery on the general, whatever his drawbacks. However, Musharraf is obligated to give the world a better explanation about the Pearl case, should not have rejected India`s latest 12-step diplomatic initiative and owes the U.S. government a positive response to the request that it come to the negotiating table with India without preconditions.

(UCLA Professor Tom Plate is the founder of the Asia Pacific Media Network.)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Ref khamkhwa. #18

[arjun_m, gujjubaniya , jay, rationalfaith , rsaxena....galaxy of stars, in one place and who is missing? oh yeah...urstruly, harimau and satsriakal..wish they could come and complete the quorum....;) ]

The article is inane and the interacts are lame so there is no reason for me to post anything.

``#24 by arjun_m on November 7, 2003 6:25am PT
I`m sure this will come as a SHOCK to the usual deluded pakis

``We have purchased these missiles from North Korea. We have also had a transfer of technology of these missiles. We now manufacture ourselves these missiles in the same organisation that Dr A. Q. Khan headed,`` he said.
``Therefore, I don`t know how many times he has visited, but maybe his interaction was in this respect,`` Musharraf said. He said Pakistan now had no arms collaboration with North Korea. ``


Sirjee,

You are talking to some in vain. But you choose to fight. In vain.

There are very many on the other side who are... errrr...Honest. Those who listen are not in power. They never will be.

Those in power will blantantly lie. And will laugh it off. Your good ``friend`` calls himself usr``truely`` :). Muslim way of honesty. I hope he accually fasts. He is a classic case like Ayatullah. Lived in France... not Saudi OR that great Male``shia``. Then comes back and spits on the thalee that fed him. Calls them Satan.

There are humans and then there are hindoos...... Typical of ``yours``. As every one on Chowk agrees.

Sorry. Spade is a spade...Spade.. Spitter is a spitter.

Why do you ask honesty out of you know who??


Yogiraj Patil

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Jihadic continuum,

Most pakistanis on chowk insist that the kashmir jihad is different from the others. The ban of LET in australia is based on the evidence that two jihadists, david hicks and another french guy who came to australia did infact train in POK. May be it time for the pakistanis to accept that the madrassas produce generaised jihadis, seeking death and are willing to kill any one whom their leaders designate as kafirs.

The sectarian killings of karachi, the taliban, the mujahideen and the kashmir jihadists all come from the 200000 marassas of pakistan, with a large portion joining the pak army. The treatment of indian soldiers in kargill is the proof of the jihadic mindset of the pak army.
Weell, cricket, what has that to do with a jihadists.

Saw this on unplugged - and checked out The NEWS` website and it is true.
WHy do pakistanis always resort to racism when dealing with Indians.
the website is http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/nov2003-daily/07-11-2003/oped/o5.htm

I guess, as my friend says it appears to be hardwired into the system - so every generation resorts to the same image and racism.

The author of the article says ``This being a money matter, and the Hindu ``Banya`` being extremely sensitive on such matter...``

I wonder why the pakistanis like ROMAIR and others donot say anything about this but are cry fowl when in the US .....

#8 khotasikka

bhidooo, kya sayee baat bola rey...

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Mr. Gul

I was attacking your religious beliefs?!

You can surely read English, so the fault must be somewhere else....yes, it is in your dhimmihood :)

arjun_m, gujjubaniya , jay, rationalfaith , rsaxena....galaxy of stars, in one place and who is missing? oh yeah...urstruly, harimau and satsriakal..wish they could come and complete the quorum....;)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

...quit whining you little runt...

RationalFaith, your faith does not seem to have instilled any rationality in you. I put you in the same league as #6 and #11. How petty minded to attack religious beliefs. You feel so offended because your entire coloured image of Pakistan falls apart because of my beliefs.

``Oh Lord, forgive them for they do not know what they do``.

I am disappointed.

``The whole world knows Pakistan sponsors the Kashmir insurgency and yet you have the gall to say India blames Pakistan unreasonably?``

Ijaz_Gul is probably another nickname for AhmedZai. The difference is that under the Ahmedzai nick he makes no claims to any education or intelligence. As Ijaz_Gul he claims to rub shoulders with Putin, Bush, and Osama bin Laden every day :)

Yet, you will rarely find a person as ill-informed. Tragically, he also claims to be an Islamic dhimmi -that too, a Christian :(