Assassination is so common in Pakistan that anybody of any importance in the Land of the Purest must be wondering every day when it would be his or her turn. It was only on January 4 this year that Malik Mumtaz Hussain Qadri pumped in 27 bullets into Governor Salman Taseer (who also happens to be the nephew of one of Pakistan's greatest poets, Faiz Ahmed Faiz) to avenge the blasphemer and within two months we have another blasphemer, Shahbaz Bhatti, being 'taken care of' by the true and blue-blooded Believers.
So, what was Bhatti's crime ? He was appointed by the President Asif Ali Zardari to investigate the blasphemy charges under which a Christian mother of four kids, Ms. Aasia Bibi, is held in a Pakistani prison. His investigations found the charges to be false and he demanded her release. He also criticized the misuse of the Blasphemy Law (more about this in a while) in Pakistan. These are sufficiently incendiary demands for the frothing-at-the-mouth-corner jihadi Islamists who mill around every every conceivable space of Pakistan. Under the simple but effective expedient that anybody who speaks for a blasphemer is also a blasphemer, Mr. Bhatti became a marked man.
Governor Salman Taseer was killed by his own security guard but Shahbaz Bhatti was killed by the lack of a security detail. Bhatti's requests for enhanced security, like shifting of his residence to a more secure place or access to a bullet-proof car were 'not entertained' eventhough everybody and his uncle as well as aunt knew that he was a prime candidate in the hit list of the Islamist jihadi terrorists. In any other country, such a person would have been protected much better, but not in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. This assassination reeks of a similar one that took place in Rawalpindi on December 27, 2007. The similarity was not in the execution but in the way the 'Deep State' enabled such an event to take place. The State knew that Ms. Benazir Bhutto was the highest in the hit list of the terrorists. How can one be sure that the State knew ? Well, it was the State that sponsored the assassination in the first place after all. In order to facilitate the murderers, the State thinned out the security cover for Ms. Bhutto that evening.
In Bhatti's case, there are two versions. One speaks of Bhatti demanding a much enhanced security for himself following repeated death threats and the other quotes the Inspector General of Police, Islamabad claiming that Bhatti actually discarded his security cover. Obviously, both cannot be true at the same time. As in the case of Ms. Bhutto's assassination, when the 'Deep State' announced that she died because of her head hitting the heavy lever of the sun-roof of her SUV, one can expect to hear in the coming days various excuses being proferred by the Islamic Republic. In the case of Governor Taseer, the Deep State deliberately allowed a known extremist with links to a well-known outfit, and who was found unfit for police work, being given the job of a bodyguard to protect a man who was again high on the hit-list. Apparently, Qadri had informed the fellow bodyguards in the squad of his plan and asked them not to shoot him down, a request to which the others agreed. So, he emptied the full magazine into Governor Taseer without let or hindrance. It shows the extent of the spread of extremism within the police. The military is no better. The general society can be assumed to be equally afflicted with this extremist and jihadi mindset because the police and the armed forces are nothing but a microcosm of the much larger society. In fact, if the more disciplined armed forces are that bad, the society must be even worse. It is said that “First the gods make crazy those whom they wish to destroy”. The Deep State first makes such persons 'sitting ducks'. The end result is the same in both cases.
When Governor Taseer was murdered, there were some anguished Pakistanis. This time around, that number will be far less because Bhatti was after all a kafir. More importantly, those minuscule number of Pakistanis who may feel genuinely anguished, would be more immune now to a shock like this and might also feel intimidated. They should be because the State looks on helplessly as these things unravel. But, what else can one expect in a country after such medieval laws as the Hudood or Blasphemy etc were passed ? As usual, it was Gen. Zia-ul-Haq who takes the blame for this black law though it must be understood that it was after all the 'Socialist' Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto who irrevocably set the Islamization process in Pakistan.
Gen. Zia decided to introduce Nizam-e-mustafa, which required all laws to be based on Islamic injunctions. This resulted in the introduction of such abominable laws as Hudood (the only other Islamic country to have that law is Saudi Arabia), just to please the Saudi monarchy which was bankrolling Pakistan including its nuclear weapon project. He also introduced sections 295-B & C in Pakistan Penal Code that comprise what is more popularly known as the Blasphemy Law (Tahafooz-e-Namoos-e-Risalat). Section 295-B states “Whoever wilfully defiles, damages or desecrates a copy of the Holy Quran or of an extract therefrom, or uses it in any derogatory manner or for any unlawful purpose shall be punishable with imprisonment for life.” This has come very convenient and handy for implicating non-Muslims in blasphemy cases. {Under the Hudood Laws of Pakistan, a raped woman has to produce four male witnesses of pious standing who can testify to the actual act of penetration. If not, the woman will be arrested under adultery.}
In circa 1991, the Federal Shariah Court struck down a provision of the Blasphemy Law that allowed life imprisonment instead of death for acts of blasphemy and opined that only death was permissible under the Islamic shariah. When Ms Benazir Bhutto criticized this ruling, a fatwa was issued in 1992 by the then Religious Affairs minister of Pakistan, Maulana Abdul Sattar Niazi, who was also an Islamic cleric as his title suggests, calling her a kafir for acting in an unIslamic way. Many Pakistanis have taken this law into their own hands to settle personal issues, especially with the minorities. Such people are never arrested or punished. Usually, the blasphemy cases result in the award of death sentence for the accused in lower courts and there will be relief only in the highest court. The lower courts generally award death because of the fear that the judges of the lower courts have of the frenzied mobs which intimidate them. Usually in the lower courts, on the day of the judgement, the courts are pasted with banners and posters demanding death and warning against leniency invoking the Quran in support and there would normally be a super charged environment. In c. 2008, a Hindu factory worker in Karachi was killed by his Muslim colleagues for alleged blasphemy even as the police remained as mute spectators. Any non-Muslim should be really insane to blaspheme in a country where 97% are Muslims and where death is the only punishment for that crime. Later enquiries revealed that the Hindu worker did not blaspheme but was simply qurelous in nature. Blasphemy came handy to get rid of him once and for all. How easy ! In c. 1997, a judge of the Lahore High Court, Arif Iqbal Hussain Bhatti (what a coincidence of the name) , was assassinated in his chambers for releasing two prisoners, young Christian boys, accused of blasphemy. Later, in April 2009, the Federal Shariat Court confirmed again that only death sentence was possible in cases involving blasphemy, dismissing an appeal against death sentence for blasphemy.
The Human Rights Council of Pakistan (HRCP) estimates that the number of blasphemers booked in Pakistan under the infamous Blasphemy Law far exceeds those punished for the same crime in the entire 1400 year old history of Islam. In addition, the Blasphemy Law has become convenient for settling private scores with the members of non-Muslim community as well as rob them of their valuables and property. Once somebody accuses another of blasphemy, life becomes miserable for the accused. He or she is sure to be hounded out and killed even if eventually freed by the Supreme Court. For the other members of the family, life turns upside down immediately.
So, when a leading member of the ruling Pakistan Peoples' Party, Ms. Sherry Rehman proposed meaningful changes that would prevent such incidents, one naturally felt sorry for her bravado. Even the Great Dictator Gen. Musharraf at the peak of his power could not change these Laws. He had to beat a hasty retreat from such an attempt that would have even then only made cosmetic changes. Ms. Rehman's proposal was therefore not expected to even scratch the surface leave alone making a dent. So, when she introduved a Private Member’s Bill calling for amending the death sentence provision in the Blasphemy Law, the infuriated right-wing politico-religious parties and extremist organizations called for a nationwide strike, and the nervous Religious Minister, Syed Khursheed Shah, firmly announced that no change would be made to the Blasphemy Law and affirmed government’s commitment to the Law on the floor of the National Assembly. The Prime Minister, Mr. Gilani, confirmed the Minister's assertion a few days later to cool down the tempers. Ms. Rehman's bill was later withdrawn, on her own volition or not we do not know.
Thus the issue of Blasphemy remains a crowning glory on the much blotted face of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Certainly, a nuclear Pakistan is heading for severe radicalization and is a grave threat to countries in the region and beyond, especially India.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
The 26/11 Case - How Pakistan and its Judiciary Help the Terrorists - Part III
Pakistan's diplomatic ploy against India is quite well known and has been evolving with changing circumstances. However, there is a fundamental and constant foundation on which it operates: perfidy. Pakistan has been denying for long that it has any terrorists at all targetting India though everyone knows that Pakistan-sponsored terrorism has been the story since 1947. It claimed furtively that the terrorist attacks in India were purely indigenous. Indeed, terror was the tactic that the Muslim League used in pre-partition India during the last phase. No wonder that an independent Pakistan, implacably obsessed with India, chose to carry on with terror as a weapon. Once, terror could no longer be plausibly denied, as proof was coming thick and fast, Pakistan blamed inflamed passion generated by the long-running Kashmir question as the root cause, little recognizing that it had a legal, moral and binding responsibility to prevent such terrorist activities, inflammation notwithstanding !
Then it blamed India itself for amassing 700,000 troops along the Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) border and yet being unable to stop infiltration of the terrorists. Yet, there has never been a single instance of Pakistan having caught even one such terrorist infilitrator trying to cross into India. It is as though Pakistan wants to present the face of a disinterested spectator in this whole drama. On the other hand, it is well known that it provides covering fire and diversionary attacks to make it easy for these jihadi infiltrators to sneak into India. Mr. Zardari's flight of fancy has resulted in a new term 'non-state actors' as though it is again not Pakistan's responsibility and international committment to arrest these terrorists, dismantle their outfits and prosecute them, let alone prosecute speedily. When things reach a difficult stage where it becomes indefensible for Pakistan anymore, it invokes the sob-story of itself being a great victim of terrorism. What a travesty and what a pathetic performance !! Its citizens, elite and ordinary alike, partake this shameful and disgusting performance of mendacity. If international pressure mounts further, it promises actions, only to speak with a forked tongue and make just the very minimal efforts to give the appearance of some action being taken with tantalizingly more to follow only to be belied later.
In the case of 26/11 probe and prosecution, it has done all these and in addition blamed India also for not providing it with concrete evidence, forgetting that evidence is what it should establish for the events that took place within its borders and against the terrorists who operate from there !!! It was in this context that the Indian Home Minister, P.Chidambaram stated "If it is half-baked, they (Pakistan) are welcome to bake it fully". So, when the then Indian National Security Adviser, M.K.Narayanan, said towards end of August, 2009, that he did not expect Pakistan to proceed much further as "They’ve done just enough to take the heat off them from the West.", it was not only an accurate assessmnet but also indicated India's conclusion that it would be futile to expect any further movement by Pakistan. The accuracy of the above Indian assessment is proved by the fact that even two years later, by March 2011, only one witness had taken the stand and already three judges have heard the case.
Therefore, when Makhdoom Shah Mehmood Qureshi promised that serious action would take place in the courtrooms from October 3, 2009, nobody in India believed it. Pakistan has not belied such Indian (non-)expectations. On October 3, 2009, the Trial Judge was taken ill and so the hearing was postponed for the sixth time in the previous two months ! Rehman Malik had said that the nine accused would be formally indicted on September 26 and then Qureshi had promised that a full fledged trial would positively start on October 3 and yet none of these milestones was met. Finally, the accused were chargesheeted only on October 10th. But, framing the chargesheet itself was wrought with high drama. There was an on-going siege of the General Headquarters (GHQ) of the Pakistani Army at Rawalpindi on that very same day and the ATC judge therefore asked the defence lawyers to leave the court to save their lives and not be caught in traffic jam and stranded while he bravely went ahead with framing the accused ! {I have really not made this up} After thus asking the defence lawyers to run for their lives even when they protested that they would stay behind, the Judge asked the prosecution lawyers and the accused to appear before him and he framed the charges. The accused refused to accept the charges citing the absence of their lawyers and the chargesheet being in English. The Judge should have very well known that the defence, which even otherwise was raising objection after objection to delay and kill the case, would surely object to this flouting of law at the next hearing and yet he went ahead with this ! What a convenient ruse to delay the case further ! Pakistan makes every attempt to stifle this case and it gives us great merriment to chronicle their efforts and expose them. If the Judge cannot be accused of being hand in glove with the terrorists and their lawyers in giving them loopholes to challenge the very process of framing charges and thus delay the proceedings, can anyone disagree with that ?
Two days later the spirit of the jihadi camp was mightily lifted when the jihadi-pasand Lahore High Court dismissed the twin charges (of inciting jihad and collecting funds for jihad) against Professor Hafeez Saeed saheb. It said, inter alia, "Anti-terror law does not apply to Saeed," because JuD was not a banned organization in Pakistan ! It is thus very clear that either Pakistani government failed to prove that LeT and JuD were one and the same and were involving themselves in terrorism and jihad or the Lahore High Court did not accept such proof in order to help the terrorists. It is also possible that both were true. Of course, the United Nations' Security Council (UNSC) had already declared, in December 2008 itself, JuD as a terrorist organization which was binding on all member countries but apparently not in Pakistan !! Later, Interior Minister Abdul Rehman would offer weak excuses that since JuD was already declared as a terrorist organization by the UNSC itself, Pakistan did not deem it necessary to issue such a declaration within Pakistan. For its part, the Punjab government confirmed that JuD was only on a 'watch list' as it was a charity organization. What was most striking was the speed with which the Lahore High Court disposed of this case, less than a month, in contrast with the 26/11 trial at ATC-II at Adiala prison.
Back in the ATC-II, there was more drama to come when the court re-convened on October 17 for the hearing. As was expected, the defence lawyers protested serving of chargesheets to their clients in their absence the previous week. The lawyers boycotted the proceedings and the Judge, Baqir Ali Rana, promptly postponed the hearings to October 24th. Meanwhile, India decided to send to ATC-II, court-certified copies of witness depositions as well as the deposition of the Judge to whom Kasab confessed. Two days later, and before the next adjourned hearing, Justice Baqir Ali Rana of ATC-II, Adiala refused to take any further part in the hearings and asked the Lahore High Court to recuse him from the case due to "unavoidable personal reasons". News reports said that the judge felt that his position had been made "vulnerable" because of the move to conduct the proceedings behind closed doors. Thus the 'gag order' he himself issued came back to haunt him ? Or, was he forced to issue the 'gag-order' in the first place ?
In the meanwhile, in the jihadi-pasand Lahore High Court (LHC), another case came up for hearing and that pertained to the one filed by Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi asking the LHC to transfer the case out of Justice Baqir Ali Rana's court as he was acting under directions from the Interior Minister, Rehman Malik. Thus, both the Judge and the accused wanted the case to be out ! So, the LHC appointed a new judge on Octoer 24 to conduct this all important case !
(To Be Continued . . . )
Then it blamed India itself for amassing 700,000 troops along the Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) border and yet being unable to stop infiltration of the terrorists. Yet, there has never been a single instance of Pakistan having caught even one such terrorist infilitrator trying to cross into India. It is as though Pakistan wants to present the face of a disinterested spectator in this whole drama. On the other hand, it is well known that it provides covering fire and diversionary attacks to make it easy for these jihadi infiltrators to sneak into India. Mr. Zardari's flight of fancy has resulted in a new term 'non-state actors' as though it is again not Pakistan's responsibility and international committment to arrest these terrorists, dismantle their outfits and prosecute them, let alone prosecute speedily. When things reach a difficult stage where it becomes indefensible for Pakistan anymore, it invokes the sob-story of itself being a great victim of terrorism. What a travesty and what a pathetic performance !! Its citizens, elite and ordinary alike, partake this shameful and disgusting performance of mendacity. If international pressure mounts further, it promises actions, only to speak with a forked tongue and make just the very minimal efforts to give the appearance of some action being taken with tantalizingly more to follow only to be belied later.
In the case of 26/11 probe and prosecution, it has done all these and in addition blamed India also for not providing it with concrete evidence, forgetting that evidence is what it should establish for the events that took place within its borders and against the terrorists who operate from there !!! It was in this context that the Indian Home Minister, P.Chidambaram stated "If it is half-baked, they (Pakistan) are welcome to bake it fully". So, when the then Indian National Security Adviser, M.K.Narayanan, said towards end of August, 2009, that he did not expect Pakistan to proceed much further as "They’ve done just enough to take the heat off them from the West.", it was not only an accurate assessmnet but also indicated India's conclusion that it would be futile to expect any further movement by Pakistan. The accuracy of the above Indian assessment is proved by the fact that even two years later, by March 2011, only one witness had taken the stand and already three judges have heard the case.
Therefore, when Makhdoom Shah Mehmood Qureshi promised that serious action would take place in the courtrooms from October 3, 2009, nobody in India believed it. Pakistan has not belied such Indian (non-)expectations. On October 3, 2009, the Trial Judge was taken ill and so the hearing was postponed for the sixth time in the previous two months ! Rehman Malik had said that the nine accused would be formally indicted on September 26 and then Qureshi had promised that a full fledged trial would positively start on October 3 and yet none of these milestones was met. Finally, the accused were chargesheeted only on October 10th. But, framing the chargesheet itself was wrought with high drama. There was an on-going siege of the General Headquarters (GHQ) of the Pakistani Army at Rawalpindi on that very same day and the ATC judge therefore asked the defence lawyers to leave the court to save their lives and not be caught in traffic jam and stranded while he bravely went ahead with framing the accused ! {I have really not made this up} After thus asking the defence lawyers to run for their lives even when they protested that they would stay behind, the Judge asked the prosecution lawyers and the accused to appear before him and he framed the charges. The accused refused to accept the charges citing the absence of their lawyers and the chargesheet being in English. The Judge should have very well known that the defence, which even otherwise was raising objection after objection to delay and kill the case, would surely object to this flouting of law at the next hearing and yet he went ahead with this ! What a convenient ruse to delay the case further ! Pakistan makes every attempt to stifle this case and it gives us great merriment to chronicle their efforts and expose them. If the Judge cannot be accused of being hand in glove with the terrorists and their lawyers in giving them loopholes to challenge the very process of framing charges and thus delay the proceedings, can anyone disagree with that ?
Two days later the spirit of the jihadi camp was mightily lifted when the jihadi-pasand Lahore High Court dismissed the twin charges (of inciting jihad and collecting funds for jihad) against Professor Hafeez Saeed saheb. It said, inter alia, "Anti-terror law does not apply to Saeed," because JuD was not a banned organization in Pakistan ! It is thus very clear that either Pakistani government failed to prove that LeT and JuD were one and the same and were involving themselves in terrorism and jihad or the Lahore High Court did not accept such proof in order to help the terrorists. It is also possible that both were true. Of course, the United Nations' Security Council (UNSC) had already declared, in December 2008 itself, JuD as a terrorist organization which was binding on all member countries but apparently not in Pakistan !! Later, Interior Minister Abdul Rehman would offer weak excuses that since JuD was already declared as a terrorist organization by the UNSC itself, Pakistan did not deem it necessary to issue such a declaration within Pakistan. For its part, the Punjab government confirmed that JuD was only on a 'watch list' as it was a charity organization. What was most striking was the speed with which the Lahore High Court disposed of this case, less than a month, in contrast with the 26/11 trial at ATC-II at Adiala prison.
Back in the ATC-II, there was more drama to come when the court re-convened on October 17 for the hearing. As was expected, the defence lawyers protested serving of chargesheets to their clients in their absence the previous week. The lawyers boycotted the proceedings and the Judge, Baqir Ali Rana, promptly postponed the hearings to October 24th. Meanwhile, India decided to send to ATC-II, court-certified copies of witness depositions as well as the deposition of the Judge to whom Kasab confessed. Two days later, and before the next adjourned hearing, Justice Baqir Ali Rana of ATC-II, Adiala refused to take any further part in the hearings and asked the Lahore High Court to recuse him from the case due to "unavoidable personal reasons". News reports said that the judge felt that his position had been made "vulnerable" because of the move to conduct the proceedings behind closed doors. Thus the 'gag order' he himself issued came back to haunt him ? Or, was he forced to issue the 'gag-order' in the first place ?
In the meanwhile, in the jihadi-pasand Lahore High Court (LHC), another case came up for hearing and that pertained to the one filed by Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi asking the LHC to transfer the case out of Justice Baqir Ali Rana's court as he was acting under directions from the Interior Minister, Rehman Malik. Thus, both the Judge and the accused wanted the case to be out ! So, the LHC appointed a new judge on Octoer 24 to conduct this all important case !
(To Be Continued . . . )
Saturday, February 26, 2011
The 26/11 Case - How Pakistan and its Judiciary Help the Terrorists - Part II
After framing the charges against the seven accused (two in absentia), the Anti Terrorism Court-II (ATC-II) at Adiala adjourned the hearing by a week until July 24, 2009, by which time the Sharm-el-Sheikh meeting was scheduled to be over. We know that Hammad Amin facilitated funds and hideouts for the prepetrators of the attacks, while Mazhar Iqbal was handler, Abdul Wajid and Shahid Jamil were facilitators. (Two other associates, Jamil Ahmed & Younus Anjum, were later arrested.) Expectedly, when the next hearing came up on July 24, 2009, the Honourable Court adjourned further hearing by a month but not before a startling revelation was made. Contrary to reports that stated that a week earlier, charges had been framed against all the accused, the government's prosecutor, Malik Rab Nawaz Noon, said formal charges against the accused had not yet been framed. Even by September, 2009, it was not clear if the suspects had been indicted and for what because the FIA had prepared two sets of chargesheets. Since the ATC has ordered strict censoring of proceedings in the media and since the entire proceeding is in-camera with no journalists allowed (contrary to how India conducted the Ajmal Kasab case), the information has been sketchy and not authentic. In his order on the blackout of proceedings, Justice Baqir Ali Rana, the trial court judge said, "the proceedings would be kept totally secret and not published in any manner as the case had implications for national security and national interests". The ATC's order on in-camera trial is obviously to prevent the relationship between the Pakistani Army and the terrorists from being aired in the public. India was outraged and objected strongly to the secret trial but it did not register in Pakistan. This lack of public information also helps the Pakistani government to fudge the issue and present it with whichever spin it wants, hiding under the twin excuses of a pending trial and the gag order by the court. Having got what it wanted in Sharm-el-Sheikh, Pakistan now went back on what it promised to Ms. Hillary Clinton and the Indian Government. Every step forward was immediately followed by several steps backward by Pakistan. Nothing unusual there regarding Pakistani behaviour.
Meanwhile, in India, on July 20, 2009, Kasab (alias abu Mujahid, a name given him by the redoubtable Prof. Hafeez Saeed saheb himself, no less, at the Chekhalabandi Mountain Terror Camp near Muzaffarabad) made a startling confession before a magistrate, Ms. Sawant Waghule who explained to him that this confession could be used against him and also gave him 72 hours to ponder over the implications of his request to confess. In his confession, he explained in detail about the training he had undergone in the hands of various LeT commanders including Prof. Hafeez Saeed and Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi (alias Abu Wahed Irshad Ahmad). He also narrated the entire sequence of what transpired from the time he joined LeT to the time he was captured by that selfless martyr Assistant Sub Inspector Tukaram Omble. Of course, Kasab's confession has been corroborated by several eye witness accounts (including a brave 10-year old girl, Devika, who is crippled by Kasab's firing at the Chhatrapati Shivaji railway terminus), electronic records (such as video footages, data from the five GPS devices and a satellite phone recovered from the terrorists), ballistic evidence, trace of the geographical locations of the IP (Internet Protocol) addresses used, visual evidence by photojournalists from Times of India who captured vividly his terror spree, and various other evidences painstakingly gathered. In the court, Kasab's attorney, Abbas Kazmi, urged the judge to accept the entire confession and not to prolong the trial, a request that was rejected by the Judge saying that complete guilt must be established through a trial even though the criminal had confessed (only partially in Kasab's case). Three weeks later, Kasab would plead guilty to all charges framed against him.
Expectedly, the Pakistani Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar rejected the confession as induced under duress, thus proving yet again that Pakistan was continuing to live under denial. A few days later, July 29 to be precise, Pakistan's Attorney General and a close confidante of President Zardari, Latif Khosa (who has recently become Governor of the Punjab province after the assassination of Gov. Salman Taseer), said that JuD Chief could not be prosecuted because there was no evidence against him. The very next day, the Pakistani newspaper DAWN carried a report that Lakhvi and Shah had confessed to their involvement in the 26/11 terrorist attack. On August 1, India sent the certified copy of Kasab's confession to Pakistan along with interrogation reports of Fahim Ansari and Sahabuddin Ahmed.
However, the euphoria raised in India by the dossier that was sent by Pakistan on the eve of the Sharm-el-Sheikh meeting, because Pakistan accepted culpability for the action of the terrorists in that dossier for the first time, soon evaportaed on closer examination of the document. It disproved the DAWN report that Lakhvi and Shah had confessed to their crimes. It was indeed only the two lower level operatives, Hammad Amin Sadiq and Shahid Jamil Riaz who had confessed to "their guilt and their contribution in planning, preparing, financing, arranging boats, logistics, training, facilitating and launching LeT terrorist attacks from Karachi and Thath to Mumbai." The dossier did not link Kasab or the two Pakistani confessors to Lakhvi, Shah and Mazhar Iqbal alias Abu-al-Qama. The dossier did not detail any findings against these three accused as well. There was no voice sample analysis done to establish their role. In short, the dossier gave the impression that Pakistan was simply unwilling to take the investigation beyond those two low-level operatives and go all the way up to its logical end which probably would have implicated Gen. Musharraf, Lt. Gen. Kayani and Prof. Hafeez Saeed.
A further proof of this unwillingness was to come soon when on August 3, the Pakistani Supreme Court indefinitely adjourned a hearing challenging the release of Prof. Hafeez Saeed ostensibly due to the resignation of Punjab's Advocate General Raza Farooq. Another excuse ! On August 6, 2009, the Interpol announced Pakistan's request for lookout and arrest of 13 more Pakistani foot soldiers who were connected with the 26/11 attack. It was becoming clearer that Pakistan was more interested in lower level terrorists and was quite unwilling or unable (or both) to touch more senior leaders and masterminds. Meanwhile, the Interpol also issued red corner notices (RCNs) for Prof. Hafeez Saeed and Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi based on the arrest warrants issued by the Mumbai court of Special Judge M.L. Tahaliyani. The Pakistani Interior Minister Mr. Rehman Malik was quick to react when he said that even if a red corner notice had been issued against Professor saheb, the government was not obliged to immediately arrest him. “The country makes its own investigations against the person, and only then decides,” Mr. Malik said. He also said that the evidence provided by India in three dossiers "is, in our considered view, not sufficient to link Hafiz Saeed to the (Mumbai) attack". Even before the Indian evidence could be presented to the Court or even analyzed by his lawyers, it was shot down by Rehman Malik, an ex-police officer. This has been the pattern. It has been a battle of wits between a top notch lawyer like the Indian Home Minister P. Chidambaram claiming that there was sufficient evidence to prosecute Prof. Hafeez Saeed with the ex-police officer rejecting the same out of hand and immediately.
Finally, on September 19, the Interior Minister Rehman Malik confirmed that no charges had been so far framed against any of the accused (now totalling nine) and that would be done at the next hearing of the ATC, Adiala on September 26. Simultaneously, reports also appeared of Prof. Hafeez Saeed's house arrest on September 21, though Pakistani newspapers also spoke of his 'movement being restricted for his own security'. The 'arrest' came ten days after he had been invited as a guest for an iftaar party hosted by the Lahore-based X Corps of the Pakistani Army ! This in spite of an Interpol RCN pending against him ! As Indian Foreign Ministers were expected to meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meeting at New York on September 27, Pakistan slapped two First Information Reports (FIRs) against Prof. Hafeez Saeed for his speech glorifying jihad against kafir on August 27 & 28 and for collecting funds. Ostensibly, the FIRs were delayed until after the iftaar at the Army Command ! When questioned about this development, Prime Minister Gilani vaguely referred to Prof. Hafeez Saeed being 'in custody' even as Prof. Hafeez Saeed's lawyer claimed that the restriction was only against him leading the Eid prayer at the Gadaffi stadium and there was no restriction otherwise, a fact borne out by a NY Times reporter later. Two days later a petition was filed in the Lahore High Court to quash the investigation. However, Interior Minister Rehman Malik sought more time from India to investigate the role of the detained JuD chief Hafiz Mohd Saeed thus making it appear as though some progress was being made !
Then September 26 came and went quietly by. Unlike what was promised by Rehman Malik, no charge was framed against the accused as the Judge went on leave and the hearing was once again adjourned as it had happened so many times before. The Judges retire, or go on leave or get transferred all the time in Pakistan, especially in the 26/11 case. Contrast this with how the case proceeded in India to understand the various means that Pakistan resorts to blunt the wheels of justice.
In their New York meeting on September 27, Pakistan's Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi assured his Indian counterpart, S.M. Krishna that the formal trial would start on October 3, 2009 !! Pakistan had given several such assurances to India from Jinnah downwards, only to be flouted in the very next breath and Makhdoom would turn out to be no exception.
(To Be Continued. . .)
Meanwhile, in India, on July 20, 2009, Kasab (alias abu Mujahid, a name given him by the redoubtable Prof. Hafeez Saeed saheb himself, no less, at the Chekhalabandi Mountain Terror Camp near Muzaffarabad) made a startling confession before a magistrate, Ms. Sawant Waghule who explained to him that this confession could be used against him and also gave him 72 hours to ponder over the implications of his request to confess. In his confession, he explained in detail about the training he had undergone in the hands of various LeT commanders including Prof. Hafeez Saeed and Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi (alias Abu Wahed Irshad Ahmad). He also narrated the entire sequence of what transpired from the time he joined LeT to the time he was captured by that selfless martyr Assistant Sub Inspector Tukaram Omble. Of course, Kasab's confession has been corroborated by several eye witness accounts (including a brave 10-year old girl, Devika, who is crippled by Kasab's firing at the Chhatrapati Shivaji railway terminus), electronic records (such as video footages, data from the five GPS devices and a satellite phone recovered from the terrorists), ballistic evidence, trace of the geographical locations of the IP (Internet Protocol) addresses used, visual evidence by photojournalists from Times of India who captured vividly his terror spree, and various other evidences painstakingly gathered. In the court, Kasab's attorney, Abbas Kazmi, urged the judge to accept the entire confession and not to prolong the trial, a request that was rejected by the Judge saying that complete guilt must be established through a trial even though the criminal had confessed (only partially in Kasab's case). Three weeks later, Kasab would plead guilty to all charges framed against him.
Expectedly, the Pakistani Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar rejected the confession as induced under duress, thus proving yet again that Pakistan was continuing to live under denial. A few days later, July 29 to be precise, Pakistan's Attorney General and a close confidante of President Zardari, Latif Khosa (who has recently become Governor of the Punjab province after the assassination of Gov. Salman Taseer), said that JuD Chief could not be prosecuted because there was no evidence against him. The very next day, the Pakistani newspaper DAWN carried a report that Lakhvi and Shah had confessed to their involvement in the 26/11 terrorist attack. On August 1, India sent the certified copy of Kasab's confession to Pakistan along with interrogation reports of Fahim Ansari and Sahabuddin Ahmed.
However, the euphoria raised in India by the dossier that was sent by Pakistan on the eve of the Sharm-el-Sheikh meeting, because Pakistan accepted culpability for the action of the terrorists in that dossier for the first time, soon evaportaed on closer examination of the document. It disproved the DAWN report that Lakhvi and Shah had confessed to their crimes. It was indeed only the two lower level operatives, Hammad Amin Sadiq and Shahid Jamil Riaz who had confessed to "their guilt and their contribution in planning, preparing, financing, arranging boats, logistics, training, facilitating and launching LeT terrorist attacks from Karachi and Thath to Mumbai." The dossier did not link Kasab or the two Pakistani confessors to Lakhvi, Shah and Mazhar Iqbal alias Abu-al-Qama. The dossier did not detail any findings against these three accused as well. There was no voice sample analysis done to establish their role. In short, the dossier gave the impression that Pakistan was simply unwilling to take the investigation beyond those two low-level operatives and go all the way up to its logical end which probably would have implicated Gen. Musharraf, Lt. Gen. Kayani and Prof. Hafeez Saeed.
A further proof of this unwillingness was to come soon when on August 3, the Pakistani Supreme Court indefinitely adjourned a hearing challenging the release of Prof. Hafeez Saeed ostensibly due to the resignation of Punjab's Advocate General Raza Farooq. Another excuse ! On August 6, 2009, the Interpol announced Pakistan's request for lookout and arrest of 13 more Pakistani foot soldiers who were connected with the 26/11 attack. It was becoming clearer that Pakistan was more interested in lower level terrorists and was quite unwilling or unable (or both) to touch more senior leaders and masterminds. Meanwhile, the Interpol also issued red corner notices (RCNs) for Prof. Hafeez Saeed and Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi based on the arrest warrants issued by the Mumbai court of Special Judge M.L. Tahaliyani. The Pakistani Interior Minister Mr. Rehman Malik was quick to react when he said that even if a red corner notice had been issued against Professor saheb, the government was not obliged to immediately arrest him. “The country makes its own investigations against the person, and only then decides,” Mr. Malik said. He also said that the evidence provided by India in three dossiers "is, in our considered view, not sufficient to link Hafiz Saeed to the (Mumbai) attack". Even before the Indian evidence could be presented to the Court or even analyzed by his lawyers, it was shot down by Rehman Malik, an ex-police officer. This has been the pattern. It has been a battle of wits between a top notch lawyer like the Indian Home Minister P. Chidambaram claiming that there was sufficient evidence to prosecute Prof. Hafeez Saeed with the ex-police officer rejecting the same out of hand and immediately.
Finally, on September 19, the Interior Minister Rehman Malik confirmed that no charges had been so far framed against any of the accused (now totalling nine) and that would be done at the next hearing of the ATC, Adiala on September 26. Simultaneously, reports also appeared of Prof. Hafeez Saeed's house arrest on September 21, though Pakistani newspapers also spoke of his 'movement being restricted for his own security'. The 'arrest' came ten days after he had been invited as a guest for an iftaar party hosted by the Lahore-based X Corps of the Pakistani Army ! This in spite of an Interpol RCN pending against him ! As Indian Foreign Ministers were expected to meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meeting at New York on September 27, Pakistan slapped two First Information Reports (FIRs) against Prof. Hafeez Saeed for his speech glorifying jihad against kafir on August 27 & 28 and for collecting funds. Ostensibly, the FIRs were delayed until after the iftaar at the Army Command ! When questioned about this development, Prime Minister Gilani vaguely referred to Prof. Hafeez Saeed being 'in custody' even as Prof. Hafeez Saeed's lawyer claimed that the restriction was only against him leading the Eid prayer at the Gadaffi stadium and there was no restriction otherwise, a fact borne out by a NY Times reporter later. Two days later a petition was filed in the Lahore High Court to quash the investigation. However, Interior Minister Rehman Malik sought more time from India to investigate the role of the detained JuD chief Hafiz Mohd Saeed thus making it appear as though some progress was being made !
Then September 26 came and went quietly by. Unlike what was promised by Rehman Malik, no charge was framed against the accused as the Judge went on leave and the hearing was once again adjourned as it had happened so many times before. The Judges retire, or go on leave or get transferred all the time in Pakistan, especially in the 26/11 case. Contrast this with how the case proceeded in India to understand the various means that Pakistan resorts to blunt the wheels of justice.
In their New York meeting on September 27, Pakistan's Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi assured his Indian counterpart, S.M. Krishna that the formal trial would start on October 3, 2009 !! Pakistan had given several such assurances to India from Jinnah downwards, only to be flouted in the very next breath and Makhdoom would turn out to be no exception.
(To Be Continued. . .)
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
The 26/11 Case - How Pakistan and its Judiciary Help the Terrorists - Part I
The Honourable High Court of Mumbai has confirmed the death sentence awarded by the Special Judge M.L. Tahliani in a lower court to the lone surving terrorist of the 26/11 Mumbai urban warfare carnage. Ajmal Amir Kasab was caught red handed, video footage electronic records show this jihadi rambo shooting from the hip calmly at innocent and unarmed men, women and children, there is his voluntary confession before a magistrate and yet due process of law has been followed so far with enough opportunities given to the accused (now a convict) to defend his case. A remorseless and unrepentant Ajmal Amir Kasab still has at least a couple of opportunities left, the appeal in the Supreme Court followed by a mercy petition to the President of India in case his death sentence is confirmed by the Supreme Court also. Who knows, he may even get a pardon from a President of India, most of whom do not want to hang any convict and have been deciding mercy petitions in favour of the convicts. It would be a shame if it were to happen but India will have to simply grin and bear it if that unfortunately comes to pass.
There are two aspects to the Kasab case. One was his criminal action of waging war against a democratically established Indian State, killing innocent citizens and fighting its Army and Police forces. The second was the conspiracy that was hatched and planned in Pakistan and then executed with Pakistani masterminds directing every step of the terrorists in Mumbai remotely all the time. The Indian investigative agencies and prosecutors have gone through the entire complex web as best as they can (in spite of total non-cooperation from Pakistan where the entire scheme was conceived, planned, funded, and manned). No doubt there have been some loose ends (especially Headley), but they do not materially alter the proceedings against Kasab per se.
The biggest difference is that the Indian court, prosecution and defence have been at it every single day since the court was constituted. Nobody can accuse them of resorting to extra judicial processes, delaying tactics etc., for any adjournments were genuine and warranted. On the other hand, Pakistani investigators have done very minimal work in exposing the crime, have constantly demanded evidence from India for even events that took place on their soil, and even when the players and masterminds live in their own country.
While Kasab, the foot soldier of the Lashkar-e-Tayba (LeT) has been given a death sentence by an Indian court, for anything else would simply be a travesty of justice of the highest order, the masterminds in Pakistan who sent him in on a fidayeen attack, live to plan and excute more such attacks. They have the active support of the Pakistani Army, Government, and the Judiciary. I have another blog on how the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has treated the chief of LeT (let us not kid that he is only the head of the charity organization Jama'at-ud Dawah, JuD, and that there is no organization called LeT any more). It can be seen here under the caption, "Prof. Hafeez Saeed, LeT, and the Support from the State of Pakistan". I would therefore limit myself in giving an overview in this piece and the following, about how farcically the Pakistani judiciary has acted in conducting the 'endless exercise' of the 26/11 case at their end.
The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) registered First Information Report (FIR) vide number 1 on February 12, 2009 (over two years back)under several sections of Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). It implicated seven persons including two in Indian custody, Ajmal Amir Kasab, a Pakistani and Fahim Ansari, an Indian. The remaining five, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, Abdul Wajid alias Zarar Shah of Sheikhupura, Mazhar Iqbal alias Abu Al-Qama of Islamabad, Shahid Jamil Riaz of Nasirabad Behawalpur and Hammad Amin of Rahimyar Khan are in custody at Adiala prison, Rawalpindi. Of these, Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, Hamad Amin and Zarar Shah are key founding members of LeT. Lakhvi, also known as 'Rehman chacha', is the Chief Operational Commander of the LeT. Zarar Shah is claimed to be the Communication Chief of the LeT and an urban warfare expert. Zarar Shah was the one of the calm voices (the other being that of Mazhar Iqbal alias Abu Al-Qama) that could be heard in telephone intercepts directing the operation at every step, urging the terrorists to kill their hostage in cold-blood and motivating the terrorists with visions of Paradise. These are very dangerous men who have conducted innumerable terrorist operations against India.
It was on March 4, 2009 that the in-camera trial of the seven accused started in the Anti terrorism Court II (ATC-II) in the Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi. On May 5, the Court distributed chargesheets to the accused. Soon, the judge hearing the case retired and therefore, without framing any charges, the case was postponed until a new judge was appointed. Why was a judge about to retire given this most important case at all except as a Pakistani perfidy to delay the hearing ? Days before the Sharm-el-Sheikh meeting of July 16, 2009, Pakistan handed over a dossier to India in which it claimed that Lakhvi was the mastermind behind the attack and Kasab was indeed a Paksitani. As has been the Pakistani practice, enough ground is conceded just before an important even only to be re-taken after that. For her part, Ms. Hillary Clinton predicted that there would be some movement in the next few days to enable Indian leaders a face-saving excuse to tell their citizens as to why at all India should agree to a talk at Sharm-el-Sheikh. On July 18, chargesheets were framed against the five accused.
(To Be Continued . . . )
There are two aspects to the Kasab case. One was his criminal action of waging war against a democratically established Indian State, killing innocent citizens and fighting its Army and Police forces. The second was the conspiracy that was hatched and planned in Pakistan and then executed with Pakistani masterminds directing every step of the terrorists in Mumbai remotely all the time. The Indian investigative agencies and prosecutors have gone through the entire complex web as best as they can (in spite of total non-cooperation from Pakistan where the entire scheme was conceived, planned, funded, and manned). No doubt there have been some loose ends (especially Headley), but they do not materially alter the proceedings against Kasab per se.
The biggest difference is that the Indian court, prosecution and defence have been at it every single day since the court was constituted. Nobody can accuse them of resorting to extra judicial processes, delaying tactics etc., for any adjournments were genuine and warranted. On the other hand, Pakistani investigators have done very minimal work in exposing the crime, have constantly demanded evidence from India for even events that took place on their soil, and even when the players and masterminds live in their own country.
While Kasab, the foot soldier of the Lashkar-e-Tayba (LeT) has been given a death sentence by an Indian court, for anything else would simply be a travesty of justice of the highest order, the masterminds in Pakistan who sent him in on a fidayeen attack, live to plan and excute more such attacks. They have the active support of the Pakistani Army, Government, and the Judiciary. I have another blog on how the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has treated the chief of LeT (let us not kid that he is only the head of the charity organization Jama'at-ud Dawah, JuD, and that there is no organization called LeT any more). It can be seen here under the caption, "Prof. Hafeez Saeed, LeT, and the Support from the State of Pakistan". I would therefore limit myself in giving an overview in this piece and the following, about how farcically the Pakistani judiciary has acted in conducting the 'endless exercise' of the 26/11 case at their end.
The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) registered First Information Report (FIR) vide number 1 on February 12, 2009 (over two years back)under several sections of Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). It implicated seven persons including two in Indian custody, Ajmal Amir Kasab, a Pakistani and Fahim Ansari, an Indian. The remaining five, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, Abdul Wajid alias Zarar Shah of Sheikhupura, Mazhar Iqbal alias Abu Al-Qama of Islamabad, Shahid Jamil Riaz of Nasirabad Behawalpur and Hammad Amin of Rahimyar Khan are in custody at Adiala prison, Rawalpindi. Of these, Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, Hamad Amin and Zarar Shah are key founding members of LeT. Lakhvi, also known as 'Rehman chacha', is the Chief Operational Commander of the LeT. Zarar Shah is claimed to be the Communication Chief of the LeT and an urban warfare expert. Zarar Shah was the one of the calm voices (the other being that of Mazhar Iqbal alias Abu Al-Qama) that could be heard in telephone intercepts directing the operation at every step, urging the terrorists to kill their hostage in cold-blood and motivating the terrorists with visions of Paradise. These are very dangerous men who have conducted innumerable terrorist operations against India.
It was on March 4, 2009 that the in-camera trial of the seven accused started in the Anti terrorism Court II (ATC-II) in the Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi. On May 5, the Court distributed chargesheets to the accused. Soon, the judge hearing the case retired and therefore, without framing any charges, the case was postponed until a new judge was appointed. Why was a judge about to retire given this most important case at all except as a Pakistani perfidy to delay the hearing ? Days before the Sharm-el-Sheikh meeting of July 16, 2009, Pakistan handed over a dossier to India in which it claimed that Lakhvi was the mastermind behind the attack and Kasab was indeed a Paksitani. As has been the Pakistani practice, enough ground is conceded just before an important even only to be re-taken after that. For her part, Ms. Hillary Clinton predicted that there would be some movement in the next few days to enable Indian leaders a face-saving excuse to tell their citizens as to why at all India should agree to a talk at Sharm-el-Sheikh. On July 18, chargesheets were framed against the five accused.
(To Be Continued . . . )
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
The Egyptian Turmoil and its Likely Impact on Pakistan
That Egypt is in deep turmoil is an understatement. Just a week before the troubles started there, there was an unprecedented wave of anger in Tunisia which saw the long-running autocracy of Zine el Abidine Ben Ali come to an end with Ben Ali seeking asylum in Saudi Arabia, the ultimate refuge for scoundrels of Islamic countries. The long-exiled religious leader of Tunisia, Rachid Ghannouchi, has returned invoking memories of the triumphant return from Paris of Ayatollah Khomeini thirty years back that has thrown a liberal Iran back to an Islamist state today. No wonder then that the Saudi monarchy, led by the octogenarian King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al Saud, has supported the long running autocracy of Hosni Mubarak as well. Another King Abdullah, a much younger one and this time of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, is also deeply worried as protests have surfaced there as well. Apart from other West Asian countries, which seem to be ripe for such a revolution, a la Orange, Rose and Pink Revolutions in Central Asian Republics about five years back, there are other countries in their immediate neighbourhood that may also be worried about the fall out of the on-going Egyptian crisis. One such country must be Pakistan, where the situation is far more critical and explosive than in Egypt or Tunisia or Jordan. While the Arab countries suffer from autocracy or autarchy, the situation in Pakistan is rapidly moving to anarchy. A worried Pakistani Prime Minister, Yousuf Raza Gilani, eager to scotch the idea of a ‘Green Revolution’ reacted to say that “the situation in Egypt and Tunisia cannot be compared with that of Pakistan as our institutions are working and democracy is functional”. This is certainly a blatant and unadulterated lie, something which Mr. Gilani seems to have said with a very straight face. Long before Mr. Gilani, a rampaging dictator, Gen. Zia-ul-Haq had justified to his American counterpart that a Muslim was permitted to lie for a good cause.
The Egyptian uprising seems to be well coordinated, with a simple message that the loudspeakers of mosques across the country seem to be carrying: “You have a right to protest”. People have taken this message to heart and have poured out to the city centres and town squares with the Egyptian Army seemingly standing as mute spectators. It will be impossible for the Army to fire upon the protestors or even use strong arm tactics, though it seems to engage in a show of strength to intimidate the protestors, a tactic that has borne no fruits so far. Curfews have had little effect as the Army is unwilling to enforce them for fear of bloodshed, after the police, target of people’s wrath, have simply disappeared. Hosni Mubarak’s replacement of the Prime Minister, appointment of a Vice-President and the reshuffle of the cabinet are merely cosmetic and are not going to materially alter the ground situation. The masses are protesting directly against Hosni Mubarak himself and therefore these changes are not going to cut any ice with them. The fact that foreign governments are evacuating their stranded citizens and even their consular staff and their family, go to show how serious the situation is.
Egypt’s recent history, at least since World War II, has been characterized by instability, violence and espousal of Islamist ideology. Even the relatively calm period of Hosni Mubarak after the assassination of Anwar Sadat has been punctuated by violent Islamist terrorist attacks now and then, court dramas, and ruthless police action. One has to look at recent history to understand the current situation perhaps.
When the Ottoman empire was dissolved in c. 1924, it left a deep sense of loss and listlessness among the Muslims of the world as a nearly 1300 years of Islamic Caliphate came to an end. The overwhelming might of the Western countries, against which the Muslims seemed to be utterly powerless, ignited an urge to seek inwards for solutions to their problem as the Believers imagined that Islam was in danger of being wiped out. Egypt was thus naturally pushed to a central stage in the revivalist movement. For long Al Azhar was the most important sunni theological centre. Islamist thinkers like Afghani, Mohammed Abdu and Rida had already laid the foundation for reform of Islam in consonance with modern and emerging world by arguing the case for ijtihad. In the turbulent times following World War I, the dissolution of the Caliphate and the rise to power of fiercely secular nationalist leader Kemal Ataturk in Turkey, was born a new star in Egypt, Hassan al Banna. He established the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwanul Muslimeen) in c. 1928. He is An important member of the modern day Islamist revivalist movement. He wrote Risalat-al-Jihad that has become fountainhead of indoctrination for modern day Islamists and jihadists. Another important pillar of the Egyptian movement was Syed Qutb. He was often described as ‘First thinker of Islam in our epoch’. Ayman al-Zawahiri, the important leader of the violent Al Gama al Islamiyyah of Egypt and later the second in command of Al Qaeda, has been shaped by Qutb’s thoughts.
The question here is not whether the current uprising is justified or not. Today, one can definitely see the hand of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan ul Muslimeen) behind this uprising. The exhortation from the mosques, the invisible hand that seems to coordinate the as yet leaderless unrest throughout the country all point in that direction. The sudden, united and synchronous chorus against the regime is otherwise impossible in a large country such as Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood is possibly exploiting the widespread feeling of disenchantment among the Egyptian masses for the unchanging Mubarak regime. However, a significant number of protestors also are against the entire gamut of politicians, both in the ruling National Democratic Party and the Opposition. This is certainly playing into the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood. The people’s anger is also directed against the ‘ugly’ Americans who are seen as having bought out this regime through aid packages etc. Recent Wikileaks revelations have come handy in this respect. The already simmering hatred for the Americans because of their steadfast support for the Israelis will only erupt more forcefully now. The Hosni Mubarak regime is thus finding that the American support is turning out to be an albatross around its neck.
The distance from Alexandria to Cairo (apprx. 220 Kms) is eerily similar to the distance from Lahore to Rawalpindi/Islamabad on the Grand Trunk Road (250 Kms). The 2009 Long March by lawyers, Nawaz Sharif and the masses forced an adamant Zardari to reinstate the deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. The Army intervened as the situation threatened to go out of control and the Americans began to put pressure on all stakeholders in the drama. President Zardari was forced to eat the humble pie very quickly. The probable Long March in 2011 as part of a Green Revolution can be violent and far more threatening than the earlier one as the deprived masses shepherded by the Islamist parties such as Jama’at-e-Islami (JI), both factions of Jama’at-Ulema-e-Islami (JUI), Jama’at-Ulema-e-Pakistan (JUP), Nawaz Sharif’s PML-N and the sectarian jihadi outfits of Punjab such as the resurrected Sipah-Sahaba-e-Pakistan (SSP) and other outfits, take on a much harassed government teetering on collapse. The assassination of Salman Taseer has united the Islamist parties of various sects, both Sunni and Shi’a as their Karachi meeting of January 13, 2011 showed. Even the pro-military Jama’at-ud-Dawah (JuD) joined the protests. If any uprising were to take place, JuD cannot be expected to remain non-participative as that would quickly lead to its own decimation. JuD is already under pressure as its cadres are finding it attractive to join the other Punjabi Taliban group such as Brigade 313 who are more aggressive.
One can reasonably expect that the over three dozen terrorist tanzeems would perforce join such an uprising especially if the reasons for such a revolt are carefully crafted to appeal to Muslim sensibilities. These along with the Islamist political parties are capable of amassing a few million people if they join for a common cause. The trick therefore lies in finding a common ground for protests. As Muslims are more prone to emotions, especially in a Pakistan which prides itself to be guarding the ideological frontiers of Islam and as the only Muslim Nuclear Weapon country, the fire can spread easily. The silent majority will remain silent as usual or a significant section may even support the revolution because of the dire economic and security situation. The sectarian jihadi tanzeems will be emboldened in the coming weeks to think of such a window of opportunity in months ahead. Such a revolution would also be a Godsend opportunity for the beleaguered Haqqani group in North Waziristan whose leaders have accepted that the intense and prolonged US drone attacks are taking a heavy toll of them. They, along with the Al Qaeda and the Taliban, will also be correct in thinking that a change of regime in Pakistan would inevitably suck the oxygen out of the US fire as a new regime, which could be more Islamist in nature, may take tougher stance vis-à-vis the US in transit routes, military engagement and political dialogue to find an Afghan solution. The Pakistani Army, might decide to remain neutral in the revolution as the Egyptian Army appears to be currently doing, for fear of the situation going out of control and leading to a lot of bloodshed or even a mutiny within its own rank and file. Unlike Egypt, where ruthless and high-handed government action for over three decades have almost decimated terrorist groups, the all-pervasive terror tanzeems in Pakistan would certainly exploit the situation especially as they have a large number of supporters in the Police, Army and the Establishment.
(To be Continued). . . .
The Egyptian uprising seems to be well coordinated, with a simple message that the loudspeakers of mosques across the country seem to be carrying: “You have a right to protest”. People have taken this message to heart and have poured out to the city centres and town squares with the Egyptian Army seemingly standing as mute spectators. It will be impossible for the Army to fire upon the protestors or even use strong arm tactics, though it seems to engage in a show of strength to intimidate the protestors, a tactic that has borne no fruits so far. Curfews have had little effect as the Army is unwilling to enforce them for fear of bloodshed, after the police, target of people’s wrath, have simply disappeared. Hosni Mubarak’s replacement of the Prime Minister, appointment of a Vice-President and the reshuffle of the cabinet are merely cosmetic and are not going to materially alter the ground situation. The masses are protesting directly against Hosni Mubarak himself and therefore these changes are not going to cut any ice with them. The fact that foreign governments are evacuating their stranded citizens and even their consular staff and their family, go to show how serious the situation is.
Egypt’s recent history, at least since World War II, has been characterized by instability, violence and espousal of Islamist ideology. Even the relatively calm period of Hosni Mubarak after the assassination of Anwar Sadat has been punctuated by violent Islamist terrorist attacks now and then, court dramas, and ruthless police action. One has to look at recent history to understand the current situation perhaps.
When the Ottoman empire was dissolved in c. 1924, it left a deep sense of loss and listlessness among the Muslims of the world as a nearly 1300 years of Islamic Caliphate came to an end. The overwhelming might of the Western countries, against which the Muslims seemed to be utterly powerless, ignited an urge to seek inwards for solutions to their problem as the Believers imagined that Islam was in danger of being wiped out. Egypt was thus naturally pushed to a central stage in the revivalist movement. For long Al Azhar was the most important sunni theological centre. Islamist thinkers like Afghani, Mohammed Abdu and Rida had already laid the foundation for reform of Islam in consonance with modern and emerging world by arguing the case for ijtihad. In the turbulent times following World War I, the dissolution of the Caliphate and the rise to power of fiercely secular nationalist leader Kemal Ataturk in Turkey, was born a new star in Egypt, Hassan al Banna. He established the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwanul Muslimeen) in c. 1928. He is An important member of the modern day Islamist revivalist movement. He wrote Risalat-al-Jihad that has become fountainhead of indoctrination for modern day Islamists and jihadists. Another important pillar of the Egyptian movement was Syed Qutb. He was often described as ‘First thinker of Islam in our epoch’. Ayman al-Zawahiri, the important leader of the violent Al Gama al Islamiyyah of Egypt and later the second in command of Al Qaeda, has been shaped by Qutb’s thoughts.
The question here is not whether the current uprising is justified or not. Today, one can definitely see the hand of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan ul Muslimeen) behind this uprising. The exhortation from the mosques, the invisible hand that seems to coordinate the as yet leaderless unrest throughout the country all point in that direction. The sudden, united and synchronous chorus against the regime is otherwise impossible in a large country such as Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood is possibly exploiting the widespread feeling of disenchantment among the Egyptian masses for the unchanging Mubarak regime. However, a significant number of protestors also are against the entire gamut of politicians, both in the ruling National Democratic Party and the Opposition. This is certainly playing into the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood. The people’s anger is also directed against the ‘ugly’ Americans who are seen as having bought out this regime through aid packages etc. Recent Wikileaks revelations have come handy in this respect. The already simmering hatred for the Americans because of their steadfast support for the Israelis will only erupt more forcefully now. The Hosni Mubarak regime is thus finding that the American support is turning out to be an albatross around its neck.
The distance from Alexandria to Cairo (apprx. 220 Kms) is eerily similar to the distance from Lahore to Rawalpindi/Islamabad on the Grand Trunk Road (250 Kms). The 2009 Long March by lawyers, Nawaz Sharif and the masses forced an adamant Zardari to reinstate the deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. The Army intervened as the situation threatened to go out of control and the Americans began to put pressure on all stakeholders in the drama. President Zardari was forced to eat the humble pie very quickly. The probable Long March in 2011 as part of a Green Revolution can be violent and far more threatening than the earlier one as the deprived masses shepherded by the Islamist parties such as Jama’at-e-Islami (JI), both factions of Jama’at-Ulema-e-Islami (JUI), Jama’at-Ulema-e-Pakistan (JUP), Nawaz Sharif’s PML-N and the sectarian jihadi outfits of Punjab such as the resurrected Sipah-Sahaba-e-Pakistan (SSP) and other outfits, take on a much harassed government teetering on collapse. The assassination of Salman Taseer has united the Islamist parties of various sects, both Sunni and Shi’a as their Karachi meeting of January 13, 2011 showed. Even the pro-military Jama’at-ud-Dawah (JuD) joined the protests. If any uprising were to take place, JuD cannot be expected to remain non-participative as that would quickly lead to its own decimation. JuD is already under pressure as its cadres are finding it attractive to join the other Punjabi Taliban group such as Brigade 313 who are more aggressive.
One can reasonably expect that the over three dozen terrorist tanzeems would perforce join such an uprising especially if the reasons for such a revolt are carefully crafted to appeal to Muslim sensibilities. These along with the Islamist political parties are capable of amassing a few million people if they join for a common cause. The trick therefore lies in finding a common ground for protests. As Muslims are more prone to emotions, especially in a Pakistan which prides itself to be guarding the ideological frontiers of Islam and as the only Muslim Nuclear Weapon country, the fire can spread easily. The silent majority will remain silent as usual or a significant section may even support the revolution because of the dire economic and security situation. The sectarian jihadi tanzeems will be emboldened in the coming weeks to think of such a window of opportunity in months ahead. Such a revolution would also be a Godsend opportunity for the beleaguered Haqqani group in North Waziristan whose leaders have accepted that the intense and prolonged US drone attacks are taking a heavy toll of them. They, along with the Al Qaeda and the Taliban, will also be correct in thinking that a change of regime in Pakistan would inevitably suck the oxygen out of the US fire as a new regime, which could be more Islamist in nature, may take tougher stance vis-à-vis the US in transit routes, military engagement and political dialogue to find an Afghan solution. The Pakistani Army, might decide to remain neutral in the revolution as the Egyptian Army appears to be currently doing, for fear of the situation going out of control and leading to a lot of bloodshed or even a mutiny within its own rank and file. Unlike Egypt, where ruthless and high-handed government action for over three decades have almost decimated terrorist groups, the all-pervasive terror tanzeems in Pakistan would certainly exploit the situation especially as they have a large number of supporters in the Police, Army and the Establishment.
(To be Continued). . . .
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Perfidious Musharraf and his Recent TV Interview - Part IV
Gen. (r) Musharraf referred to other things as well, for example, on actions taken against Prof. Hafeez Saeed saheb and Maulana Masood Azhar saheb. The interviewer referred to the 'arrest' of the learned Maulana, only to be 'corrected' by the General(r) that "no, he was never arrested because we could not arrest him". Again, the answer was a double entendre as has been the various utterances of Pakistani leaders. We will come to the Maulana episode a little later.
We need to understand a little bit about these two great jihadi leaders, Prof. Hafeez Saeed saheb and Maulana Masood Azhar saheb before we proceed with the General's usual perfidy.
Lashkar-e-Tayba(LeT, Army of the Pure) is a Sunni Ahl-e-Hadith terrorist organization that was started in the Kunar province of eastern Afghanistan. Prof. Hafeez Saeed (who taught Islam at the University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore and hence the oxymoronic Professor tag) was the co-founder, along with Abdullah Azzam, of Maktab-al-Khidmat (Office of Service) in Peshawar in circa 1979 to help the Arab jihadis. Abdullah Azzam was the mentor of Osama bin Laden, both at the King Abdul Aziz University (KAAU) in Jeddah and later in the Afghan jihad. After Azzam's assassination on Nov. 24, 1989, variously attributed to Israeli Mossad or even the mujahideen faction, the Maktab became Jama'at-ud-Dawah W'al Irshad and LeT was founded soon thereafter as its military wing.
Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM, Army of Muhammad, PBUH), a Sunni Hanafi Deobandi terrorist organization, was created by the ISI on 31 January 2000, exactly one month after Maulana Masood Azhar was released from the Indian prison in exchange for release of passengers of the hijacked Indian Airlines plane IC-814. The creation of JeM is attributed to Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed, who was the chief of ISI (between circa 1999 – 2001). Maulana Masood Azhar is a close friend of Osama bin Laden from the days of his exile in Sudan after the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia expelled him for anti-State (anti-monarchy, in fact) activities. Predictably, his organization is a member of IIF (Islamic International Front for Jihad against the Crusaders and the Jewish people). Apart from various terrorist attacks in India, especially J&K, JeM has also been involved in terrorist attacks within Pakistan. Some important attacks were the assassination attempts on Gen. Pervez Musharraf in 2003; US Consulate attack in Karachi on May 26, 2004; attack on Karachi Corps Commander on June 9, 2004 etc. Earlier, when Pakistan deployed its troops in Somalia under UN supervision, an enraged Masood Azhar carried out operations that killed 24 Pakistani Army soldiers there. He also wrote a booklet against Pakistani troops in Somalia and even distributed that in Pakistan. His jihadi commitment to the ideological frontiers of Islam thus truly transcends mere geographical boundaries of a nation, well in line with the 'Jihad fi Sabilillah' (Jihad in the way of Allah) motto of the regular Pakistani Army itself.
Now, let us come to the various ways by which the Islamic republic of Pakistan has handled these two great warriors. See my earlier blog, "Prof. Hafeez Saeed, LeT, and the Support from the State of Pakistan" on how the 'Deep State' benevolently handled this 'non-state actor' after 9/11. Let us therefore limit ourselves to a discussion on Maulana saheb alone here.
After his release at Kandahar into ISI hands, a fact accepted by the then Taliban Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmed Mutawakil and confirmed by Indian signal intercepts[2], Maulana Masood Azhar was driven to Pakistan in vehicles provided by the Taliban and was received with great joy and pride all over the country. His first stop was the Binori mosque at Karachi (Jamia Darul Uloom Islamia Allama Binori) and it was not surprising because that was his alma mater (where Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden and HuJI chief Qari Saifullah Akhtar also studied at one time or another), having passed with distinction from there. Its Chief Nazeemuddin Shamzai (since assassinated) was the patron saint of JeM. He was constantly surrounded by dozens of heavily armed militia even as there was a ban on display of arms by any person or group in Karachi because of the security situation there. Just nobody dared to challenge Azhar saheb and his heavily armed guards could be seen in vehicles and open meetings, the first of which he addressed at Al-Rasheediya mosque in central Karachi within a week, proclaiming his resolve to defeat India and calling for funds and volunteers. Now, did Gen. (r) Musharraf say that Pakistan could never arrest Masood Azhar ? He was indeed arrested in December, 2001 after the attack on the Indian Parliament but was ordered released by a review board of the Lahore High Court on Dec. 14, 2002. His arrest was confirmed by none other than the Spokesperson of Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) Major General Rashid Qureshi, that Master Spinner. The usual ploy, as we found later in the case of Prof. Hafeez Saeed saheb, of arresting under 'Maintenance of Public Order' was employed in Azhar's case too. We know how Islamist the Lahore High Court has been, from the way it has released scores of hardcore jihadi terrorists over the years and so his subsequent release is not surprising.
In c. 2003, Gen. Musharraf met all top jihadi leaders[1], including Maulana Masood Azhar, to re-assure them of the continued support of his government for their jihadi activities in spite of US pressure to do otherwise. This was the 'running with the hares and hunting with the hounds' policy of Musharraf, as accepted now by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Gilani. The Deep State therefore encouraged LeT to organize a large gathering at Muridke in c. 2003 which was addressed, among others, by Masood Azhar as well. Azhar saheb was again placed under house arrest after the twin suicide attacks on Gen. Musharraf in 2003. He conveniently disappeared from house arrest in Bahawalpur sometime later. However, there have been many authentic reports of his frequent visits since then to his house in Bahawalpur where heavy security support is provided by the Deep State. He also held an open function to launch his new book Fatah-ul-Jawad: Quranic Verses on Jihad, on April 28, 2008, in Bahawalpur when Gen. (r) Musharraf was still very much in power. In the meanwhile, his Balakot terror training facility has been running without let or hindrance. In December, 2008, Pakistan claimed that it had placed Azhar under house arrest in Bahawalpur (confirmed by defense minister Chaudhary Ahmad Mukhtar in a TV interview where he also said that Azhar would not be handed over to India however). The DAWN News Channel also confirmed this quoting interior ministry sources. However, it was denied within a few days by the Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi claiming that his whereabouts were unknown though they were certain that he was not in Pakistan. Does it not sound all too familiar considering that a similar response comes from Pakistan whenever Dawood Ibrahim's name is mentioned when the whole world knows where he lives in Pakistan, except of course the Government of Pakistan ? So much for the Deep State's inability to arrest or prosecute the Maulana saheb.
(To be continued. . . )
REFERENCES
[1] "Pakistan, India: Same Game, New Rules", Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia Times,Nov. 27, 2003
[2] "The Kandahar Plot", Praveen Swami, Frontline,Vol 20-Issue 24, Nov. 22 - Dec. 05, 2003
We need to understand a little bit about these two great jihadi leaders, Prof. Hafeez Saeed saheb and Maulana Masood Azhar saheb before we proceed with the General's usual perfidy.
Lashkar-e-Tayba(LeT, Army of the Pure) is a Sunni Ahl-e-Hadith terrorist organization that was started in the Kunar province of eastern Afghanistan. Prof. Hafeez Saeed (who taught Islam at the University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore and hence the oxymoronic Professor tag) was the co-founder, along with Abdullah Azzam, of Maktab-al-Khidmat (Office of Service) in Peshawar in circa 1979 to help the Arab jihadis. Abdullah Azzam was the mentor of Osama bin Laden, both at the King Abdul Aziz University (KAAU) in Jeddah and later in the Afghan jihad. After Azzam's assassination on Nov. 24, 1989, variously attributed to Israeli Mossad or even the mujahideen faction, the Maktab became Jama'at-ud-Dawah W'al Irshad and LeT was founded soon thereafter as its military wing.
Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM, Army of Muhammad, PBUH), a Sunni Hanafi Deobandi terrorist organization, was created by the ISI on 31 January 2000, exactly one month after Maulana Masood Azhar was released from the Indian prison in exchange for release of passengers of the hijacked Indian Airlines plane IC-814. The creation of JeM is attributed to Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed, who was the chief of ISI (between circa 1999 – 2001). Maulana Masood Azhar is a close friend of Osama bin Laden from the days of his exile in Sudan after the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia expelled him for anti-State (anti-monarchy, in fact) activities. Predictably, his organization is a member of IIF (Islamic International Front for Jihad against the Crusaders and the Jewish people). Apart from various terrorist attacks in India, especially J&K, JeM has also been involved in terrorist attacks within Pakistan. Some important attacks were the assassination attempts on Gen. Pervez Musharraf in 2003; US Consulate attack in Karachi on May 26, 2004; attack on Karachi Corps Commander on June 9, 2004 etc. Earlier, when Pakistan deployed its troops in Somalia under UN supervision, an enraged Masood Azhar carried out operations that killed 24 Pakistani Army soldiers there. He also wrote a booklet against Pakistani troops in Somalia and even distributed that in Pakistan. His jihadi commitment to the ideological frontiers of Islam thus truly transcends mere geographical boundaries of a nation, well in line with the 'Jihad fi Sabilillah' (Jihad in the way of Allah) motto of the regular Pakistani Army itself.
Now, let us come to the various ways by which the Islamic republic of Pakistan has handled these two great warriors. See my earlier blog, "Prof. Hafeez Saeed, LeT, and the Support from the State of Pakistan" on how the 'Deep State' benevolently handled this 'non-state actor' after 9/11. Let us therefore limit ourselves to a discussion on Maulana saheb alone here.
After his release at Kandahar into ISI hands, a fact accepted by the then Taliban Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmed Mutawakil and confirmed by Indian signal intercepts[2], Maulana Masood Azhar was driven to Pakistan in vehicles provided by the Taliban and was received with great joy and pride all over the country. His first stop was the Binori mosque at Karachi (Jamia Darul Uloom Islamia Allama Binori) and it was not surprising because that was his alma mater (where Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden and HuJI chief Qari Saifullah Akhtar also studied at one time or another), having passed with distinction from there. Its Chief Nazeemuddin Shamzai (since assassinated) was the patron saint of JeM. He was constantly surrounded by dozens of heavily armed militia even as there was a ban on display of arms by any person or group in Karachi because of the security situation there. Just nobody dared to challenge Azhar saheb and his heavily armed guards could be seen in vehicles and open meetings, the first of which he addressed at Al-Rasheediya mosque in central Karachi within a week, proclaiming his resolve to defeat India and calling for funds and volunteers. Now, did Gen. (r) Musharraf say that Pakistan could never arrest Masood Azhar ? He was indeed arrested in December, 2001 after the attack on the Indian Parliament but was ordered released by a review board of the Lahore High Court on Dec. 14, 2002. His arrest was confirmed by none other than the Spokesperson of Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) Major General Rashid Qureshi, that Master Spinner. The usual ploy, as we found later in the case of Prof. Hafeez Saeed saheb, of arresting under 'Maintenance of Public Order' was employed in Azhar's case too. We know how Islamist the Lahore High Court has been, from the way it has released scores of hardcore jihadi terrorists over the years and so his subsequent release is not surprising.
In c. 2003, Gen. Musharraf met all top jihadi leaders[1], including Maulana Masood Azhar, to re-assure them of the continued support of his government for their jihadi activities in spite of US pressure to do otherwise. This was the 'running with the hares and hunting with the hounds' policy of Musharraf, as accepted now by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Gilani. The Deep State therefore encouraged LeT to organize a large gathering at Muridke in c. 2003 which was addressed, among others, by Masood Azhar as well. Azhar saheb was again placed under house arrest after the twin suicide attacks on Gen. Musharraf in 2003. He conveniently disappeared from house arrest in Bahawalpur sometime later. However, there have been many authentic reports of his frequent visits since then to his house in Bahawalpur where heavy security support is provided by the Deep State. He also held an open function to launch his new book Fatah-ul-Jawad: Quranic Verses on Jihad, on April 28, 2008, in Bahawalpur when Gen. (r) Musharraf was still very much in power. In the meanwhile, his Balakot terror training facility has been running without let or hindrance. In December, 2008, Pakistan claimed that it had placed Azhar under house arrest in Bahawalpur (confirmed by defense minister Chaudhary Ahmad Mukhtar in a TV interview where he also said that Azhar would not be handed over to India however). The DAWN News Channel also confirmed this quoting interior ministry sources. However, it was denied within a few days by the Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi claiming that his whereabouts were unknown though they were certain that he was not in Pakistan. Does it not sound all too familiar considering that a similar response comes from Pakistan whenever Dawood Ibrahim's name is mentioned when the whole world knows where he lives in Pakistan, except of course the Government of Pakistan ? So much for the Deep State's inability to arrest or prosecute the Maulana saheb.
(To be continued. . . )
REFERENCES
[1] "Pakistan, India: Same Game, New Rules", Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia Times,Nov. 27, 2003
[2] "The Kandahar Plot", Praveen Swami, Frontline,Vol 20-Issue 24, Nov. 22 - Dec. 05, 2003
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Perfidious Musharraf and his Recent TV Interview - Part III
During the course of the interview, there was a reference to the speech given by Gen. Musharraf to his fellow Pakistanis (and the rest of the world, especially India) in Jan, 2002, a month after the Dec. 13, 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament by LeT and JeM. At the time he gave this speech, the situation was spiralling out of control and he was under tremendous pressure to act to contain it.
The speech under question is the January 12, 2002 speech of Gen. Musharraf over the national television in Pakistan. The US President, George Bush had exhorted Gen. Musharraf in the first week of January, to make his position clear on terrorism. As usual, in order to pull the wool over the eyes of India and Western benefactor countries, Musharraf made several promises. It is worth recalling some of them:
Let's remember that Gen. Musharraf condemned, banned, vowed, promised, said and ordered so many things. And now, to the perfidious part of the speech. We will later see the perfidious action part as none of the above promises was kept. In the same speech, the following were interspersed as well:
A few days after the January 12, 2002 speech, an open and defiant meeting was held in Holiday Inn, Islamabad where representatives of LeT, JeM, Tehrik-e-Jaffria, Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) met with other similar luminaries as Lt. Gen. (r) Hamid Gul, Gen. (r) Aslam Beg, Maj. Gen. (r) Zaheerul Islam Abbassi (who in September 1995 tried a military coup along with terrorist outfits to seize power from Ms. Benazir Bhutto to establish a Caliphate) and Jama'at-e-Islami (S) chief Maulana Sami-ul-Haq (who is popularly known also as Maulana Sandwich for some strange reason) and discussed the 'appalling betrayal of the Kashmiri cause' by Gen. (r) Musharraf. Pakistan did nothing to prevent this meeting or arrest these people who support jihad openly. Since then, all the Pakistani actions have been farcical on the front of containment of terrorism even while claiming to take action all the time. So much so, President Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani have said that Musharraf followed a policy of running with the hares and hunting with the hounds.
Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, who held such portfolios as Information and Railways in Gen. Musharraf's Presidency, openly admitted that he was a jihadi in Kashmir. His colleagues in the jihad business ascertained that he set up a camp at Fateh Jung near Rawalpindi, where around 3,500 jihadis were trained in guerrilla warfare. Gen. (r) Mirza Aslam Beg, an ex Chief of Army Staff (COAS), confirmed the claim and went on to say that even the then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif could confirm that ! Gen. (r) Mirza Aslam Beg also said that the camp, Freedom House, still existed. Another ISI officer, since deceased, confirmed this.
Ms. Benazir Bhutto - no paragon of virtue herself when it comes to terrorism - admitted that some of her Army Generals planned to attack the US in collaboration with Osama bin Laden.[1] Writing in the Washington Post on March 12, 2007[2], this is what Ms. Bhutto had to say: Why is it that all terrorist plots – from the Sept. 11 attacks, to Madrid, to London, to Mumbai – seem to have roots in Islamabad?Pakistan’s military and intelligence services have, for decades, used religious parties for recruits.
Mr. Shamshad Ahmed, a former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan summed it up all nicely, in an article dated November 24, 2007, by saying, "Every act of violence anywhere in the world is traced back to our country in one way or the other."[3]
Another former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan, Najmuddin A Shaikh, wrote thus in Daily Times on August, 29, 2008 [4], while discussing Pakistani tactics in Afghanistan: It is now no secret that, Afghanistan apart, the assistance required by the spontaneous uprising in Indian-occupied Kashmir also made it necessary to maintain and enhance rather than dismantle the anti-Soviet jihad machinery.
This implicit reliance on jihad, terror, and violence to achieve political goals was amply demonstrated in the National Assembly of Pakistan by no other than the Secretary of Defence Maj. Tanveer Syed on Aug. 7, 2007 when he demanded the Pakistani government to wage jihad against India to get Kashmir. He assured the nation that if full-fledged jihad was waged, Pakistan would get Kashmir within six months. He said, "“India will not give freedom to the Kashmiris through dialogue so we have to wage a Jihad and our Mujahideen will secure the freedom of Kashmir within six months”[5] It is noteworthy that the Secretary of Defence, who justified jihad, was a retired Army major.
One of Gen. (r) Musharraf's protege, Madam Shireen Mazari, whom he appointed as the Chairperson of the Pakistani Institute of Strategic Studies (aptly named PISS) as soon as he took over power, had this to write about the tactics to be adopted by the terrorists operating in Kashmir, in an article she penned in circa 1999 in The News: “But perhaps the Kashmiri freedom fighters need to be reminded of history: That freedom struggles like the Algerian only succeeded when the freedom fighters took the war to the French homeland. And the British only compromised with the Irish once the IRA took the war to the British Isles and London. These are the cruel realities of military struggles and so the Kashmir war must be taken to the Indian mainland, especially South India to make the ordinary Indian realise the costs of his government's occupation policy in Kashmir. If freedom is to be won through the barrel of a gun then niceties cannot prevail and efficiency and effectiveness should be the primary considerations”
Why does, therefore, Gen. (r) Musharraf want people to believe all the nonsense that he peddles now ? In the Times Now TV interview, Gen. (r) Musharraf blamed the US also for what he termed as 'religious militancy' in his country. No doubt the US, which is as tactically brilliant as its tight buddy Pakistan, failed to see or did not care or both, the long-term fall out of stoking Islamist, jihadi, sectarian mindset in the Af-Pak region. But, it was Pakistan and Pakistan alone that has preserved, nurtured and grown that mindset after circa 1989 to be used against its only enemy, India. Indeed, one can easily surmise that Pakistan participated in the Afghan jihad with the sole intent of turning it on against India later.
The irony is that Gen. (r) Musharraf claims that the policy of encouraging terrorism was practised by Pakistani regimes prior to his own. By their accusations against each other, the Pakistani leaders have all made it clear that every Pakistani government has used terrorism as a tool of the State.
(To be continued. . . )
REFERENCES
[1]"I Vetoed Plan by Pak to Attack America: Bhutto", Indian Express
[1]A False Choice for Pakistan, Washington Post
[3]Back to Stone Age, The Nation
[4]Looking back at our role in Afghanistan
[5]Parliamentary Secretary Calls for Jihad
The speech under question is the January 12, 2002 speech of Gen. Musharraf over the national television in Pakistan. The US President, George Bush had exhorted Gen. Musharraf in the first week of January, to make his position clear on terrorism. As usual, in order to pull the wool over the eyes of India and Western benefactor countries, Musharraf made several promises. It is worth recalling some of them:
- He condemned the terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament and said terrorism tarnished the image of Pakistan
- He banned Lashkar-e-Tayba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM)
- He vowed to finish off religious extremism
- He promised that no organisations will be able to carry out terrorism on the pretext of Kashmir. Whoever is involved with such acts in the future will be dealt with strongly
- He said that Pakistan will not allow its territory to be used for any terrorist activity anywhere in the world.
- He ordered all madrasseh to register with the government within two months
Let's remember that Gen. Musharraf condemned, banned, vowed, promised, said and ordered so many things. And now, to the perfidious part of the speech. We will later see the perfidious action part as none of the above promises was kept. In the same speech, the following were interspersed as well:
- If Kashmir dispute was not resolved peacefully, the region will not see peace
- "Kashmir runs in our blood. No Pakistani can afford to sever links with Kashmir. We will continue to extend our moral, political and diplomatic support to Kashmiris."
A few days after the January 12, 2002 speech, an open and defiant meeting was held in Holiday Inn, Islamabad where representatives of LeT, JeM, Tehrik-e-Jaffria, Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) met with other similar luminaries as Lt. Gen. (r) Hamid Gul, Gen. (r) Aslam Beg, Maj. Gen. (r) Zaheerul Islam Abbassi (who in September 1995 tried a military coup along with terrorist outfits to seize power from Ms. Benazir Bhutto to establish a Caliphate) and Jama'at-e-Islami (S) chief Maulana Sami-ul-Haq (who is popularly known also as Maulana Sandwich for some strange reason) and discussed the 'appalling betrayal of the Kashmiri cause' by Gen. (r) Musharraf. Pakistan did nothing to prevent this meeting or arrest these people who support jihad openly. Since then, all the Pakistani actions have been farcical on the front of containment of terrorism even while claiming to take action all the time. So much so, President Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani have said that Musharraf followed a policy of running with the hares and hunting with the hounds.
Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, who held such portfolios as Information and Railways in Gen. Musharraf's Presidency, openly admitted that he was a jihadi in Kashmir. His colleagues in the jihad business ascertained that he set up a camp at Fateh Jung near Rawalpindi, where around 3,500 jihadis were trained in guerrilla warfare. Gen. (r) Mirza Aslam Beg, an ex Chief of Army Staff (COAS), confirmed the claim and went on to say that even the then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif could confirm that ! Gen. (r) Mirza Aslam Beg also said that the camp, Freedom House, still existed. Another ISI officer, since deceased, confirmed this.
Ms. Benazir Bhutto - no paragon of virtue herself when it comes to terrorism - admitted that some of her Army Generals planned to attack the US in collaboration with Osama bin Laden.[1] Writing in the Washington Post on March 12, 2007[2], this is what Ms. Bhutto had to say: Why is it that all terrorist plots – from the Sept. 11 attacks, to Madrid, to London, to Mumbai – seem to have roots in Islamabad?Pakistan’s military and intelligence services have, for decades, used religious parties for recruits.
Mr. Shamshad Ahmed, a former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan summed it up all nicely, in an article dated November 24, 2007, by saying, "Every act of violence anywhere in the world is traced back to our country in one way or the other."[3]
Another former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan, Najmuddin A Shaikh, wrote thus in Daily Times on August, 29, 2008 [4], while discussing Pakistani tactics in Afghanistan: It is now no secret that, Afghanistan apart, the assistance required by the spontaneous uprising in Indian-occupied Kashmir also made it necessary to maintain and enhance rather than dismantle the anti-Soviet jihad machinery.
This implicit reliance on jihad, terror, and violence to achieve political goals was amply demonstrated in the National Assembly of Pakistan by no other than the Secretary of Defence Maj. Tanveer Syed on Aug. 7, 2007 when he demanded the Pakistani government to wage jihad against India to get Kashmir. He assured the nation that if full-fledged jihad was waged, Pakistan would get Kashmir within six months. He said, "“India will not give freedom to the Kashmiris through dialogue so we have to wage a Jihad and our Mujahideen will secure the freedom of Kashmir within six months”[5] It is noteworthy that the Secretary of Defence, who justified jihad, was a retired Army major.
One of Gen. (r) Musharraf's protege, Madam Shireen Mazari, whom he appointed as the Chairperson of the Pakistani Institute of Strategic Studies (aptly named PISS) as soon as he took over power, had this to write about the tactics to be adopted by the terrorists operating in Kashmir, in an article she penned in circa 1999 in The News: “But perhaps the Kashmiri freedom fighters need to be reminded of history: That freedom struggles like the Algerian only succeeded when the freedom fighters took the war to the French homeland. And the British only compromised with the Irish once the IRA took the war to the British Isles and London. These are the cruel realities of military struggles and so the Kashmir war must be taken to the Indian mainland, especially South India to make the ordinary Indian realise the costs of his government's occupation policy in Kashmir. If freedom is to be won through the barrel of a gun then niceties cannot prevail and efficiency and effectiveness should be the primary considerations”
Why does, therefore, Gen. (r) Musharraf want people to believe all the nonsense that he peddles now ? In the Times Now TV interview, Gen. (r) Musharraf blamed the US also for what he termed as 'religious militancy' in his country. No doubt the US, which is as tactically brilliant as its tight buddy Pakistan, failed to see or did not care or both, the long-term fall out of stoking Islamist, jihadi, sectarian mindset in the Af-Pak region. But, it was Pakistan and Pakistan alone that has preserved, nurtured and grown that mindset after circa 1989 to be used against its only enemy, India. Indeed, one can easily surmise that Pakistan participated in the Afghan jihad with the sole intent of turning it on against India later.
The irony is that Gen. (r) Musharraf claims that the policy of encouraging terrorism was practised by Pakistani regimes prior to his own. By their accusations against each other, the Pakistani leaders have all made it clear that every Pakistani government has used terrorism as a tool of the State.
(To be continued. . . )
REFERENCES
[1]"I Vetoed Plan by Pak to Attack America: Bhutto", Indian Express
[1]A False Choice for Pakistan, Washington Post
[3]Back to Stone Age, The Nation
[4]Looking back at our role in Afghanistan
[5]Parliamentary Secretary Calls for Jihad
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
