By Nicholas Kristof
The educated guess is that the terrorists behind the Mumbai attacks were from Lashkar-e-Tayyaba or Jaish-e-Muhammad, both Pakistani groups that have focused on Kashmir. The result is that we face a real danger of escalating tensions that will be bad for India and bad for Pakistan and Afghanistan. The risk is that Indian nationalists, such as the hot-headed chief minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi, use the Mumbai attacks to gain ground and be more confrontational toward Pakistan. That in turn would empower Pakistani nationalists and radicals, and we would see more terror attacks in Pakistan and India alike. Moreover, since Afghanistan is one of the fields of competition between India and Pakistan, Afghan’s future would be compromised as well.
That said, Pakistan has to face its responsibility. The Pakistani government, particularly the ISI and other intelligence agencies, have had longstanding links with Lashkar-e-Tayyaba and Jaish-e-Muhammad. Those ties were cut back after pressure from Washington in the aftermath of 9/11, but Pakistan never really cracked down and put either group out of business as it could have. It just told them to pipe down and put pressure on them to behave better, and it curbed infiltration into India.
As I noted in a blog post before the Mumbai attacks, I heard during my trip to Pakistan that the government of Asif Ali Zardari has again allowed more of these infiltrations of militants into Indian Kashmir; it’s not clear to me if that’s because Zardari wants to put pressure on India or create a foreign scapegoat for his own problems, or if he just doesn’t want to spend his political capital tackling jihadis in Pakistan (there’s a view in the Pakistani security forces that it’s best to redirect hotheads toward India so that they don’t bother Pakistani targets).
So Zardari and other Pakistanis are right that the Islamabad government is innocent of any direct involvement in the Mumbai attacks. But I also think that if the government and intelligence agencies were serious about stopping infiltrations, they could. I also think they could be far more aggressive in uprooting Lashkar-e-Tayyaba and Jaish-e-Muhammad. The Pakistani security forces have always tended to see militants as tools to be used in India or Afghanistan, rather than as threats to stability. So I don’t think the Pakistani government is guilty, but I also don’t think it’s quite innocent.
As for India, its harsh violations of human rights in Kashmir — and the brutal anti-Muslim pogroms in Gujarat — have empowered groups like Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (in much the same way that America’s policies in Guantanamo have empowered Al Qaeda). And India was slow to react to olive branches from General Musharraf, missing the chance to ease tensions in Kashmir. There’ll be a tendency for enraged Indians to want to follow the Dick Cheney model now and fight back, but that Cheney model didn’t work so well for America and I would counsel Indians not to follow it.
At the end of the day, India’s interest is in a calmer, less militant, more economically vibrant Pakistan. The last thing India should want is a western border with the Taliban. When I made references to Kashmir in my first Pakistan column, Indians erupted in anger and asked why they should give up Kashmir to Pakistan. But that’s not what anybody is talking about, and indeed that’s not what Kashmiris want. A starting point is to introduce oversight and transparency in Kashmir, so that security forces don’t rape and torture Kashmiris with impunity. I would also see more trade and tourism ties between the two countries, to support moderates and undermine extremists.
But, alas, I’m afraid we may be on a downward spiral, with Indian and Pakistani nationalists alike gaining ground and empowering the other. I just hope that the Indian business community will step up to the plate and demand moderation and stand up to the Hindu nationalists.
No comments:
Post a Comment