Pakistan and Militant Groups in Kashmir: Musharraf’s Admission
10 Oct, 2010 · 3255
Radhavinod Raju comments on the implications of state sponsored terrorism by Pakistan in Kashmir
DER SPIEGEL: Why did you form militant underground groups to fight India in Kashmir?
Musharraf: They were indeed formed. The government turned a blind eye because they wanted India to discuss Kashmir. ('Pakistan is Always Seen as the Rogue')
For Indian Intelligence Agencies and the J&K police, this is old news. We always knew that the terrorists crossing over into J&K from across the border were trained, armed, and infiltrated by the Pakistani forces. Even the rest of the world is convinced about this, as is implied in the above question put to Gen. Musharraf by the Der Spiegel.
In this connection, an article by Shireen Mazari, (Director General of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Pakistan till May 2008) just before the Vajpayee-Musharraf summit in Agra in July 2001, is relevant and significant. Mazari’s stewardship of this prestigious Institute more or less coincided with Musharraf’s tenure. This article was written in the background of what Mazari claimed were the new rules of the game at the global level which ‘pushed’ India into accepting Pakistan’s continuous call for a dialogue, and citing developments in the Middle East and the Balkans. According to Mazari, the US and its allies, who have been exerting pressure, were interested only in a ‘quick fix’ solution, which inevitably meant allowing the stronger side to retain the advantage even when it was wrong. This interpretation can be seen reflected in the oft repeated Pakistani complaint against the West that they were ignoring the civilian casualties in Kashmir and were favouring the militarily stronger India, and though the interpretation is of events prior to July 2001, is nevertheless relevant even today.
Mazari further continues thus in the article: “The most disturbing fact that is emerging in this new approach to resolution of conflicts involving people seeking their right to self-determination is the manner in which the US, EU and Russia are closing ranks…In the Balkans, Russia will now find more in common with the US and the EU in its consistent support for the Serbs. And, of course, the West has chosen to accept Russia’s conduct of a policy of genocide in Chechnya... If these are the realities, then can any small power go counter to the trend? Or, specifically, can Pakistan counter the Western-Russian support for India? On the Kashmir issue, it can if the situation on the ground is sustained. In other words, the freedom struggle on ground in IHK cannot fade out because that is the only pressure on the international community and India-especially the Indian military. Dialogue must not be accompanied by a cessation of the military struggle on the ground until substantive progress has been made.”
The above assertion bears remarkable resemblance to the current Pakistani strategy vis-à-vis Kashmir, by Musharraf’s successor, General Parvez Kayani. Militants will continue to be trained, armed and infiltrated into Kashmir from Pakistan in order to bring pressure on the international community by pointing to the threat of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan, and on the Indian Government and military to come to terms, favourable to Pakistan. These militants would be fully under the control of the Pakistan Army, as was claimed by Lt. General Aziz in his telephone conversation with General Musharraf who was in China, in May 1999, during the Kargil war. This is why the Pakistan military refuse to take action against the Lashkar-e-Taiba and other India centric outfits. Apart from Kashmir, Mumbai type attacks in other sensitive centres in India in the future, cannot be ruled out. What indeed is striking is that now the admission has come from a former Pakistan President, who hopes to come back to power again in Pakistan!
What the Generals in Pakistan refuse to see is that this unfortunate strategy of using terrorism as an instrument of State policy has now become an existential threat to Pakistan itself. In Kashmir, it has resulted in death and destruction in unimaginable terms causing untold suffering to innocent people. Musharraf claims that it is the right of his country to train militants to put pressure on India to discuss Kashmir. He forgets India’s right to counter them with all the force at its command to preserve its integrity!
While we draw the attention of the international community to the widely acclaimed elections that were held in J&K in late 2008, in which there was strong public participation, our failure to control civilian killings by the police and paramilitary forces in the last three months needs to be looked into. During the last twenty years or more, these forces have been in an anti-militancy and counter insurgency mode, where the gun was the main weapon, and not the lathi. Have the police and paramilitary forces deployed been sufficiently re-oriented to change into the law and order mode to deal with unruly crowds?
Musharraf: They were indeed formed. The government turned a blind eye because they wanted India to discuss Kashmir. ('Pakistan is Always Seen as the Rogue')
For Indian Intelligence Agencies and the J&K police, this is old news. We always knew that the terrorists crossing over into J&K from across the border were trained, armed, and infiltrated by the Pakistani forces. Even the rest of the world is convinced about this, as is implied in the above question put to Gen. Musharraf by the Der Spiegel.
In this connection, an article by Shireen Mazari, (Director General of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Pakistan till May 2008) just before the Vajpayee-Musharraf summit in Agra in July 2001, is relevant and significant. Mazari’s stewardship of this prestigious Institute more or less coincided with Musharraf’s tenure. This article was written in the background of what Mazari claimed were the new rules of the game at the global level which ‘pushed’ India into accepting Pakistan’s continuous call for a dialogue, and citing developments in the Middle East and the Balkans. According to Mazari, the US and its allies, who have been exerting pressure, were interested only in a ‘quick fix’ solution, which inevitably meant allowing the stronger side to retain the advantage even when it was wrong. This interpretation can be seen reflected in the oft repeated Pakistani complaint against the West that they were ignoring the civilian casualties in Kashmir and were favouring the militarily stronger India, and though the interpretation is of events prior to July 2001, is nevertheless relevant even today.
Mazari further continues thus in the article: “The most disturbing fact that is emerging in this new approach to resolution of conflicts involving people seeking their right to self-determination is the manner in which the US, EU and Russia are closing ranks…In the Balkans, Russia will now find more in common with the US and the EU in its consistent support for the Serbs. And, of course, the West has chosen to accept Russia’s conduct of a policy of genocide in Chechnya... If these are the realities, then can any small power go counter to the trend? Or, specifically, can Pakistan counter the Western-Russian support for India? On the Kashmir issue, it can if the situation on the ground is sustained. In other words, the freedom struggle on ground in IHK cannot fade out because that is the only pressure on the international community and India-especially the Indian military. Dialogue must not be accompanied by a cessation of the military struggle on the ground until substantive progress has been made.”
The above assertion bears remarkable resemblance to the current Pakistani strategy vis-à-vis Kashmir, by Musharraf’s successor, General Parvez Kayani. Militants will continue to be trained, armed and infiltrated into Kashmir from Pakistan in order to bring pressure on the international community by pointing to the threat of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan, and on the Indian Government and military to come to terms, favourable to Pakistan. These militants would be fully under the control of the Pakistan Army, as was claimed by Lt. General Aziz in his telephone conversation with General Musharraf who was in China, in May 1999, during the Kargil war. This is why the Pakistan military refuse to take action against the Lashkar-e-Taiba and other India centric outfits. Apart from Kashmir, Mumbai type attacks in other sensitive centres in India in the future, cannot be ruled out. What indeed is striking is that now the admission has come from a former Pakistan President, who hopes to come back to power again in Pakistan!
What the Generals in Pakistan refuse to see is that this unfortunate strategy of using terrorism as an instrument of State policy has now become an existential threat to Pakistan itself. In Kashmir, it has resulted in death and destruction in unimaginable terms causing untold suffering to innocent people. Musharraf claims that it is the right of his country to train militants to put pressure on India to discuss Kashmir. He forgets India’s right to counter them with all the force at its command to preserve its integrity!
While we draw the attention of the international community to the widely acclaimed elections that were held in J&K in late 2008, in which there was strong public participation, our failure to control civilian killings by the police and paramilitary forces in the last three months needs to be looked into. During the last twenty years or more, these forces have been in an anti-militancy and counter insurgency mode, where the gun was the main weapon, and not the lathi. Have the police and paramilitary forces deployed been sufficiently re-oriented to change into the law and order mode to deal with unruly crowds?
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
