Call Pakistan’s bluff There can’t be business as usual unless it means business

Posted at: Jan 14 2016 5AMG Parthasarathy

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/call-pakistan-s-bluff/183157.html

Keep dialogue channels open, but the pressure on Pakistan to deliver must stay.

G Parthasarathy

THE attack by Pakistan based terrorists on the strategic Pathankot air base, located barely 35 miles from the International Border with Pakistan, was yet another transgression of India’s sovereignty by an ISI-supported terrorist group. It was akin to the attack on India’s Parliament in December 2001 and the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. In the days following the attack on our Parliament, the Musharraf dispensation vigorously denied any knowledge of, or involvement in, the attack. Yet, in March 2004, Lt Gen Javed Ashraf Qazi, a former ISI chief and then minister in the Musharraf government, acknowledged in Pakistan’s Parliament: “We must admit that the Jaish-e-Mohammed has been involved in the killings of thousands of innocent Kashmiris, the attack on the Indian Parliament, the murder of (Wall Street Journal journalist) Daniel Pearl and an attempt to assassinate General (Pervez) Musharraf.”

Pakistan’s behaviour was identical, when the Lashkar-e-Taiba attacked Mumbai in November 2008, killing over 160 persons. We once again witnessed the spectacle of blatant and false denials of any Pakistani involvement by the ISI, till the media traced the home of captured terrorist Ajmal Kasab in Pakistan’s Punjab province. India has only itself to blame for the rise of the Jaish-e-Mohammed as a vicious terrorist organisation by releasing its leader, Maulana Masood Azhar, during the IC 814 hijacking in Kandahar. Interestingly, yet another terrorist, Omar Saeed Sheikh, whom India released during the hijacking of IC 814, was associated with the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack on New York and Washington also. Nations, and indeed the world, pay a high price when surrendering to terrorist demands.

Even though a faction of the Jaish-e- Mohammed led by Masood Azhar is now back in favour with the ISI, the Jaish itself was in the ISI doghouse for years because of its association with the Pakistani Taliban, (Tehriq-e- Taliban). The relations of the ISI with the Tehriq-e-Taliban started to sour after Pakistani Special Forces laid siege to and attacked the Lal Masjid in the capital Islamabad, which was then run by Deobandi clerics, affiliated to the Jaish-e-Mohammed. The Jaish claims an ideological/sectarian affinity with the Afghan Taliban, who also label themselves as “Deobandi”. But, in the recent past, the ISI and the Jaish-e-Mohammed appears to have struck a deal, under which they will support each other in backing the Afghan Taliban and cooperate in terrorist attacks in Jammu and Kashmir and elsewhere in India. 

The link between the Jaish and the ISI helps drive a wedge between the Pashtun-dominated Afghan Taliban and their Pashtun Pakistani counterparts (TTP), who are now being targeted by the Pakistan army. The involvement of the Jaish in the attack on the Pathankot air base has to be seen in this context. Pakistan’s support for the Afghan Taliban is reinforced ideologically by the Deobandi-oriented Jaish. The Jaish also provides additional muscle to the ISI-sponsored jihad against India. Maulana Masood Azhar, who was imprisoned in India before his release in Kandahar, has repeatedly vowed to wage jihad against India. While Pakistan may pretend to take some symbolic steps against the Jaish-e-Mohammed, it is unlikely to end support for the involvement of the Jaish jihad against India by acting seriously against its leaders. The fact that the investigation into the attack has been entrusted by Mr Nawaz Sharif to Pakistan’s toothless Intelligence Bureau, which is given to kowtowing before the army establishment, indicates that no serious action will be taken against the masterminds of the Pathankot attack. 

While the Obama Administration has called on Pakistan to act expeditiously against the perpetrators of the Pathankot attack, one has to realise that Washington is presently depending heavily on the Pakistan military to promote “reconciliation” between the Afghan Government and the Taliban. There is, however, little reason to believe that despite its pious professions, the ISI will do anything to prevent a Taliban takeover in Afghanistan. In these circumstances, India will have to actively utilise the bipartisan support it enjoys in the US Congress to see that the Obama Administration acts more decisively, by curtailing it military aid programme to Pakistan and asking its western allies and Japan to do likewise with their economic assistance. There cannot be business as usual unless Pakistan acts against the perpetrators of the Pathankot attack.

New Delhi will have to take some hard decisions on how to proceed with the conduct of relations with Pakistan. Quite obviously, India needs to calibrate its engagement and dialogue with Pakistan, bearing these realities in mind. Alluding to the meeting that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had with Gen Raheel Sharif and others, the Pakistan government said on January 8: “The meeting discussed the Pathankot attack, expressed condemnation of this incident and reiterated the country’s commitment to cooperate with India to completely eradicate the menace of terrorism afflicting our region.” Pakistan is thus implicitly suggesting that it too has concerns on terrorism, allegedly sponsored by India. By all accounts, the National Security Advisers (reinforced by Foreign Secretaries) had a useful meeting in Bangkok. Several such meetings, preferably behind the scenes and devoid of publicity, are required if we are to reach an agreement on how to deal with concerns on terrorism. Similar meetings between the heads of intelligence agencies (ISI and R&AW) should reinforce these meetings. 

Working out the framework for a new Comprehensive Dialogue as proposed by External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj can be discussed in due course. Moreover, it is important that a mechanism for regular meetings between the DGMOs should be firmly in place before the winter snows melt and infiltration picks up in the Kashmir Valley. It is also time to activate measures to raise the costs for the Pakistan army internally for its support to cross-border terrorism. The Pakistan army is today engaged in suppressing its own people in three of its four provinces—Sind, Baluchistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, bordering Afghanistan. These military operations should be made infinitely more costly for the Pakistan army in terms of men, material and finances. Dialogue has to be accompanied by the full spectrum use of “non-conventional capabilities” by India, as long as the ISI continues its policies aimed to “bleed India with a thousand cuts”.