All posts by admin

Defence And Strategic Affairs Blog

ISI in the Doghouse – Again

1 Comment

The Kashmiri American Council, based in Washington D.C. and headed by Ghulam Nabi Fai, has been established by Pakistan’s ISI to influence public opinion about Kashmir, according to the FBI. Fai is of Kashmiri origin but a US citizen. For almost two decades, the ISI has been channeling funds through Fai to make contributions to American political leaders by way of campaign contributions to lobby against India in the United States Congress, hold international seminars to launch attacks on the government of India regarding alleged human rights violations in Kashmir and print propaganda pamphlets. A total of US$ 4 million was allegedly funneled by the ISI to the U.S. to influence political leaders with a view to changing U.S. policy on Kashmir.

614_x_261All of these activities were in violation of U.S. laws but the authorities appear to have chosen to ignore them, possibly because of Pakistan’s status as an ally in the so-called global war on terror and perhaps as a quid pro quo for the Pakistan army and the ISI keeping quiet about similar CIA activities in Pakistan. The killing of Osama bin Laden at Abbottabad in May this year irrevocably altered the cozy relationship between the ISI and the CIA. This is what led to the arrest of Fai and his fellow conspirator Zaheer Ahmed on July 19th. Their prosecution will once again reveal the perfidious and duplicitous nature of the Pakistan army and its rogue intelligence agency – the ISI.

The international conferences organized by the KAC were attended by several influential Indians as well, among them Mr. Subramaniam Swamy, a member of Parliament and Mr. Dilip Padgaonkar, a former journalist who is now a member of the prime minister’s task force on Kashmir. Both of them have denied knowledge of Fai’s background and his affiliation with the ISI.

There are other such organizations which are supported by the ISI in Europe and elsewhere. They are usually NGOs that support the Kashmiri people’s ‘right to self determination’. The never tell the paid audiences that gather for their propagandist conferences that free and fair elections have been held in Jammu and Kashmir continuously at least since the mid-1990s and that a people’s government has been in power. On the contrary, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir is governed directly by Islamabad and the people of POK are treated like second class citizens.

According to the Washington Post, “News of the case reverberated through Pakistan’s military and intelligence apparatus on Wednesday, where many suspect the timing of the charges was in retaliation for recent expulsions and arrests of Americans in Pakistan.” However, the FBI has denied any such linkage. The arrests are certainly likely to lead to yet another dip in US-Pakistan relations in the short term. However, as long as American troops remain in Afghanistan in large numbers and their supply lines continue to pass through Quetta and Peshawar, the U.S. has no option but to keep the Pakistan army and the ISI humored in its own national interest.

Defence And Strategic Affairs Blog

Worst-case scenario for Pakistan

1 Comment

Pakistan’s civil society is gradually being torn apart by radical extremism and sectarian violence and its powerful army seems incapable of stemming the rot. The daring attack by terrorists of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) on the naval aviation base at Mehran, Karachi is the latest case in point. The hypothesis that Pakistan’s nuclear warheads may fall into Jihadi hands has once again gained currency.

Pakistan has been besieged by creeping Talibanization. Ground attack fighter aircraft, helicopter gunships and heavy artillery had to be used in 2007-08 to liberate the Swat Valley and Buner from the Sharia rule imposed by Maulana Fazlullah‘s militants. It took major military operations and large-scale army casualties to drive TTP extremists out of South Waziristan in 2009. Though TTP leader Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a U.S. drone strike, the extremists simply moved into North Waziristan and still operate from there. The Army HQ at Rawalpindi and ISI headquarters in Lahore have been successfully attacked by the Taliban in league with al-Qaeda. Bomb blasts in Peshawar and elsewhere are a daily occurrence. Bahawalpur in south Punjab has become a hub for ideological indoctrination.

The Pakistan army and its rogue intelligence agency, the ISI, are having a tough time living up to their carefully cultivated hype as the self-appointed ‘defenders of the faith’ and the custodians of Pakistan’s ‘ideological frontiers’. The rank and file supports the Taliban cause and is unwilling to forgive the generals for allying with the U.S. in its war on terror. The troops are reluctant to operate against fellow Sunni Muslims. The Pushtuns, in particular, are unwilling to fight fellow Pushtuns. In 2007, an army company surrendered to the Taliban. Desertions are commonplace; cases of fratricide are often reported and many weapons have been lost to the Taliban. Apprehensions have been expressed about the radicalization of the officer cadre. Nearly six army divisions are employed in counter-insurgency operations in the Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa and FATA areas but progress in eliminating the Taliban has been painfully slow.

Despite being in tight spot, the Pakistan army and ISI continue to make facetious distinctions between the good Taliban—’strategic’ assets for employment against India and in Afghanistan—and bad Taliban. Their support for the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed is undiminished. In Afghanistan they are running with the hares and hunting with the hounds and are still looking for strategic depth. If Pakistan has earned the dubious distinction of having become the epicentre of fundamentalist terrorism, it is because the army and ISI, driven by their hatred for India, have blundered so badly.

The worst case scenario for Pakistan over the next two to three years will be a Jihadi-led coup from within the army. Radicalized officers owing allegiance to the TTP variety of Taliban could come to power. The probability of this is low but the steady deterioration in the security situation and the army’s unwillingness and inability to fight the scourge of Talibanization means the possibility cannot be ruled out. In such a nightmarish scenario, with near civil war conditions prevailing, nuclear weapons may actually be used against U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan and targets in India. This would mean a holocaust on the Indian subcontinent.

It is time the international community seriously considered neutralizing Pakistan’s nuclear warhead storage sites and the delivery systems. It would be in India’s interest to join such an initiative. India should be prepared to provide military assistance, including direct intervention. The U.S. must lead the international community in efforts to convince General Kayani that the only way forward is to launch determined counter-terrorism operations to weed out the TTP, LeT, JeM and other terrorist groups that have enjoyed state patronage. The consequences of not doing so are too horrendous to contemplate.

Defence And Strategic Affairs Blog

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on India’s Policy towards its Neighbours

1 Comment

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh rarely speaks his mind on the major issues of the day. However, on June 29, 2011, in his interaction with five editors from the print medium, he spoke at length on domestic issues as well as the geo-political scenario and relations with India’s neighbours. He noted with concern the deteriorating international economic environment and said India’s neighbourhood was a very uncertain one. He said, “India would have to swim through all this adversity and keep our heads high if we have to come through.”

credit: pmindia.nic.inThe Prime Minster said that the planned draw-down of U.S. and other NATO-ISAF troops scheduled to begin in July 2011, as approved by President Barack Obama recently, was not good for India. “It does hurt us. It could hurt us. No one knows what is going to happen in Afghanistan.” However, he did not spell out India’s options to deal with the emerging situation. He once again emphasised that India supported reconciliation in Afghanistan, “I (had) told the Afghan Parliament that the reconciliation should be Afghan-led. I think (President) Hamid Karzai and other politicians can work on that. You cannot carry the good-bad Taliban distinction much too far.”

Maintaining a cautious approach towards Pakistan, the Prime Minister repeated his earlier statement on visiting Pakistan. He had said that he would visit Islamabad only when he was convinced that there had been sufficient progress in the ongoing talks and there was a substantive agreement to be signed. He was not convinced that Pakistan had done enough to eliminate terrorism emanating from its soil but believed that “India should continue to talk and engage with Pakistan to solve outstanding issues”.

He expressed his satisfaction with the progress in relations with Bangladesh. “The Bangladesh Government has gone out of its way to help us in apprehending anti-India insurgent groups that were operating from Bangladesh for long. And, that is why we have been generous in dealing with Bangladesh. We are not a rich country, but we offered it a line of credit of $1 billion when Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina came here. We are now looking at ways and means of some further unilateral concessions. We are also looking at ways and means of finding a practical and pragmatic solution to the sharing of Teesta waters. I plan to go there myself…” However, he expressed his unhappiness about extremist forces in Bangladesh and said, “We must reckon that at least 25 per cent of the population of Bangladesh swears by the Jamiat-ul-Islami and they are very anti-Indian, and they are in the clutches, many times, of the ISI. So, the political landscape in Bangladesh can change at any time.” This became an embarrassing faux pas as his words were misinterpreted in Bangladesh to mean that 25 per cent of the population is anti-Indian.

The Prime Minister welcomed the defeat of the LTTE in Sri Lanka. He advised the Sri Lankan government to find an amicable solution to the Tamil problem that is acceptable to the Tamilian people. He said, “The Tamil problem does not disappear with the defeat of the LTTE. The Tamil population has legitimate grievances. They feel they are reduced to second-class citizens. And our emphasis has been to persuade the Sri Lankan government that we must move towards a new system of institutional reforms, where the Tamil people will have a feeling that they are equal citizens of Sri Lanka, and they can lead a life of dignity and self-respect.”

The Prime Minister did not express any views on the continuing political and constitutional stalemate in Nepal or on India’s relations with China and Myanmar. Overall, the Prime Minister’s pronouncements reiterated India’s known position on most issues regarding India’s relations with its neighbours and were marked by a renewed emphasis on continuity. Observers who were looking for some bold initiatives to resolve ongoing challenges would have been disappointed.

India-US Relations Blog

Change of Helm in Washington; Nirupama Rao to be the Ambassador

Leave a comment

The road to becoming the Indian Foreign Secretary most certainly runs through the ambassadorships in Beijing, Islamabad and probably Kathmandu and Colombo. Nirupama did Beijing and Colombo and now after a successful stint as Foreign Secretary, is slated to become India’s most high profile ambassador – in Washington. It is customary to say that appointments like these take place at a critical or crucial juncture.  Is it a crucial time? Not more than at any other time.

credit: theindiaexperts.comAlthough a number of reasons can be found to explain why the Indo-US relationship is currently in a parlous condition. The biggest blow comes undoubtedly from the elimination of the U.S. from the MRCA competition, quite probably for purely technical reasons. But there is another side to the Nirupama story. That is the story of the U.S. ambassador in New Delhi. After the performance of absolute cracker – Jacks like Robert Blackwill, Frank Wisner, Dick Celeste and many others, the performance of the current US ambassador in Delhi has been entirely forgettable. If it meant much to the U.S. to get short listed in the MRCA competition, one wouldn’t have guessed so from the activities or the lack of them at Roosevelt House. The U.S. ambassador’s office and residence was constantly buzzing during the time of the U.S. nuclear deal, but that was probably a stunning one – off performance – when the U.S. embassy mustered a huge public relations campaign on behalf of the deal, and followed it up with a command performance at the NSG waiver at Geneva.

Since then it’s all been downhill. No visiting congressmen in Delhi – or if there were, they kept a low profile. The result of all this is that Nirupama Rao has a job in hand- putting some heat into the relationship. As the PR blurbs say, the Indo- U.S. relationship is so multi-faceted that many parts of it run on automatic. So if the U.S. didn’t get the MRCA, it did get the torpedo deal, the C -17 deal and will probably get the howitzer deal. Institutionally the Indo-US relationship is incredibly strong, running as it does through 13 forums or dialogues. These include the Strategic Dialogue, Foreign Office Consultation, Defence Planning Group, Joint Working Group on Counter Terrorism, the US-India Economic Dialogue, the CEO Forum, The Trade Policy Forum, The Energy Dialogue, Global Climate Change Dialogue, Information & Communication Dialogue, Science and Technology Forum, Education Dialogue and Health Cooperation Framework. That list should knock anyone out – but more importantly demonstrates how many joint bodies can be set up to produce very pedestrian results. In the entire run-up to the Obama visit probably one or two of these forums actually produced tangible agreements for the heads of state to sign.

The question also arises rather sharply, that if the state to state relationship runs through 13 standing forums, what can one ambassador do? Actually, she can do a lot. Because if even one or two of these forums actually click, the results can be spectacular. But this raises the important issue, of how much of the relationship is ‘managing’ and how much is old fashioned ‘diplomacy’? It probably is still a mixture, with more and more work between the two countries being conducted ‘outside’ the embassies and through the forums and through communities. Actually it was a US congressman (unnamed) who came to Delhi may years ago and said that U.S. foreign policy is controlled more through congress. According to him, other countries need to imitate China, in building up lobbies within congress rather than running formal diplomacy through the Embassy. This may or may not be true, but Nirupama has very little time to find out as she heads West to represent India in Washington. We certainly don’t want to repeat the NRI ambassador fiasco but if Nirupama can yet go beyond Foggy Bottom to get to grips with her job it would be worth watching.

Defence And Strategic Affairs Blog

Constructive Engagement: India-Pakistan Foreign Secretaries Talks

1 Comment

Although talks between India’s Nirupama Rao and Pakistan’s Salman Bashir in the last week of June 2011 did not produce a major breakthrough, the fact that these were viewed positively by both the sides and were described as constructive and cordial makes the talks special. This is because nothing more than the reiteration of known positions on the resolution of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute and on the export of terrorism into India had been anticipated in both the countries. The talks focussed on peace and security, including terrorism and nuclear and military confidence bldg measures; the Kashmir issue; and, the promotion of people-to-people contacts as well as friendly exchanges.

During the talks, India sought early closure on the trial of Pakistani terrorists who were involved in the planning and execution of the Mumbai terror strikes in November 2008 and pointed out that there cannot be any meaningful discussion on Kashmir under the shadow of the gun. Calling for an end to the “shadow of the gun and the violence it has unleashed”, Ms Rao expressed concern over continuing infiltration into Kashmir. She said at a joint press conference that the “ideology of military conflict should have no place in the paradigm of our relationship of the 21st century… Instead, this relationship should be characterised by the vocabulary of peace, all-round cooperation in the interest of our people, growing trade and economic interaction, as well as people to people contacts — and, all this, let me emphasise, in an atmosphere free of terror and violence.”

The issue of terrorism figured prominently in the joint statement: “The foreign secretaries noted that both countries recognize that terrorism poses a continuing threat to peace and security and they reiterated the firm and undiluted commitment of the two countries to fight and eliminate this scourge in all its forms and manifestations. They agreed on the need to strengthen cooperation on counter-terrorism.”

Both the sides agreed to make efforts to expand trans-LoC trade, increase the frequency of the Srinagar-Muzzafarabad bus service and to examine the feasibility of starting a bus service between Kargil and Skardu. Frank talks were held on the issue of peace and security between India and Pakistan. Discussions on CBMs included the establishment of contacts between the training establishments of the armed forces of the two countries, including India’s National Defence College and Pakistan’s National Defence University. New nuclear CBMs and measures for better coordination between India’s Coast Guard and Pakistan’s Maritime Security Agency were also discussed. India had presented a draft agreement to prevent “situations at sea” involving vessels of the two countries at a previous meeting. The Pakistani side agreed to examine the document.

A suggestion for contacts between defence and security think tanks, including the holding of seminars and conferences, was also taken up for discussion. Both the sides agreed that hostile propaganda should not be allowed to cloud the relationship. The two countries decided to constitute a group of experts to discuss conventional and nuclear CBMs to “discuss implementation and strengthening of existing arrangements, and to consider additional measures, which are mutually acceptable, to build trust and confidence and promote peace and security.”

Unlike the frosty talks between India’s External Affairs Minister S M Krishna and his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi in 2010, the Foreign Secretary talks resulted in some forward movement. Krishna and Pakistan’s new Foreign Minister – to be appointed shortly, will meet in July 2011 and take up these issues where the two Foreign Secretaries have left off. If they succeed in building on the gains made at Islamabad, the India-Pakistan rapprochement process will once again begin to gather momentum.