Conclusion

pdc

Political Discourse

2395-22292582-2691

Prof. R S Yadav

Kurukshetra, Harayana

pdc-3-1-008

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Cross-border Terrorism: Main Obstacle to Peace

Baral

Sivani

¹Sivani Baral, Assistant Professor, Political Science in Ranapur College, Odisha

162017

31101106

2017

IndianJournals.com

There is as yet no precise definition of terrorism. ‘Terrorism’ has been defined in several ways, but there is not much of international consensus on its core elements. Almost every day, some part of the world is a victim of terrorist violence causing destructions and loss of lives. The victims are security people or civilians or both. Terrorism may be indigenous in origin and localized in operation and effect; it may also have international links, networks and consequences. With the passage of time, internationalization of terrorism has been on increase.

In this study, terrorism means indiscriminate use of violence against people – security personnel/civilians. The focus of the study is on cross-border terrorism in the subcontinent, especially Pak-sponsored terrorism causing destructions and loss of lives in India. Pakistan has deployed terror against India as an instrument of state policy. India insists that unless and until there is an end to cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistan's soil, it would not be possible to establish peace between the two countries.

Pakistan would continue to deny its involvement in international terrorism, especially in terrorist operations against India conducted from its soil, but almost the rest of the world has come to believe that Pakistan has become a terrorist state and that it is directly or indirectly involved in terrorist activities perpetrated against India. Having realized that it cannot win a war against India, Pakistan has resorted to terrorism as a potent weapon. The Pakistani army and its intelligence wing, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), train, arm and finance several Pakistani terrorist groups based in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (POK), Punjab province (of Pakistan), Gilgit-Baltistan, and the frontier tribal areas bordering Afghanistan. These groups are directed to attack the targets in India and also Indian targets in other countries like Afghanistan. Two prominent terrorist groups based in Pakistan's Punjab province are Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). It was JeM which was behind the terrorist attack on India's Parliament on 13 December 2001 while the LeT conducted terrorist attacks on the city of Mumbai on 26–28 November 2008. Though the terrorists belonging to Haqqani Network mounted an attack on India's embassy in Kabul on 7 July 2008, yet the plan was directed by ISI, the intelligence wing of Pakistan's army. 1 The LeT also attacked India's consulate in Harat, Afghanistan, on 23 May 2014, just three days before Narendra Modi was sworn in as India's Prime Minister.2

David Headley, in his testimony before a US court, confessed that the LeT which did 26/11 had the support and guidance of ISI.3 The masterminds of 26/11 wanted to prevent rapprochement between India and Pakistan and drag them to a military confrontation – even a war. President Asif Ali Zardari while extending the hand of friendship towards India conceded that Kashmir militants were terrorists and that India had never been a threat to Pakistan.4 He further said that “democratic countries do not go to war” and that Pakistan would not initiate a nuclear war against India. These dovish gestures apparently provoked some “hawks” in Pakistan to launch a terror attack on Mumbai city in November 2008.

Some reports suggest that there are 30 to 40 terror camps in Pakistan's Punjab Province, Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan.5The Government of Pakistan's Punjab province gives financial support to LeT and the present Prime Minister of that province is Shahbaz Sharif, the younger brother of Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Following the blacklisting of LeT by the UN, its leadership functioned through its front organization called Jamat-ud-Dawa (JUD) which claimed that it was a “charitable organization”. Thus, the terrorist groups, based in Pakistan, get active support and encouragement of its civilian and military leaderships.

From the beginning, India has been convinced that those who attacked Mumbai on 26 November 2008 were supported, trained and directed by Pakistan's military and ISI. Pakistan, as expected, denied this. It said that those terrorists were “non-state actors” or “stateless actors”. Pranab Mukherjee, the then External Affairs Minister of India, retorted that those terrorists did not fall from heaven and that they were very much Pakistanis.6 A well-known Pakistani investigative journalist, Syed Saleem Shahzad who was allegedly killed by ISI had revealed in his book, Inside Al Qaeda and the Taliban that the plan to attack Mumbai was scripted by ISI and executed by Al Qaeda with ISI's approval.7 However, it is new clear that it was LeT which, with the guidance and support of ISI, attacked Mumbai city on 26 November 2008. Pervez Musharraf, the former Army Chief and President of Pakistan, disclosed in October 2015 that Lashkar-e-Taiba, Taliban and Haqqani were trained and assisted by the government of Pakistan. The LeT leader Hafiz Saeed is Pakistan's “hero”, said Musharraf.8

More than eight years after the terrorist attack on Mumbai, the trial of the 7 accused has not yet started in a Pakistani Court. New Delhi has given 12 dossiers on the role of the 7 accused, but Pakistani courts, it seems, do not accept the materials contained in these dossiers as evidence.

In response to India's complaint that Pakistan is deliberately delaying the trial of the accused of attacks on Mumbai, Pakistan points fingers at the alleged delay in the trial of Indians who have been accused of being involved in the Samjhauta Express bombing.9 Pakistan also alleges that India's agents are causing terrorist violence in Balochistan (Several Baloch groups have, long, been agitating for independence/autonomy).

More than 12 years back – on 6 January 2004 – the government of Pakistan had promised that its territory would not be used for exporting terrorism to India. This promise has often been broken. The border/LoC incursions by Pakistani soldiers and terrorists have been a regular phenomenon. Towards the end of the UPA-2 government headed by Dr. Manmohan Singh of Congress, the border terrorism of Pakistan took an extreme turn. A number of Indian soldiers were brutally killed and many civilians also suffered.10 But, while denying this charge, Pakistan counter-charged that Indian soldiers, crossing the LoC, had killed Pakistani soldiers and civilians. Border incursions by Pakistan have continued to occur after the change of government in New Delhi in May 2014. With the ‘masculine’/’macho’ image of the NDA government headed by BJP's Narendra Modi, Pakistan's border incursion has not stopped.

After the Peshawar massacre of 141 persons including 132 school children on 11 December 2014, it was hoped that the Nawaz Sharif government would take strong actions against terrorists and that it would not allow them to operate in India. But this expectation has been belied. The Sharif government, after coming to power in May 2013, took military action against some terrorists based in the tribal belt bordering the Afghan border, but it has done little to control and contain the terrorists based in Pakistan's Punjab province and PoK who are causing terror in India. Islamabad considers the Pakistani terrorists (Pak Taliban) based in its Western territory as ‘bad terrorists’, but it views those based in its eastern part (such as LeT and JeM) as “good terrorists”. The Pak Taliban based in the Frontier Province (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) is “bad” because it targets Pakistani military and civilians while the terrorists operating from Pakistan's Punjab and POK are “good” as they are hitting out at their targets in India. This policy of distinguishing between “good” and “bad” terrorists has cost Pakistan dear. Because of its complicity in terrorism, Pakistan is considered today as an “international pariah” or the “epicenter of international terrorism”.

Nawaz Sharif, both during the election campaign and after assuming the office of Prime Minister, promised to take steps for improving relations with India. This sentiment was reciprocated by Narendra Modi on the very day he was sworn in as the Prime Minister of India. Several steps were taken by both sides to resume talks. Sharif attended Modi's swearing-in function on 26 May 2014. Modi air-dashed to Lahore on 25 December 2015 to greet Sharif on his birthday. But all this bonhomie has failed to prevent Pak terrorism in India. The Pak-sponsored terrorist violence in Jammu and Kashmir has been taking place virtually without a break.

While a terror attack on Dinanangar police station in Gurudaspur district of Punjab on 27 July 2015 resulted in 11 casualties, two live terrorists were caught in Jammu and Kashmir in August 2015. The Gurudaspur attack raised suspicion that it was the beginning of the revival of Khalistan movement which had bloodied the soil of Punjab with terrorist violence in 1980s. In the first week of January 2016, Jaish-e-Mohammed launched an attack on the Pathankot Air Force Station. A group of four to six terrorists were involved in this operation which started on 2 January and came to an end on 6 January. Seven security personnel and all attackers were killed. On 18 September 2016, four terrorists belonging to LeT mounted an attack on the Army camp in Uri in Jammu and Kashmir. While all the attackers were neutralized, 19 Indian soldiers fell victims. The terror attack on the Uri camp may be seen in the background of the killing of Burhan Wani, a Kashmiri Militant leader, by security personnel on 8 July 2016. The terrorists apparently attacked the Uri army camp to avenge Burhan's death.

The Uri massacre shocked and enraged India. The determination and capacity of the Modi government to defeat and eliminate Pak-sponsored terrorism came under doubt. This perhaps prompted it to launch “surgical strike”11 on terror launch-pads in Pak-occupied-Kashmir (PoK) on 29 September 2016 – Just 11 days after the Uri attack. The Indian media, quoting “surgical strike”, reported that as a result of surgical strike seven to 10 terror launch- pads were destroyed and 30 to 50 terrorists were killed. But Pakistan has denied India's “surgical strike”. While Obama administration implicitly gave credence to India's claim of “surgical strike”, leading international media like BBC, New York Times and Washington Post have, more or less maintained a neutral stand on India's claim of “surgical strike”12. These media organizations with huge international prestige and influence have just reported India's claim and Pakistan's response on “surgical strikes”; they have hardly presented their own positions after due investigation on this controversy. On the ground of “security”, New Delhi has not produced any evidence to prove that the “surgical strikes” happened. However, the Congress party in India has cast doubts about the claim of the Modi government about “surgical strike”. It contends that in the past also the Indian army, more than once, had mounted “surgical strikes but those were kept secret. While military objectives were achieved, the government of the day did not try to get political mileage out of them. The Congress has criticized the Modi government for having “politicized” the “surgical strike”. It may be pointed out that the “surgical strikes” of 29 September 2016 have failed to silence the Pakistani terrorists and their political and military mentors.

Both India and Pakistan are nuclear powers. They have been involved, for long in serious conficts over several issues. They have fought four wars, and border violence has been a regular feature. Fears have been expressed about the outbreak of a nuclear war between them. Equally frightening is the fear that some of Pakistani bombs especially, tactical nuclear weapons,13 may fall into the hands of Pakistan-based Jihadis.14 Many observers are not convinced by Islamabad's assertion that the nuclear command and control system is perfect. India's security is vulnerable to “nuclear terrorism” – terrorists being in possession of nuclear bombs. India is trying to draw the attention of the international community to this nuclear scare.

Conclusion

There is International pressure – particularly, from the US – on India and Pakistan to resume the bilateral dialogue which has remained suspended since the terror attack on Mumbai city on 26 November 2008. The Modi government was inclined to resume it, but decided against it after the Uri attack on 18 September 2016. It links the resumption of “comprehensive” – previously called “composite” – dialogue to the ending of cross-border terrorism. To Pakistan, “Kashmir” is the central issue between the two countries, but, to India, the central issue is Pak-sponsored terrorism. The international community should put pressure on Pakistan to stop breeding and exporting terrorism. This pressure may be diplomatic/financial punishment. Pakistan has earned the dubious distinction of being the most-talked about state regarding “nuclear terrorism”. By all means, this horror is to be averted. Violence is not the road to peace; peace may emerge from talks. Pakistan has created the monster of terror. The monster has started devouring its creator. The sooner the people of Pakistan realize this and force their government to end its policy of bleeding India by thousand cuts, the more secure they will be and the more peaceful the subcontinent will be.

References1.

“2008 Indian Embassy Attack in Kabul Sanctioned by ISI, New Book Claims”, Time of India, 2332014, www.m.timesofndia.com accessed on 332017.

“Let Responsible for Attack at Indian Consulate in Herat: US”, Ibid., 2562014, www.m.timesofndia.com accessed on 332017.

Ibid., 2072010.

Rajiv

Sikri

, Challenge and strategy: Rethinking Indian's Foreign Policy, Sage, New Delhi, 2009, p. 42; Times of India, 972009.

Rajat

Pandit

, “40 Jihadi Camps, Operating across Border”, Times of India, 2482008.

The Hindu, 14122010.

“26/11 Plan was Drafted by ISI and stamped by Qaeda”, Times of India, 262011.

“Mush Exposes Pak Terror Role”, Deccan Chronicle, 29102015.

There took place a bomb explosion in Samjhauta Express train in the mid-night of 1822007killing 68 passengers including 42 Pakistanis. Some “Hindu extremists”, accused in the case, are in jail. The trial is in an advanced stage.

10.

Rajesh

Ahuja

, “Samjhuta Express Blast Case: NIA to Ask Pakistan to Send 13 witnesses:, Hindustan Times updated2482016, www.m.hindustantimes.com, Accessed on 332017.

11.

Mohar

Chakraborty

, “India-Pakistan Relations in 2013: Weighing the ‘hits’ and ‘misses’”, World Focus, 122013, p.73.

12.

On 16122014, an Army Public School in Peshawar came under terrorist attack. 141 persons including 132 school children were killed. The Hindu, 17122015.

13.

International Media Reacts to Indian ‘Surgical Strikes’ claim”, Kashmir Observer, 3102016, www.kshmirobserver.net, accessed on 332017; Anni

Gowen

and Shaiq

Hussain

“Indian Claims ‘Surgical strikes’, against militants in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir”, The Washington Post, 2992016; Amir

Iqbal

and Pamela

Constable

, “In Kashmir, Doubts that Indian Soldiers Actually infltrated across the Border”, Ibid., 2102016; Ellen

Barry

and Sal

an Masood

, “India claims ‘Surgical Strikes’ across Line of Control in Kashmir”, New York Times, 2992016;

Salman

Masood

, “In Kashmir, Pakistan questions India's ‘Surgical Strikes’ on Militants”, Ibid, 1102016.

14.

Pakistan has developed tactical nuclear weapons in response to India's “Cold Start Doctrine” which was apparently developed after India realized the limitations of Operation Parakram (2001 to 2002). New Delhi, however, denied the existence of Cold Start Doctrine.

15.

Shahzeb

Ali Rathore

, “Are Pakistani's Nuclear Assets under Threat”, The Diplomat, 2842016, www.thediplomat.com, accessed on 2032017.