The Indian press is raising the bloody shirt. Every day a new proof that the attackers were Pakistani is used to argue that there should be strikes against Pakistan, and the time table is short. The trail of the accused group, the Lashkar-e-Taiba or LeT, is long in international terrorism. They have been sanctioned as a terrorist group in a variety of ways. They are located in a front line state in the so called war on Terrorism, and yet, little has really been done about them, because of their connections to the "ISI" – Pakistan’s powerful security force.
It does not help that the Congress Party’s response has been confused. A cabinet minister was sacked, but another was left in place. Nothing has been done to improve the police or state security, which is the hole that was exploited by gun men that went on a naked rampage. India had received multiple warnings of the attacks, from multiple sources, with a high degree of confidence, and yet, it was completely unprepared. Malice or incompetence, it makes little difference to the dead.
It is already clear that the militant commando team had help inside of India and that the police forces were completely ill prepared and ill equipped. Reviews have started, but it is a measure of the inefficiency of the Indian military that no concrete steps have been taken.
It does not help that American leadership has been vague about what India’s right to self defense actually entails. Hot pursuit? Surgical strikes? Joint military action? It is not that Obama does not have a broader strategic vision: he has in the past called for a military alliance of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India against terror. He is pushing for the government of Pakistan to get time to deal with the multiple internal problems. Both of the internal divisions in Pakistan, because the ISI, in effect, does not answer to the government – and the civilian government has only recently replaced a military government. This three sided political problem means that the civilian government must first persuade the armed forces to act against the security forces – in a matter which the armed forces regard as being vital to the defense of Pakistan’s interests, namely the status of Kashmir.
But time is a very expensive commodity when outrage, particularly profitable outrage, is being used for the gain of individual parties. It is fairly clear that the terrorist attack was meant to provoke the elite of India, and in particular against Pakistan. And yet, as President-Elect Obama has already made clear, terrorism of this sort – quasi-state actors pursuing their own goals – is an equal threat to all.
Outgoing Secretary of State Rice is headed to India, filled with a great deal of language about a demand for total transparency from Pakistan. While urging restraint with one hand, she is pressing the civilian government of Pakistan to act against internal forces, while offering very little in the way of aid or positive incentive. The war in Afghanistan has metastasized into a larger conflict: forces of dissolution, militancy, extremism, and violence have used the money, weapons, and chaos, being generated. It is to the good to call for an investigation, but transparency must work both ways. India cannot ask for cooperation from Pakistan on security, without giving it in return. By blaming the Pakistani government for the actions of Pakistani factions, the government of India, and the United States which has provided cover for the deteriorating relationship between the two governments, has made a grave error.
The Mumbai attacks were calculated to drive the elites of India into a frenzy – there have been more deaths in attacks before, but none struck at the rich and powerful. The last militant said that the end was to cause India’s "9/11." It was not the attacks on 9/11 that did the most damage, but the incoherent and hysterical response. The best step is not shuttle diplomacy, but a three way security summit, aimed at producing concrete steps in investigating the attacks, and reducing dramatically the cross border violence that long stand off between India and Pakistan has fostered.
Terrorism feeds on failed states, failed societies, and failed relationships. Pakistan’s security elite almost certainly had a hand in these attacks, but the field that they sprung from was seeded by the hostility between the two nations. India and Pakistan, as state actors, can no longer afford to fail to settle their differences by using military means.



36 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
zed
There needs to be a 2 state summit – India and Pakistan. Having the US involved would cause problems with domestic politics in both countries.
Thinking outside the box – could China have a role in solving the Kashmir problem? China does after all share a border with Kashmir.
If India has evidence real evidence that Pakistan is involved they should invade.
But what is the standard we use to measure that? America however should be the last to talk about somebody else not invading another country based on weak evidence. Or moral cred is gone as well as our rep about being right.
China has border issues with India over Tibet and India keeping the Dahli Lama safe they worry he might organize a rebellion.
Should be Pakistan, yes?
Iran has ties with India and a border plus no stakes in the game as far as I know.
India won’t go to war if the ISI is dismantled and its leaders are put on trial publicly. The civilian government needs to get control the civilian government also has another reason to do this.
They have to suspect that the ISI was behind the killing of Benazir Bhutto.
However America has deals with the ISI and the military I’m sure that Bush does not want them in court.
The embarrassment of where all that money we gave them and their ties to al Qaeda would damage Bush’s legacy.
Umm, no Iran does not border India. It borders Pakistan and Afghanistan to the east. It has the virtue of not having stakes in the game. Are the LeT sunni or shia? one would think sunni based on alleged Pakistani complicity.
China does have issues with India. China does have skin in this already – it has interests in ultimate resolution of borders and control of Kashmir and Jammu.
Times of India suggested the other day, that unless missiles start flying prematurely, there will likely be a four part framework with India and Pakistan talking and the US and China intermediating. Also, China and India are doing 14 days of joint antiterror drills starting Monday. Sorry… iPhone, can’t link
OT: lack of cut and paste in iPhone – I’m in trial period and will be going back to a less expensive smartphone that has more features.
Where besides the temporizing are concrete steps from the Pakistanis to investigate the Mumbai attacks. They know the name of one of the attackers and where he was from. The attackers had to have a lot of very specific training. I’m thinking there can not be many places in Pakistan where such training is available. The could be pounding the ports to see how the terrorists left Pakistan. And of couse, they should be tearing the ISI apart to find out the extent of its involvement. But as far as I can tell they are saying they will only maybe do something if India provides them with solid proof. There is a lot of lying, hypocrisy, and kabuki going on here.
Sorry you are right Iran has no border with India
remember, the worst sino-US fear is for Pakistan to deploy it’s regular troops away from the NW province near Afghanistan and to the Indian/Kashmir border instead… which is probably exactly the outcome that AQ designed the attacks to provoke and that, arguably, India is now playing into. My guess is that the US and China and frantically pleading with Pakistan not to redeploy those troops while, at the same time, pleading for Indian restraint. US will play a vaguely India-sympathetic role in all this pleading, with China doing the same for Pakistan, but the goal is the same. This is the world’s messiest mess.
India and Pakistan do this frenetic little dance occasionally, which sets the rest of the world on edge because they both have nukes but it won’t come to all-out war because neither of them is completely insane.
famous last words!
Leftover map from from the McCain/Palin campaign? :-)
So far it appears that the adults are in charge. I hope it holds together long enough to where we can have an adult in charge too.
You could be right but I’m inclined to think it’s bluster. Another major terrorist attack or two in India though and all bets are off.
The wild card is that the government of Pakistan appears too weak to control goings on in or out of their country.
Fareed Zacharia had the former head of the ISI on this am. From what I understood him to be saying military members rotate in and out of ISI. This could be problematic if true.
I think part of the problem here is that this attack took place in the transition period. The new administration isn’t in place yet and the current one is weak domestically and internationally.
I think there is great need for there to be strong presence of US diplomacy in that region, but since we are in this weird no-man’s-land situation and the public anger in India is high, this a particularly dangerous time.
Another stumbling block is that Obama has repeatedly said that he would follow the Bush policy of bombing the Pakistani border areas to go after terrorists. This policy is deeply unpopular in Pakistan and has contributed to the weakening of the Pakistani civilian government which is seen as (and is in fact) eager to work with the US. This policy has helped the Military and the Intelligence agencies gain a stronger footing in some areas of the Pakistan and has shut out the civilian government from those regions.
So in terms of positive incentive that can be given to the Pakistani government – one would be to get Obama to rescind that Bush policy. Because let’s face it. If the US claims the right to unilaterally go into Pakistan, India will see no reason as to why it shouldn’t. India is more likely to do this because it has a history of disregarding the global practice of giving certain nations special rights in comparison to other nations and India thinks of itself as major power on the world stage (it always has thought of itself that way).
It’s true, the civilian leaders have very little control over the situation. Probably just a matter of time until another military coup.
hehe. Interestingly, the other day Iran shrub issued a bizarre statement to the effect the Mumbai attack presaged a major terrorist attack on Chinese soil… interesting ’cause Iran borders neither country and, as far as I know, only Sunni separatists are implicated as problems in either China or India… not Iranian Shiites. Dunno what Iran shrub’s game is.
Nope made a mistake
Steve Clemons said on a cable news program recently that he had asked a high-ranking Pakistani insider (not knowing that he was such) about Musharraf’s claim that the ISI was out of his control. The insider told him that it was in Musharraf’s interest that the ISI appear to be out of control.
If its al Qaeda then maybe there are Muslims Uighurs in Xinjiang.
Not any more
Will India wait for Obama to gets his diplomats in? If India wants a war an attack now before Obama can try and stop them makes sense.
The fact that Musharraf survived his years at the top suggests he had a pretty good handle on things.
India doesn’t want war, they want Pakistan to reign in militants in the Kashmir region. Unfortunately, Pakistan is no more likely to do so than they are to crack down on the Taliban in Waziristan.
Thought he left is he still playing games behind the scenes?
Sorry my 30 was for ratfood @28
I hadn’t heard that but I wouldn’t be surprised.
Well I don’t think the Indian government really wants that. The Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, is a renowned economist and has been the chief architect, over the past 2 decades, of India’s economic rise from the ashes. He believes that going to war would be very damaging for the Indian economy and would hurt even more in this economic climate where the drying up of international credit markets is hurting the sky-rocketing growth rates India had managed to attain in recent years. Plus his cabinet is stocked with a number of other renowned economists who he himself brought in, so I think economic concerns are very high on the governments priorities (they just came out with a huge stimulus package the other day.
But they are facing huge political pressures from the public and opposition parties to do something “strong” against Pakistan and since they are in power have made serious mistakes, they ruling party ( more like parties since it is a coalition government) are standing in a politically weaker spot, although it should be noted that when the opposing party was in power they did not do a stellar job of preventing terrorist attacks (as there were a number of them) and they brought in ghoulish laws like POTA (the Prevention of Terrorism Act – the Indian version of the PATRIOT act) and also the fact that considering there are Somalian pirates inhabiting the sea we should all see that securing India’s ginormous maritime border is hard, especially for a country with such a large population that is still a developing nation.
Also the government is responding to public demands, which is what happens in a functioning democracy, and has fired some people at the top – when was the last time that happened in the Bush administration?
bmaz a couple of flights upstairs with Book Salon and guest Abbe Smith Case of a Lifetime
That’s the ticket. Give Kashmir to China. Then neither India nor Pakistan will have it. They already have Tibet so they have experience with owning mountain countries.
My all purpose solution for breakaway provinces, like Kashmir/Jammu is to give them independence but then create a common market for everyone to join. So Pakistan and Kashmir and India would get their own economic union.
Course, controlled market capitalism only works if there are enough controls especially on the rich.