Is Lashkar-e-Taiba behind Kashmir protests?
India has blamed the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group for violent anti-India demonstrations sweeping across the Muslim-majority valley in which 11 people have been killed so far.
In Indian Kashmir, authorities extended a curfew on Friday and deployed thousands of troops to quell fresh protests that have spread to other parts of the disputed region.
“We think it is the LeT (Lashkar-e-Taiba) which is active in Sopore (in north Kashmir),” Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram said.
But Kashmir’s former chief minister, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, called the response from New Delhi to the present Kashmir crisis an “insult” to the people of Kashmir.
“Linking the genuine anger and anguish among people here with terrorism was nothing short of an assault on their self-respect and dignity,” Sayeed said.
Sayeed, chief and founder of the state’s main opposition People’s Democratic Party (PDP), was also India’s Home Minister when armed revolt against New Delhi’s rule broke out in 1989.
Omar Abdullah, Kashmir’s chief minister, also says ”anti-India forces” are creating trouble and has asked people to respect curfew and counsel their children.
Is the Kasab verdict a victory for India’s judiciary?
Almost a year and a half since the 2008 Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people, Ajmal Kasab, the lone gunman captured during the three-day rampage, has been sentenced to death by a special court.
“He shall be hanged by the neck till he is dead,” Judge M.L. Tahilyani said at a special court as Kasab sat with his head bowed, occasionally wiping his eyes with the back of his hand and then covering his ears with his fingers.
The judgement was hardly surprising given the accused pleaded guilty during the course of the trial (although he later retracted) and more than 650 witnesses testified against Kasab, backed by video grabs of him walking around the attack site with an AK-47 rifle in hand.
Add to that intense public pressure for awarding the harshest punishment possible and the fact he is from Pakistan, India’s traditional enemy, the verdict was more or less a given.
The speedy trial, hurried by public pressure and overwhelming evidence, is also a victory for India’s notoriously slow judicial system.
The verdict came within a year after court proceedings against Kasab, compared to a 14-year trial in the 1993 serial blasts case in the same city.
Surprisingly, two Indian nationals accused of being members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and of conducting reconnaissance in Mumbai before the attack, were acquitted of all charges because the judge felt the evidence against them was weak.
I think most of the victims family will be relieved and the Death Penalty is appropriate if it has been proved that he is the man who killed so many innocents, and the other two being acquitted shows that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges and some innocents have become the fallout of this tragedy, i wonder if the prosecution will appeal to the higher courts for the two acquitted people or is it the they have been wrongly framed.
we have lost some very honest and secular police officers in this carnage who where getting into the roots of other blasts carried in the name of muslims but proving to be done by a Hindu terror organization called Abhinav Bharath.
My condolences to all the brave citizens of India who have lost their near and loved ones. We should get to the people who have planned this and bring them all to justice.
from Pakistan: Now or Never?:
India and Pakistan on the U.S. see-saw
Few who follow South Asia could miss the symbolism of two separate developments in the past week - in one Pakistan was cosying up to the United States in a new "strategic dialogue"; in the other India was complaining to Washington about its failure to provide access to David Headley, the Chicago man accused of helping to plan the 2008 attack on Mumbai.
Ever since the London conference on Afghanistan in January signalled an exit strategy which could include reconciliation with the Taliban, it has been clear that Pakistan's star has been rising in Washington while India's has been falling.
If the United States wants to force the Taliban to the negotiating table, it needs Pakistan's help. And Pakistan has shown by arresting Taliban commander Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar amongst others that it intends to keep control of any negotiations. In return for its cooperation, it expects Washington's help in securing Pakistan's own interests, including through a scaling back of India's involvement in Afghanistan.
By contrast, the relationship between India and the United States which blossomed under the Bush administration has been fading as Washington looks to China and Pakistan to help meet respectively its economic and security needs. An initial outpouring of sympathy and international support for India following the Mumbai attack - which led to intense pressure on Pakistan to crack down on the Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group blamed for the assault - has dissipated over time.
Nowadays the mantra in Washington is that India and Pakistan must talk to each other to resolve their differences. Pakistan, after initially cracking down on the Lashkar-e-Taiba, eased the pressure on the group in the second part of 2009. India suspects the Lashkar-e-Taiba is not only active again but may have been involved in last month's attack in Kabul which targeted Indian interests. If true, this would suggest that Lashkar-e-Taiba is acting in conformity with the interests of the Pakistan Army, which is deeply sensitive about India's growing presence in Afghanistan following the fall of the Pakistan-backed Taliban in 2001.
To rewind briefly, it has always been unclear how far the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency could go in dismantling the Punjab-based militant group it once nurtured to fight India in Kashmir. While few doubt it could shut down the Lashkar-e-Taiba if it chose to do so, the risk has been that action against an organisation which has been scrupulous in avoiding attacks within Pakistan itself would shatter it into splinter groups which would make common cause with al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban. A raid on the Pakistan Army's own headquarters last October highlighted just how vulnerable the country could be to an alliance between militants in its tribal areas bordering Afghanistan and those based in its heartland Punjab province.
So the debate amongst analysts has been whether relative inaction against the Lashkar-e-Taiba has been driven by self-preservation or a desire on the part of the ISI to retain the group's operational capacity to use it against India. Islamabad is convinced India's own intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW), is using Afghanistan as a base to destabilise Pakistan, particularly by funding separatists in its Baluchistan province. Any evidence of Lashkar-e-Taiba's involvement in the Kabul attack would therefore reinforce suspicions that the Pakistan Army is still using it as part of a proxy war between the two countries' intelligence agencies. (Both countries deny the accusations levelled at each other's intelligence agencies.)
This site seems to recieve a large ammount of visitors. How do you advertise it? It gives a nice unique spin on things. I guess having something useful or substantial to post about is the most important thing.
26/11 – Lasting images, limited impact?
Ahead of the first anniversary of the Mumbai attacks, India’s financial hub is on heightened alert.
Metal detectors and scanners “beep” in office blocks and malls, snipers and sniffer dogs keep guard at hotels, and barricades are in place around high-profile locations. And various talking heads have made power point presentations to show the city is now safer.
In the past year, several measures have been put in place to tighten security in Mumbai, including a hub for elite commandos, and new weapons, armoured vehicles and speedboats for the police.
But how safe is the city that has been a target of bomb attacks before and remains a magnet for militants bent on hurting India’s status as an economic powerhouse?
Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram has said India remains just as vulnerable to another attack, but that our capacity to deal with them has improved.
But some security experts say little has changed, and the fact that there have been no major attacks in the last year has little to do with India’s improved ability, and more to do with the greater pressure on Pakistan. That it is only a matter of time before the Lashkar-e-Taiba launches another attack in India. That the revamping of the police force that is needed to secure the city has not been done.
Even in Mumbai, at the main train station where militants gunned down the most number of victims last year, door-frame metal detectors stand unmanned and bags go unchecked. And the coastline, which was easily breached by the gunmen, remains largely unprotected.
If post 9/11 USA can go in Afghanistan,bomb the country throw Taliban out all in the name of securing their homeland.. my question is y cant we Do the same thing wid all d camps in PoK and inside Pakistan? – our army knows where exactly these camps r! We also have a right to protect our homeland right?It is not an eye for an eye!Its only a slap for an eye. Pak is lucky we dont bomb them like USA
from FaithWorld:
Could gagged Mumbai confession do more good than harm?
A crucial part of gunman Mohammad Ajmal Kasab's confession at the Mumbai attack trial has been censored by the judge on the grounds that it could inflame religious tensions between Hindus and Muslims in India. After stunning the court on Monday by admitting guilt in the the three-day rampage that killed 166 people, Kasab gave further testimony on Tuesday that included details about his training by Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a Pakistan-based militant group on U.S. and Indian terrorist lists.
The front-page report in today's The Hindu, which noted the judge's gag order in its sub-header, put it this way:
Ajmal made some crucial statements on Tuesday as part of his confession. They pertained to the purpose of the attack as indicated by the perpetrators and masterminds and the message they wanted to send to the government of India. Ajmal also wanted to convey a message to his handlers. However, this part of his confession faces a court ban on publication.
In view of the communally sensitive nature of Ajmal’s statements, judge M.L. Tahaliyani passed an order banning the publication and broadcast of Ajmal’s statement recorded on Tuesday by any media or person, except the part which pertains to the CST. Mr. Tahaliyani remarked that the trial was at “a delicate stage.”
Given the complex mix of religion and politics in India, it's not unusual to see the media playing down the communal aspect of tension and violence. In the recent general election, the party that usually plays up these differences, the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), hardly used the "religion card" in its losing campaign. But that doesn't mean things are getting better. According to the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism in Mumbai, the "unfortunate year of 2008 ... proved to be worse than 2007." See their two-part report on 2008 here and here.
But Kasab's testimony could shed important light on what role religion plays in Islamist militancy. How could a young man who wanted to become a dacoit (bandit) be convinced by Islamist militants to try to become a shahid (martyr) instead? Was he actually convinced, or did he do it for other reasons?
Kasab told the court on Monday that he originally approached the militants to get weapons and training and won (surprisingly easy) admission to their office by saying he wanted to wage jihad. He was taken in and given extensive training in preparation for the Mumbai attack last November. All of this is detailed in published accounts of his statement in court on Monday. In earlier statements, police say, he showed little understanding of Islam or jihad, saying the latter was "about killing and getting killed and becoming famous."
I guess it will be more important to actually see what the reactions in India are as they unfold, rather than speculate at this point in the process. But it does seem to be the typical Asian version of “freedom” at work again. The scary part: India is light-years ahead of its neighbors when it comes to free speech.
Is the Lashkar-e-Taiba plotting another Mumbai?
The Jamestown Foundation, a U.S.-based think tank, has warned of a renewed threat to India from the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba.
It quotes intelligence sources as saying the LeT’s marine wing may be planning a Mumbai-type incursion to target vital installations in the coastal states of Gujarat, Maharashtra and Goa.
The group is also reported to have funneled huge amounts of money from its Gulf-based networks to fund activities in India.
It is not the first time such a warning has been issued, since the attacks in November. The U.S. embassy still has a warden message on its website dated June 2, 2009, warning U.S. citizens there is a “high threat of terrorism throughout India.
India’s Home Minister P. Chidambaram wasn’t too happy with the advisory when it was issued, arguing the country was safe to travel. But if his own intelligence agencies are talking of a second 26/11, you have to ask yourself if you should not be taking these warnings seriously.
The Jamestown Foundation said the LeT was using the Gulf networks and hawala channels to route money for operations not just in India, but in Pakistan itself.
What is Justice , Raja ?
Killing, burning and religious genocide, forced exodus of Kashmiri Hindus from their own homeland, by using an ‘imported’ terrorist religion ?
400,000 Hindus had been displaced and killed by Islamic terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir,before the Indian army moved in.
Would you justify Direct Action Day, 1946 the same way you are justifying the 26/11 attacks ?
from Pakistan: Now or Never?:
Pakistan and India; breaking the logjam
President Barack Obama chose his words carefully when asked in an interview with Dawn earlier this week why the United States has been silent on Kashmir in recent months:
"I don’t think that we’ve been silent on the fact that India is a great friend of the United States and Pakistan is a great friend of the United States, and it always grieves us to see friends fighting. And we can’t dictate to Pakistan or India how they should resolve their differences, but we know that both countries would prosper if those differences are resolved," the newspaper quoted him as saying.
"And I believe that there are opportunities, maybe not starting with Kashmir but starting with other issues, that Pakistan and India can be in a dialogue together and over time to try to reduce tensions and find areas of common interest," he said. "And we want to be helpful in that process, but I don’t think it’s appropriate for us to be the mediators in that process. I think that this is something that the Pakistanis and Indians can take leadership on."
During his election campaign, Obama said the United States should try to help resolve the Kashmir dispute so that Pakistan could focus on tackling militants on its western border with Afghanistan. "We should probably try to facilitate a better understanding between Pakistan and India and try to resolve the Kashmir crisis so that they can stay focused not on India, but on the situation with those militants,” he said in an interview with MSNBC in October 2008, shortly before the presidential election.
Myra,
So how does the United States break the logjam?
- The US is incapable of doing anything ground-breaking on this issue.
from Pakistan: Now or Never?:
India: should it take a gamble on Pakistan?
Some people in India are calling upon the new coalition government to make a series of bold moves towards Pakistan that will compel the neighbour to put its money where the mouth is.
If Pakistan keeps saying that it cannot fully and single-mindedly go after militants on its northwest frontier and indeed increasingly within the heartland because of the threat it faces from India, then New Delhi must call its bluff, argued authors Nitin Pai and Sushant K. Singh in a recent piece for India's Mint newspaper.
How about Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, back for a second term, giving a categorical public declaration that Pakistan need not fear an Indian military attack so long as the Pakistan army is engaged in fighting with Taliban militants? While a verbal commitment may not convince the military brass in Rawalpindi, it will likely play well in Washington as it rathchets up pressure on the Pakistan army to take the battle to the militants.
Second and to back up its assurance, India could move some of the army strike formations from the international border with Pakistan in Punjab and Rajasthan. "Such a bold, strategic move will not only make India's verbal assurances credible, but it will also immediately result in irresistible pressure on the Pakistani army to commit more of its troops to the western border," the authors wrote in the Mint piece.
Clearly, the aim of such a peace gamble is to expose the contradiction within the Pakistani position, force them to either go full throttle after militant groups, some of whom are suspected to be tied to its intelligence agencies, or face America's wrath.
Moving Indian troops back will compel the Pakistan army to act against the Taliban, and because it is incapable of doing so, will cause the United States to realise that there is no alternative to dismantling the military-jihadi complex, Pai and Singh argue.
Umair,
You would not have asked for moral courage from Sanjiv if you knew the turn of events that went from 1947 through 1971 in East Pakistan, aka Banladesh. It’s a pity that your knowledge is limited to what is written on the blogs and what is printed in irresponsible Pakistan media.
Besides, how is Bangladesh related to solving the border dispute in Kashmir?
from FaithWorld:
Do dead terrorists lose all right to any respect?
Do dead terrorists lose all right to any respect? I ask this because my post Should India cremate Mumbai militants, spread ashes at sea? last week has prompted a surprising wave of comments suggesting these corpses should be desecrated. Readers have been proposing (and we have been deleting) graphic and crude scenarios for disposing of the nine corpses still lying in a Mumbai morgue. The proposed solution of cremating the bodies and spreading the ashes at sea - originally from a blog post by Leor Halevi in the Washington Post - seemed far too tame for them.
The Mumbai militants were murderers. Once they're dead, though, what purpose would it serve to dismember them, feed them to crocodiles or turn them into a stoning pillar? What would it say about the Indian government if it disposed of these bodies without even the barest minimum of respect for the dead? Indeed, what does it say about readers who want it to do just that?
BTW the majority of comments - even those that are understandably very angry - call for a minimum of respect for the dead, no matter who they are.
India is under no obligation to give these bodies a proper Muslim burial. The refusal of Indian Muslim organisation to grant them one is what has created this stalemate. But can that mean New Delhi should go all the way in the opposite direction?
from FaithWorld:
Should India cremate Mumbai militants, spread ashes at sea?
The bodies of nine Islamic militants killed while attacking Mumbai in November still lie in a public morgue there. Indian Islamic leaders have refused to bury them in a local Muslim cemetery, saying terrorists "have no religion" and do not deserve a religious funeral. Although India suspects the militants came from neighbouring Pakistan, Islamabad refuses to take the bodies back as this could presumably undermine its claim to have no link to the gunmen. Indian officials say they still need the bodies for their investigations into the Nov. 26-29 massacre, in which 179 people were killed, but those inquiries will end some day. What should the Indians do with the bodies then?
A U.S. historian has come up with a proposal that would dispose of the bodies without requiring Pakistan to take them. Leor Halevi, a professor of Islamic history at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, wrote in the Washington Postthat India should cremate them and scatter the ashes in international waters, as Israel did after executing the Nazi commander Adolf Eichmann in 1962. He notes this would be an un-Islamic method of burial and would avoid a permanent grave that could become a memorial for other militants. He writes:
"If Indian Muslims can agree, then, that the terrorists died as non-Muslims and that burning their bodies is the optimal solution, they simply need to urge the government to dispatch the corpses to the crematorium after ruling on their lack of religion.
"Cremation would neither shame the bodies of dead terrorists, nor haunt the minds of would-be terrorists, as powerfully as would a symbolic inversion of standard Muslim rites. But it would convey an effective, reasonable and humanistic message to the world: that a Muslim who commits terrorism dies excommunicated, as an infidel."
Is this the answer?
I am an Indian,I belong to Hindu community.I think ” An enemy coming from any society, should not be disregarded anyway after his/her death”.As we have come to know that, those deceased militants were belong to Muslim community,they should be paid respectful burials from Indian side.The dead persons are enemy no more!They have been beyond of this controversial aspects that we consider today from different angles.I do hope my Indian Muslim brothers will think in this line very transparantly.Very simple question: Are they enemy now? I think ‘No’ would be the possible answere from major populations.So,irrespective to any disregard or controversy,we should have necessary arrangements for their burials which would be the best tribute to the departed persons at least for once i.e.last one.
Kashmir today is very different from Kashmir in 1947. A lot of water had flowed under the bridge. Today, it is an extremely geo-strategic location for India. Not an inch can be yielded there. India has been fighting Pakistan over the Siachien glacier for more than 25 years now. It is a barren landscape and the two militaries are engaged in a stalemate there. If that is the case, India has no reason to leave Kashmir. By siding with Pakistan because of religion, Kashmiris have made their condition worse. The first thing they need to do is to distance themselves from Pakistan and its support. That is the only thing that will reassure mainstream Indians that Kashmir’s needs should be addressed. We all know that Kashmir will never have its freedom. If India leaves, Kashmir will fall under the control of Pakistan immediately. It will be indirect first and Pakistan and Kashmir will live off their hatred for India for sometime. Then fissures will erupt turning Kashmiris against Pakistan as well. And Pakistan will not deal with Kashmir like India does. It will be brutal. Look at how they handled East Pakistan or Afghanistan or Balochistan. Or even ask Azad Kashmiris.
Kashmir, in today’s situation, will not be able to remain free. If it is not India, it will be Pakistan. Islamic unity will not work. It has already been proven in the case of Afghanistan and East Pakistan. Islamic unity only works against non-Muslims. And countries cannot live off of that for too long. So Kashmiris have only one path. Reconcile with India and move on. If they did that, India might not be this tight in its grip. For peace to return that, Kashmiris have to push back on Pakistan. They must realize that Pakistan is supporting them mostly for its hatred for India and nothing else. They have no special love for Kashmiris. Pakistan has already converted Azad Kashmir into a road for China. And China is famous for its invasion of Tibet and occupation. Pakistan will not say a word about that of course. They are friends. Chinese can slaughter Uighur Muslims and Pakistanis are fine with that. Only Kashmir matters because India can be irritated. Unfortunately India is growing stronger by the day. Not much is going to move there.