On Dec. 13, five Pakistani terrorists stormed the seat of Indian democracy, the Parliament, shouting "Pakistan Zindabad" (Long live Pakistan) as they killed 14 people, including themselves. (The attack occurred minutes after Parliament adjourned as the purpose was to kill as many members of Parliament as possible). Conclusive evidence suggests that not only was this deadly attack carried out by Pakistan backed Islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups, Lakshar-e-Taiba (LET) and Jaish-e-Mohammaed (JEM), but the top brass of the ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence), Pakistan's intelligence agency, planned the attack. On Sept. 11, the United States declared a "war on terrorism." Yet, India has been fighting this same war ever since its creation. This latest attack on Indian Parliament is not an isolated incident, but rather another episode in its longstanding war/battle against terrorism, fought against its neighbor across the border.
Islamabad's long standing support for terrorism is well documented by American policymakers. In 1992, the CIA told President Bill Clinton that Pakistan should be declared a state sponsor of terrorism. Clinton, however, declined and only placed Pakistan on a terrorist "watch-list." The 2000 State Department Report on Global Patterns of Terrorism notes, "In South Asia, the United States has been increasingly concerned about reports of Pakistani support to terrorist groups and elements active in Kashmir." Pakistan claims that the terrorist movement in Kashmir is "indigenous." Yet, this is not the case as over 70 percent of those killed by the Indian army in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir from June 2001 onwards were Pakistanis.
Both LET and JEM are members of the United Jihad Council, run by the ISI, which funds trains and equips the groups. B. Raman of the South Asian Analysis Group also notes that the Pakistani Army used members of Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda to occupy the Kargil heights in 1999 and to train JEM and LET. He also notes that the ISI had suggested to terrorists the idea of crashing a plane into the Mumbai High Platform in Mumbai, India in 1993. From this the seed for the Sept. 11 attack was born. The leader of the Pakistani fundamentalist party, Jamiat-e-Islami, question in "Herald," a Pakistani journal, whether there was " a single militant training center in Pakistan which can operate without the consent of the Pakistan Army? All militant groups are created and run by Pakistan's secret agencies." (The March issue of "Herald," the monthly journal of the "Dawn" group of Karachi, quoted Dr. Khalid Mehmood Soomro, Secretary-General of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema Islam).
As a result of Islamabad's terror campaign, according to H. Burnett and Wess Mitchel of National Center for Policy Research, over 50,000 Indian citizens, well over 10 times the number that died on Sept. 11, have been killed by terrorists in the past two decades. In Jammu and Kashmir, the terrorists have launched a brutal campaign of ethnic cleasing against non-Muslims in their quest for a pure Islamic and Talibanized Kashmir. More than 400,000 Hindu Kashmiri Pandits have been driven from their homes in the Kashmir Valley; cultural genocide has occurred as Hindu temples have been destroyed and Islamic law has been imposed in areas controlled by the terrorists. The terrorists have gone beyond even the Taliban in many ways. They have required even non-Muslim women to wear veils and massacred Hindus on pilgrimages.
It is also a mistake however to think that the conflict between India and Pakistan is simply over Kashmir. Pakistan's policy has been to support terrorism against and the destruction of India ever since its creation. Pakistan actively trained Sikh terrorists in the 1980s. In a 1981 hijacking of an Indian Airlines flight by a Sikh terrorist, the pistol used was traced to a group of arms sent from West Germany to Pakistan. The ISI was also involved in planning the 1993 Mumbai terrorist attacks carried out by notorious gangster Dawood Ibraham, who now holds "economic citizenship" in Pakistan.
Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharaff has been praised by the West for allegedly helping America in the war against terrorism. But to what extent are Musharaff and his regime cooperating? The New York Times reports that the Pakistani government provided safe passage for weapons and ammunition to arm the Taliban well after Sept. 11. Congressman Frank Palone noted an article in the New York Times stating the some Pakistani scientists were considering sel-ling nuclear arms to terrorists. Musharaff has also been praised for "taking actions against terrorist organizations" and "freezing bank accounts." Yet, as Raman notes on Oct. 8, 2001, Gen. Mohammad Aziz called a meeting of all the jihadi organizations and briefed them on the various steps which the junta would have to take in pursuance of the UN resolution and pressure from the United States. As a result not much money has frozen in terrorist bank accounts. For example, only Rs.900 ($20) was frozen in the JEM's bank account. According to "Dawn," the government has already released 400 terrorists that it arrested only a few weeks ago.
The United States must take action and consider declaring Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism. Pakistanibacked terrorists not only threaten India, but America and the rest of the free world, as we witnessed on Sept. 11 when terrorists aligned with the Pakistan-created Taliban and possibly the ISI itself struck American soil. LET says its goal is to "plant Islamic flags in Delhi, Tel Aviv, and Washington." Moreover Pakistan's continued support for fundamentalist terrorists is promoting the further Talibanization of Pakistani society.
Members of groups such as JEM and LET have been involved in massacres against Shia Muslims and other minorities. Only by putting pressure on Pakistan can the world force it to reverse its trend.
After all, global pressure forced Pakistan to provide at least nominal support for fighting its very own creation, the Taliban, which would have been unthinkable before Sept. 11.
North Korea was declared a state sponsor of terrorism for the sole action of refusing to extradite two suspected hijackers, an action that pales in comparison to Islamabad's atrocities.
America's exaggerated fears of "alienating" Islamabad have been an abject failure, as they have resulted in the appeasement of terrorism. Islamabad's repeated promises in the last few decades that it would curb its support for terrorism have never materialized as Islamabad has been given the impression it can act with impunity.
India's actions in response to the Dec. 13 attack are not a sign of jingoism, but of weakness. The sight of its citizens being massacred on a daily basis, a neighbor that never ceases its support for terrorism, and a world that remains indifferent to its plight, has made it seem to New Delhi that there are no other options.
By contrast, according to Burnett and Mitchell, within a week of the Sept. 11 attacks, India provided the United States with intelligence on the locations of more than 120 terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and Indian Prime Minister Atal Vihari Vajpayee offered the U.S. military immediate, unconditional use of several Indian air bases and port facilities. Arvin Bahl is from Edison, NJ. He can be reached at abahl@princeton.edu.
Read More
An open letter to President Eisgruber and VP Calhoun concerning minoritized student safety
Patrick Jaojoco, Brandi Bushman, and Humza Gondal"We — the undersigned leaders, community members, and allies of cultural affinity groups of Princeton University — condemn in the strongest possible terms the University’s utter disregard for the safety and wellbeing of its students of color."
"We — the undersigned leaders, community members, and allies of cultural affinity groups of Princeton University — condemn in the strongest possible terms the University’s utter disregard for the safety and wellbeing of its students of color."
On the occupation of Clio Hall and the treatment of Graduate School staff
Cole M. Crittenden“There are real power differentials on this campus, and we all have an obligation to be mindful of them. The students, postdocs, and faculty who occupied Clio Hall seem to have abused their privileges in the ways they treated staff as an expression of protest. That is wrong.”
“There are real power differentials on this campus, and we all have an obligation to be mindful of them. The students, postdocs, and faculty who occupied Clio Hall seem to have abused their privileges in the ways they treated staff as an expression of protest. That is wrong.”
Regulations on ‘disruption’ restrict dialogue at Princeton. Let’s change the standard.
Rishi Khanna“When Princeton administrators suppress mere disruptions tied to progressive speech, they effectively suppress a substantial portion of the speech itself.”
“When Princeton administrators suppress mere disruptions tied to progressive speech, they effectively suppress a substantial portion of the speech itself.”
