Connect with us

Terrorism

Protection from Terror: killer bees & ‘queen bees’

Published

on

This is the great security threat of our age; the radicalization of frustrated Sunni Muslim youth in our homelands by a false narrative that they are under ‘attack’ physically, culturally and religiously from the West and so act aggressively often violently against ‘the West’ (non-Muslim), its sense of superiority and its icons of success whether they be transport systems, capital cities or our cosmopolitan lifestyles and places of recreation.

Many therefore say the West is in a war against global Islamic terrorism. That is not quite accurate and has the danger of slipping into a paradigm of the West is at war with Islam ( the Wahhabi Salafi narrative) and so our revulsion and response may best be channeled not just into bombing their strongholds (akin to killing wasps or bees) but even more importantly “bombing” their ideology (their nest/their ‘Queen bee’). The West doesn’t know there’s a queen bee. For that you have to go to the Muslim world and ask them.

The figures show that both the intensity and breadth of terrorism is increasing at alarming rates and it kills more Muslims in their homelands than people from the West and that it is linked to the extremely fanatical Wahhabi Salafi Takfiri Jihadi sect within Islam.

For example, my heart aches for those school children in Pakistan murdered by the Taliban and the poor people in Nigeria suffering at the hands of the monstrous Boko Haram fanatics. Just this past week they massacred 2,000 mainly Christian innocents ” a senior government official in Borno, said Boko Haram killed more than 2,000 people which, if true, would mean the group equaled its total kill count last year in one attack. More were said to have drowned in Lake Chad while attempting to swim to a nearby island. Some estimates said more than 20,000 people are now displaced as a result of what one reporter called Boko Haram’s “most horrific act of terrorism yet.”

How can we defeat Terror?

First you have to name it, know what it is or else you’ll do more harm than good by attacking everything Islamic.

Prime Minister David Cameron has done (20th July 2015) in his speech what President Obama refuses to do; state that the root of today’s terrorist problem is extremist Islamist ideology.

In what will go down as the seminal speech to unmask the ideological drivers of modern terrorism and social unrest in the West, David Cameron spoke boldly and incisively at the Nonestiles School in Birmingham about the scourge of extremism sweeping the UK’s Muslim communities.

It’s no accident that he chose this school in this are to deliver his speech. It is here where there has been a vipers nest of Wahhabi Salafi extremists that have been the engine room of hate preachers and extremism in the UK including those involved in the: Birmingham 6 Terror plot and the Trojan Horse affair.

The UK government is now going to actively encourage the reforming and moderate Muslim voices in its strategy to wipe out extremism in the UK homeland. The PM understands that in the past, governments have been too caught up with political correctness and cries of Islamophobia to challenge the extremist religious ideology and were too quick to dismiss the religious aspect of Islamist extremism. It is undeniable the PM said that there is a religious justification for terrorism of recent times not just in the UK but globally because these extremists are

“Self-identifying as Muslims. The fact is from Woolwich to Tunisia, from Ottawa to Bali, these murderers all spout the same twisted narrative, one that claims to be based on a particular faith.”

Because the Wahhabi Salafi ideology leads to violence, social unrest and discrimination and hatred is enough to clamp down on those who spread it in our homelands. This is a mega-leap in honesty and the right direction to stop the barbarism of Syria and Iraq continuing to appear on the streets of our Homelands.

Mustafa Kail aka Abu Hamzah al-Masri when he was head of a Wahhabi Salafi front called the Partisans of the Sharia Organization, wrote a book called

Terrorism is the Solution and preached in his Salafi mosques in London and the US that terrorism against the West was a religious imperative for all Muslims because of the false narrative that the West was oppressing Muslims and seeking to humiliate then destroy Islam. (He is now serving life in a US prison for terrorism).

We can detonate their false narratives by and through the majority of moderate Muslims and their intelligentsia/scholars and rational leadership in our homelands and globally who are under attack by the extremists as much as we are. We can give them a voice, protect them from reprisals by Salafi thugs and protect their mosques from the poison pill of Saudi charitable funds by donating money to Islamic Universities and Muslim schools of learning based on moderate Islam.

The war actually is within Islam itself and we are the collateral damage (if you look at total numbers of terrorist incidents, you will see that most are Wahhabi Salafi against other Muslims).

One strategy to consider is to ally and support the moderate Muslims against the puritanical Wahhabi Salafi. We have a common interest. Our only hurdle is prejudice, KSA and politicians aligned with oil.

Unless we help the Muslims resist this Wahhabi Salafi attempt to take over Islam globally, radicalization of 1.5 billion Muslim people spells doom for humanity.

Egypt’s President al Sisi recognizes the “queen bees” are the root cause of terrorism, and joins PM Lee in calling for a ‘religious revolution’ in Islam at Cairo’s Al Azhar University back in January 2015.

David Cameron UK PM thinks the attraction of the ‘caliphate’ can be tackled with counter-narratives that debunk al-Baghdadi’s Islamist interpretation of Islam. The gulf between the brutal reality on the ground and the propagandised fantasy Isil spin on social media can be exposed. The positive things the UK provides for all its citizens can be promoted, in order to show the alternatives to living in a fascistic theocracy.

In a 2003 interview with Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek, Singapore’s former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew warned that Americans are mistaken in seeking a largely military solution to combat Islamic terrorism.

“In killing terrorists, you will only kill the worker bees. The queen bees are the (hate) preachers, who teach a deviant form of Islam in schools and Islamic centers, who capture and twist the minds of the young.”

Retired Malaysian diplomat Dennis Ignatius made the following observations :“Even if ISIS is degraded, Saudi export of Wahhabism will continue to spawn new ISIS type jihadists in Asia, Africa, South America and elsewhere… it is Saudi-exported Islamic extremism. …Young Southeast Asian Muslims from Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines and elsewhere are radicalizing and joining jihad in Syria and Iraq, with ISIS even forming a military unit for Malay-speaking fighters—Katibah Nusantara Lid Daulah Islamiyyah (Malay Archipelago Unit for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria)….He attributes the sole cause of extremism in Southeast Asia to Saudi Arabia’s aggressive export of Wahhabi ideology, spending more than US$100,00 billion the past few decades to export a culture of “intolerance, hate and violence” to all corners of the globe….”

Ignatius echoes Singapore’s former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew who also pointed to ‘Saudi Arabia as the “queen bee” spawning terrorism in Asia’.

According to Lee, ‘Muslims in Southeast Asia were traditionally moderate and tolerant. But beginning in the 1970s, awash with petrodollars, Saudi Wahhabis began to export this “venomous religion” via thousands of mosques and madrasas that has radicalized Muslims in South and Southeast Asia. As a result of Saudi proliferation of WMDs—or Wahhabis of Mass Destruction—Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Philippines have fallen victim to Wahhabi-driven extremists groups such as Jemaah Islamiah, Abu Sayyaf, MILF, ISIS, Taliban, and others.’

Ignatius views the Saudi-Wahhabi nexus has such a stranglehold on Sunni religious discourse, having polluted thousands of mosques, seminaries, universities, schools and community centers that “unquestionably, the Saudi-Wahhabi nexus has become the greatest single threat to peace and stability in the world today.”

In a September 2014 Indian Defence Review article, retired Indian general Afsir Karim shares Lee Kuan Yew’s concerns that Saudi Wahhabis are trying to exert domination over other strands of Islam (e.g., Sufi, Shia, etc.) and proclaim themselves as the gold standard for what it means to be a “good” Muslim…General Karim exposes how Saudis are using the Wahhabism weapon to dominate India, pumping millions of petrodollars into madrasas and mosques to propagate Wahhabi theology and that “anyone outside the Wahhabi sect is a heretic and will burn in hell.”

This doctrine of intolerance and violence is now polarizing Indian society and radicalizing its Muslims, projected by Pew Research to be the largest Muslim population in the world by 2050, even surpassing Indonesia.

Thus with the double onslaught of potential ISIS bases and Saudi-sponsored radicalization of Asian Muslims casting a long shadow…The growing conflict between the Shia and Sunni sects across the world is a direct result of the increasing influence of Wahhabism.

Above section largely taken from article Dr Christian Lin Fellow at the Centre for Transatlantic Relations at SAIS-John Hopkins University article highlighting the Saudi threat to Asian stability and security, and calls it the “Saudization” of Southeast Asia.

Post Script: The Wahhabi Salafi drivers

Long before ISIS became one of their brand names, one of their leaders Juhayman al Uteybi (Otaybi) and a band of 500 Wahhabi zealots attacked the Grand Mosque in Mecca itself on November 20, 1979. Otaybi, was part of a Salafi group called Al-Jamaa Al-Salafiya Al-Muhtasiba (The Salafi Group That Commands Right and Forbids Wrong). The Salafi group was headed by the Islamic University’s president, Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz . He was a Saudi Arabian Islamic scholar and a leading proponent of theSalafi form of Islam. He was the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia from 1993 until his death in 1999. His “immense religious erudition and his reputation for intransigence” gave him such prestige among the pious population of Saudi Arabia, that his fatwas endorsing government policy greatly strengthened the Saudi Arabian government,endorsement of In Defense of Muslim Lands, principally written by Osama bin Laden’s hero Abdullah Azzam, was a powerful influence in the successful call for jihad against nation states that harmed Muslims or attacked Muslim lands. Source

The seizure of Islam’s holiest site, the taking of hostages from among the worshipers, and the deaths of hundreds of militants, security forces and hostages caught in crossfire in the ensuing battles for control of the site, all shocked the Islamic world. The siege ended two weeks after the takeover began and the mosque was cleared. Following the attack, the Saudi state implemented a stricter enforcement of Islamic code and tried to protect their throne by a deal with the Wahhabi fanatics that they leave the monarchy alone if the Monarchy fund their global Wahhabization of the Ummah.

That event so scared the monarchy (then led by Khalid bin Abdulaziz Al Saud) that they have pandered to the Wahhabi Salafi extremists ever since and allowed them and their Saudi funded extremist mosques free reign so long as they operated far away from the KSA in the hope that they would leave the monarchy alone.

“Saudi rulers, terrified by what Uteybi represented, essentially gave in to his demands that the country’s drift toward liberalization be reversed. Women were taken off television, theaters were closed, and huge amounts of cash were disbursed to the country’s most xenophobic, reactionary preachers and teachers. Therein lie the roots of the terrorism that arose from Saudi Arabia two decades later and brought down the twin towers of the World Trade Center.”

When you realize that in the Wahhabi Salafi mindset:

  • people who talk to members of the opposite sex outside marriage should be killed or
  • girls be allowed to burn to death in a school fire because firemen were barred from entering because the girls were not veiled and
  • a man can be lashed almost to death for tweeting that that Muslims, Jews, Christians, and atheists are all equal,’

you appreciate that support by the rich and powerful in KSA for ISIS and Al Qaeda utopia of enforcing puritanical Islam globally is an easy step to take.

There are many Saudi’s (the last King among them) who have tried to bring this important ally of the US out of certain backwardness and intolerance in it’s society, however the Saudi State must free itself from the extremist Wahhabi clerics who condone terror either directly or indirectly by propounding a false narrative about the West if it is to be a true ally and peacemaker in the Middle East and also free itself from the inevitable clash with the Wahhabi Salafi Takfiri Jihadi ISIS frankenstein they helped create.

Whether or not Saudi Arabia did indeed willingly partake in the creation of IS, it is evident that it contributed to its inception by entertaining the idea of a reactionary Sunni Islam. (Whilst) it did not intend for IS to become the monster we all have learned to fear, IS’s very inspiration, its quest for the establishment of an all-mighty Islamic State over the nations of the world stems back from Wahhabi Islam’s core ideology. Both share the same hatred for Shia Islam, Iran and all faith denominations that do not fall within the realm of Sunni Islam…. While Saudi Arabia plays catch up with the very elements its religious school of thought gave birth to, trying to control the plague it realises it helped unleash on to the world, many wonder if it is not the son rather who will strike down his father, so mighty his reach has become.“ Catherine Shakdam

We in the West must insulate our Muslim populations from this extremism and use all our diplomatic and economic efforts to assist the Saudi’s to break free of the terminal Wahhabi Takfiri embrace for their sake and for ours.

Alexander Athos is a writer and businessman.He was awarded a Bachelor of Arts (European History) Personal background Alexander was christened Orthodox brought up Catholic and now Evangelical Christian with an acceptance of the best in Christian tradition and a respect for genuine people of faith from other cultures. Political inclinations: Christian intellectual who has an eclectic predisposition to understanding global and national political and social trends and seeking to influence them for good by thoughtful and persuasive discourse.

Continue Reading
Comments

Terrorism

A question mark on FATF’s credibility

Published

on

While addressing a political gathering, India’s external affairs minister  S. Jaishanker made a startling lapsus de langue “We have been successful in pressurizing Pakistan and the fact that Pakistan’s behaviour has changed is because of pressure put by India by various measures. “Modi made personal efforts on global forums like G7 and G20 to keep Pakistan on the list”.

He was addressing the BJP leaders’ training programme on the Modi government’s foreign policy. Jaishanker is suave person. He generally avoids filibusters and gung-ho statements.

Jaishanker lauded Modi also for pushing back China from Doklam and Ladakh. To quote his statement, he said, ‘“One was in Doklam where China had to go back and the second is when they tried infringing LAC (the Line of Actual Control) in Ladakh’.

Lies galore

Doklam

India’s view of Doklam is debatable. China thinks India was the aggressor. India intervened and stopped China road work at ostensibly Bhutan’s request (India has no border with China at Doklam). India’s intransigence at Doklam opened China’s eyes. China began to suspect what India has up its sleeve.

Stobden in a newspaper article last year `China’s past border tactics, especially in Central Asia, offer India a clue’ points out, `If India falls for some kind of Chinese position over Aksai Chin, Beijing will then shift the focus to Arunachal to emphatically claim 90,000 sq km from India. Ceding Aksai Chin would fundamentally alter the status of J&K and Ladakh’.

No more integral part. Just `might is right’ or `jis ki lathi us ki bhains‘ (he who has the staff, has the cow).

With tacit US support, India is getting tougher with China. The 73-day standoff on the Doklam Plateau near the Nathula Pass on the Sikkim border was actuated by implicit US support. .

 Being at a disadvantage vis-à-vis India, China was compelled to resolve the stand-off through negotiations. China later developed high-altitude “electromagnetic catapult” rockets for its artillery units to liquidate the Indian advantage there, as also in Tibet Autonomous Region. China intends to mount a magnetically-propelled high-velocity rail-gun on its 055-class under-construction missile destroyer 055.

The Chinese government released a map to accuse India of trespassing into its territory, and in a detailed statement in the first week of August, it said “India has no right to interfere in or impede the boundary talks between China and Bhutan.”

India and China have one of the world’s longest disputed borders and areas — which include 37,000 sq km of uninhabited Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh with 1.4 million residents and over 84,000 sq km.

Meanwhile, their Armies have been modernising at a frenetic pace. The two sides are also carrying out one of history’s biggest conventional military build-ups along their borders. Doklam adds yet another flashpoint along the disputed borders of the two Asian giants.

Ladakh (Galwan) clashes

These clashes were at best a storm in a teacup. Both China and India have signed agreements not to use firearms. As such, India’s hullabaloo was much ado about nothing. Jaishanker like so many other Indian politicians keep projecting the issue as a “victory, nonetheless.

AT a height of 14,000 feet (Galwan Valley), the world’s first and second most populated countries and two nuclear powers engaged in violence. Thankfully for the planet they brawled with fisticuffs and threw stones at each other besides using barbed-wire-enveloped bludgeons to pummel each other.

In the battle that took place over several hours, India lost 20 lives, including an officer commanding (colonel). New Delhi claimed China lost 43 men as per radio intercepts.

India claimed that China’s aim is to “dominate Durbuk-DBO road, strengthen its position in the Fingers area, halt the construction of link roads in Galwan-Pangong Tso [salt lake] and negotiate de-escalation on its terms.” This is the assertion of Maj Gen (Dr) G.G. Dwivedi.

India alleged that not only have the Chinese changed the status quo at the Fingers, the mountain spurs along the lake, but also built substantial structures in the contested region of the Line of Actual Control. The hills protrude into the lake like fingers, and are numbered one to eight from west to east.

According to India, the LAC lies at Finger 8, but China points to Finger 4. The May 27 images by Planet Labs showed dozens of new structures, most likely tents that came up between Finger 8 and Finger 4 on the north bank of Pangong Tso, one of the main points of contention in the current standoff. The Indian Express (June 6) claimed this satellite imagery shows how the Chinese have changed the status quo on Pangong bank.

The Indian media alleged that China took over 640 kilometres of Ladakh territory. On the other hand the Chinese media insists that it is India which violated the Line of Actual Control.

The Chinese assertion was confirmed by Prime Minister Narender Modi. While addressing an all-party conference Modi said: “Neither have they [Chinese]” intruded into our border, nor has any post been taken over by them [China]. One wonders what was the point in whipping up of war hysteria by the Indian media. What a contradiction between Jaishankar’s and Modi’s statements.

FATF manipulated through India’s defence-purchases clout from influential countries

India leveraged its military purchases to keep Pakistan under the grey List. Amid Ladakh border standoff, India’s defence ministry approved purchase proposals amounting to an estimated Rs 38,900 cores. They included procurement of 21 MiG-29s, upgrading Indian Air Force’s existing MiG-29 aircraft, procurement of 12 Su-30 MKI aircraft. The MiG-29 procurement and up-gradation from Russia will cost Rs 7418 crore.

A bird’s-eye view of India’s defence deals

Rafale

India signed a formal agreement to buy 36 Rafale fighter jets from France’s Dassault for a reported 7.9 billion euros (8.8 billion dollars), one of its biggest defense deals in decades.7 Apr 2021. The five Rafale fighter jets which landed in Ambala on 29th July, 2020 would

Resurrect the Number 17 Golden Arrows squadron of the Indian Air Force. It will take

the IAF’s squadron strength to 31. When all the 36 Rafale jets are delivered by 2022,

it will take it to 32 squadrons. The state-of-the-art 4.5 Generation Rafale jet can reach almost double the speed of sound, with a top speed of 1.8 Mach. With its multi-role capabilities, including electronic warfare, air defence, ground support and in-depth strikes, the Rafale lends

air superiority to the Indian Air Force.

Armed Forces $130 billion modernization plan

The plan includes acquisition of a wide variety of arms and armament that includes missiles, warships, drones, fighter jets, surveillance equipment and creation of architecture for Artificial Intelligence.

Recent India and US Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo[1]spatial Cooperation (BECA) deal on 27 October, 2020 in Delhi envisages digitising military applications. Broadly, there are four important aspects in the field of Battle field digitisation, which in military parlance is termed as Network Centric Warfare.

MiG upgradeIndia will upgrade 59 of its MiG-29 aircraft and buy 21 more from Russia for about $1 billion.

Artillery, tanks and missiles

India will buy Excalibur artillery rounds for M777 ultra light howitzersfrom the United States, Igla-S air defence systems from Russia and Spike anti-tank guided missiles from Israel.

The Army will buy ammunition for its T-90 tanks, BMP-2 vehicles, air defence guns, artillery guns and small arms, as well as rockets, missiles and mortars. The Air Force will buy air-to-air missiles, air to-ground missiles, smart bombs, chaffs, flares and precision-guided munitions.

 Russia worth $800 million to buy weapons and spare parts.

India-US Guardian Drones Deal:

The US and the Indian Government signed a

$ 2-3 billion deal for the Guardian drones in 2018. The US Government has

cleared the sale of 22 predator Guardian drones to India. The drones are

manufactured by General Atomics.

 India-US Defence Deal of Naval Guns:

In November, 2019 a deal of $1.0210 billion with the US was sealed to obtain 13 MK45 Naval guns and related

equipment. The MK-45 Gun System will help India to conduct anti-surface

warfare and anti-air defence missions.

India-US Apache Contract:

India and the US have signed $930 million agreement for 6 Apache Helicopters for Indian Army. The contract was made in the year 2015 by the Indian Air Force for 22 Apache helicopters. Out of 22 helicopters, 17 have already been delivered to India and the rest will be delivered in the year 2023.

MH-60 Romeo Helicopters Deal:

Indian Navy will procure 24 Sikorsky MH-60R helicopters.

FATF’s double standards

It is questionable why supporting ongoing freedom movement in the occupied Kashmir is “terrorism”, but not India’s support to militant groups in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and erstwhile East Pakistan. India portrays the freedom movement in Kashmir as `terrorism’. The conduct of Indian diplomats amounted to state-sponsored terrorism. For one thing, India should close the `Free Balochistan’ office on her soil, and stop resuscitating propaganda skeletons of pre-Bangladesh days.

Unlike Kashmir, East Pakistan was not a disputed territory. It was an integral part of Pakistan. But, India harboured, nurtured, trained and armed Bengali ‘freedom fighters’ on Indian soil. Ina video, India’s army chief Manekshaw confessed that prime minister Indira Gandhi forced him to attack the erstwhile east Pakistan.

Negative impact of rigorous compliance

The managers of financial institutions in Pakistan are implementing the FATF conditions without understanding their purpose. They are harassing honest investors. For, instance, the manger of the national Saving Centre Poonch house Rawalpindi refuses to issue an investment certificate unless the applicant submits a host of documents. These documents include a current bank statement, source-of-income certificate besides bio-data along with a passport-size photograph. They call for the documents even if the applicant submits a cheque on his 40-year-old bank account.

Concluding remarks

The Financial Action Task Force has,  ostensibly,  noble objectives. It provides a `legal’, regulatory, framework for muzzling the hydra-headed monster of money-laundering. It aims at identifying loopholes in the prevailing financial system and plugging them. But, it has deviated from its declared objectives. It has become a tool to coerce countries, accused of financing terrorism or facilitating money-laundering.

The FATF is more interested in disciplining a state like Pakistan, not toeing US policies, than in checking money-laundering. The tacit message is that if Pakistan does not toe Indian and USA’s Afghan policy, and lease out air bases for drone attacks, then it will remain on FATF grey list. 

Pakistan is a bête noire and India a protégé at the FATF only because of stark geo-political interests. Otherwise the money laundering situation in India is no less gruesome than in Pakistan. India has even been a conduit of ammunition to the Islamic State study conducted by Conflict Armament Research had confirmed that seven Indian companies were involved in the supply chain of over 700 components, including fuses or detonating cords used by the so-called Islamic State to construct improvised explosive devices.

Political considerations, not FATF’s primary objectives, override voting behavior at the FATF..

Continue Reading

Terrorism

Politically expedient definition of “terrorism” to put Pakistan under watch list

Published

on

pakistan-terrorism

The writer is of the view that there is no universally-acceptable definition of “terrorism”. Influential countries in the United Nations utilize their leverage to get an individual or an entity declared a “terrorist”. “Freedom fighters” are called “terrorists” by their adversaries. He wonders whether it was fair to declare some religious or welfare organisations “terrorists’. And, to use this dubious “declaration” as justification to impose financial difficulties on Pakistan. He expressed ennui on apathy of international organisations towards India’s support, for example to Mukti Bahini that Pakistan considered a “terrorist’ organisation. The views expressed are personal.

The Financial Action Task Force is supposed to plug money laundering. It is not meant to dubiously declare a person or entity terrorist to impose financial restrictions on it. According to an Islamabad-based think tank Tabadlab, Pakistan sustained a total of US$ 38 billion in economic losses due to FATF’ decision to thrice place the country on its grey list since 2008. In a way, the whole Pakistani nation was punished by declaring some religious outfits “terrorists”.

 Dubious “terrorism” label

Jammu and Kashmir is a disputed state, notwithstanding India’s occupation of some parts of it. Flouting international resolutions declaring Kashmir a disputed territory, India annexed the part under its illegal occupation a centrally controlled territory ruled by New Delhi.

Kashmiris started a movement for freedom.

In the course of time some religious organisations in Pakistan began to support the freedom movement in India. India calls the freedom movement “terrorism, and by corollary whosoever supports it. Hafiz Mohammad Saied runs a few non-government welfare oganisations. Former president Musharraf’s, in an interview pointed out that Saeed’s organisations are the best in Pakistan. Through its leverage with the USA and some other countries, India managed to get Saeed designated a terrorist by the United Nations. Without substantial incriminating evidence, Saeed was portrayed as the mastermind of Mumbai attacks. The fact however remains that the Mumbai trials lacked transparency.

To create financial difficulties for Pakistan, India through its “friends” managed to get Pakistan on Financial Action Task Force watch list for inability to take adequate action against Hafiz Saeed.

Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Thomas Hammarberg (2008) observed that “arbitrary procedures for terrorist black-listing must now be changed”. There is no definition of terrorism. Mukti Bahini in former East Pakistan was freedom fighters to India but terrorists to Pakistan. Cuban terrorists were decorated n the USA as “freedom fighters”.

Political expediency not fairness is the basis of the “terrorism” definition. To the USA Taliban were freedom fighters as long s they fought the erstwhile Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The US began to subsequently regard them as “terrorists” when they allegedly sheltered international “terrorists”. The Taliban were designated terrorists under resolutions 1267 and 1373. The US used its influence to the hilt to get them so declared.  

According to principles of penology, an offence has to be first defined before it is made punishable. In the absence of a global, universally acceptable definition of the word ‘terrorism’, any figment of imagination could be stretched to mean terrorism.

Unless the word ‘terrorism is defined, it will not be possible to distinguish it from a freedom movement, protest, guerrilla warfare, subversion, criminal violence, para-militarism, communal violence or banditry. A nation cannot be punished for individual acts of terrorism, according to principles of natural justice and penology.

In the historical context, the term meant different things to different individuals and communities. The oldest ‘terrorists’ were holy warriors who killed civilians. Recent examples of religious terrorists are Aum Shinrikyo (Japanese), Rabbi Meir Kahane and Baruch Goldstein and Yigal Amir (Jews).

The Jewish-controlled media describes Hezbollah and Hamas as ‘religious terrorists’. In the first century A.D Palestine, the Jews publicly slit the Romans’ throats, in the seventh century India, the thugs strangulated gullible passersby to please the Hindu Devi Kali, and the 19th century adherents of Narodnaya Volya (People’s Will) mercilessly killed their pro-Tsar rivals.

Most historians believe that the term ‘terrorism’ received international publicity during the French reign of terror in 1793-94.

It is now common to dub one’s adversary a ‘terrorist’. Doing so forecloses possibility of political negotiation, and gives the powerful definer the right to eliminate the ‘terrorist’.

India’s self confessed “terrorism

Former East Pakistan was not a disputed state like Jammu and Kashmir. Yet, India tried tooth and nail to stoke an insurgency in East Pakistan. Confessions of former Research and Analysis Wing’s officers and diplomats bear testimony to India’s involvement in bloodshed in East Pakistan. B. Raman (A RAW officer), in his book The Kaoboys of R&AW: Down Memory Lane makes no bones about India’s involvement up to the level of prime minister in Bangladesh’s insurgency.

Elements in the definition: Points to ponder

There is a cliche “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. “Terrorism” is focused from narrow angles. Some definitions focus on the terrorist organizations’ mode of operation. Others emphasize the motivations and characteristics of terrorism, the modus operandi of individual terrorists.

In their book Political Terrorism, Schmidt and Youngman cited 109 different definitions of terrorism, which they obtained in a survey of leading academics in the field. From these definitions, the authors isolated the following recurring elements, in order of their statistical appearance in the definitions[1]: Violence, force (appeared in 83.5% of the definitions); political (65%); fear, emphasis on terror (51%); threats (47%); psychological effects and anticipated reactions (41.5%); discrepancy between the targets and the victims (37.5%); intentional, planned, systematic, organized action (32%); methods of combat, strategy, tactics (30.5%).

Former RAW officer RK Yadav’s disclosures

 In a published letter, Yadav made  startling revelation that India’s prime minister Indira Gandhi, parliament, RAW and armed forces acted in tandem to dismember Pakistan. It is eerie that no international agency declared India a “terrorist” for its nefarious activities. His  confessions in his letter are corroborated  are corroborated by B. Raman in his book The Kaoboys of R&AW. He reminds `Indian parliament passed resolution on March 31, 1971 to support insurgency. Indira Gandhi had then confided with Kao that in case Mujib was prevented, from ruling Pakistan, she would liberate East Pakistan from the clutches of the military junta. Kao, through one RAW agent, got hijacked a Fokker Friendship, the Ganga, of Indian Airlines hijacked from Srinagar to Lahore.

Why the hullabaloo about insurgency in Kashmir if India’s intervention in East Pakistan was justified.

Kulbushan Jadhav role

Jadhav was an Indian Navy officer, attached to RAW. His mission was to covertly carry out espionage and terrorism in Pakistan. Pakistan also alleged there were Indian markings on arms deliveries to Baloch rebels pushed by Jadhav.

To India’s chagrin, India’s investigative journalists confirmed from Gazettes of India that he was commissioned in the Indian Navy in 1987 with the service ID of 41558Z Kulbhushan Sudhir. A later edition of the Gazette showed his promotion to the rank of commander after 13 years of service in 2000. His passport, E6934766, indicated he traveled to Iranfrom Pune as Hussein Mubarak Patel in December 2003. Another of his Passports, No. L9630722 (issued from Thane in 2014), inadvertently exposed his correct address: Jasdanwala Complex, old Mumbai-Pune Road, cutting through Navi Mumbai. The municipal records confirmed that the flat he lived in was owned by his mother, Avanti Jadhav. Furthermore, in his testimony before a Karachi magistrate, Karachi underworld figure Uzair Baloch confessed he had links with Jadhav. India’s prestigious Frontline surmised that Jadhav still served with the Indian Navy. Gazette of India files bore no record of Jadhav’s retirement. India told the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Jadhav was a retired naval officer. But, it refrained from stating exactly when he retired. The spy initially worked for Naval Intelligence, but later moved on to the Intelligence Bureau. He came in contact with RAW in 2010.

India portrays the freedom movement in Kashmir as `terrorism’. What about India’s terrorism in neighbouring countries? Will the world take notice of confessions by India’s former intelligence officers and diplomats?

Through Jhadav India wanted to replay the Mukti Bahini experience in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Doval doctrine: In line with India’s security czar Ajit Doval’s Doctrine, RAW aims at fomenting insurgency in Pakistan’s sensitive provinces. Doval is inspired by India’s nefarious efforts which resulted in the secession of East Pakistan. Naila Baloch’s `free Balochistan’ office has been working in New Delhi since 23 June 2018. BJP MLAs and RAW officers attended its inauguration.

Involvement in Afghanistan

India too trained Afghan Northern Alliance fighters. India’s ambassador Bharath Raj Muthu Kumar, with the consent of then foreign minister Jaswant Singh, `coordinated military and medical assistance that India was secretly giving to Massoud and his forces’… `helicopters, uniforms, ordnance, mortars, small armaments,  refurbished Kalashnikovs seized in Kashmir, combat and winter clothes, packaged food, medicines, and funds through his brother in London, Wali Massoud’, delivered circuitously with the help of other countries who helped this outreach’. When New Delhi queried about the benefit of costly support to Northern Alliance chief Massoud, Kumar explained, “He is battling someone we should be battling. When Massoud fights the Taliban, he fights Pakistan.”

Concluding remarks

It is questionable why supporting ongoing freedom movement in the occupied Kashmir is “terrorism”, but not India’s support to militant groups in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and erstwhile East Pakistan. India portrays the freedom movement in Kashmir as `terrorism’. What about India’s terrorism in neighbouring countries? Will the world take notice of confessions by India’s former diplomats. The conduct of Indian diplomats amounted to state-sponsored terrorism. For one thing, India should close the `Free Balochistan’ office on her soil, and stop resuscitating propaganda skeletons of pre-Bangladesh days.

Unlike Kashmir, East Pakistan was not a disputed territory. It was an integral part of Pakistan. But, India harboured, nurtured, trained and armed Bengali ‘freedom fighters’ on Indian soil.

Continue Reading

Terrorism

U.S.: From mass airstrikes to targeted terrorist attack

Published

on

The U.S.-led military operation “Inherent Resolve” has begun in August 2014. Its ostensible purpose was a struggle with the gaining ground ISIS at that moment. As the operation develops, Australia, France, Great Britain, Saudi Arabia, the Netherlands, Belgium and other countries joined the American airstrikes.

United forces, with purposes to show power and strengthen its influence in the region carried out more than three thousand airstrikes in the first year, resulting in thousands of victims among civilians. It is worth to note that member states of the coalition didn’t try to hide the fact that their actions caused the death of thousands of people. In 2018, British authorities justified civilian deaths by the fact that militants used them as human shields and it was impossible task to minimize losses.

According to “Airwars”, the British non-government organization, from 2014 till 2019 up to 13,190 civilians were killed in Iraq and Syria as a result of the international coalition actions.

However, despite all the “efforts” and the Pentagon’s loud statements about the fight against international terrorism, the fact of the continuously growing territory controlled by the militants testifies the opposite. In addition, since 2015, facts of provided by Washington direct support to terrorists have begun to be revealed. U.S. and its allies produced weapons were repeatedly found in the territories liberated from jihadists. So, for example in 2017 during armed clashes with government troops militants used anti-tank TOW-2 and SAMS air defense systems of the U.S. production. Also, American medicines, communication tools and even component kits for UAVs were found in positions abandoned by terrorists.

The negative reaction of the international community began to rise in this context and Washington had no choice but to change the strategy of its activity in Syria. The practice of mass airstrikes was replaced by targeted terrorist attacks against government forces by their backed militants.

For implementing of such kind of actions, U.S. retained its military presence in Homs province where their military base Al-Tanf is deployed. A huge amount of evidence U.S. servicemen training armed groups fighters is widely accessible. Moreover it’s known that 55 km zone around Al-Tanf has been inaccessible to government troops for years and Syrian army attempts to enter the area were suppressed by the U.S. airstrikes.

At the same time, IS militants have been spotted moving in this region without encumbrance and used the base as a safe zone for regrouping. Terrorists slipped in Deir ez-Zor, Palmyra, as well as Daraa and As-Suwayda from this area. In addition, the U.S. has created the Jaysh Maghawir al-Thawra group to fight government forces in the eastern section of the border between Syria and Iraq. Initially, the armed group was created to fight against government troops, but after a number of defeats they started to protect the area around the Al-Tanf.

Up to the date Washington continues to insist on Bashar al-Assad government “illegitimacy” and actively supports so-called moderate opposition. Pursuing its selfish economic and political goals, the United States counters to the international law, completely ignoring the tens of thousands victims among civilians and millions of refugees flooded Europe. Although the role of the White House and its allies in supporting terrorist groups is difficult to overestimate, the United States obviously will not consider it enough.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending