US To Reconsider Anti-Terror Policy After Osama's Death

In the aftermath of the killing of Al-Qaida chief Osama Bin Laden well inside Pakistan, this country would find it very difficult to answer several queries. Pakistan's sincerity in taking action against the perpetrators of the Mumbai attack, in particular, remains a significant question in India. Pakistan had denied Usama's presence on its soil, but when it joined the global war against terrorism by putting everything at stake, the international community was left with no doubt about the sincerity of its army and Inter-Services Intelligence.
Campaign for US Presidential Elections
The US military has killed Osama Bin Laden close to Pakistan's capital in an area considered to be extremely safe and secure. This extremely secret action is being termed a major success. US President Barack Obama announced that the most dreaded terrorist of the world has been killed. This may serve him very well in his election campaign for the second term. Yet, one should take note of the worry behind his announcement, whether following Usama's killing the terrorist network spread far and wide would be wiped out.
Following the 11 September 2001 attack on the United States, the country took the extreme measure by carrying out an invasion on Afghanistan and turning it into a heap of ruins. At that time, in December 2001, the United States had announced that Osama Bin Laden had been killed in Tora Bora hillocks in Afghanistan. Later, former US President George Bush and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf repeatedly claimed that Usama had been killed in similar actions. With the latest announcement of Usama's death and jubilation over it by Americans, the lid on the secret is off. The entire world dreaded Usama extremely.
Concerted Campaign Against Osama
It was the United States that had launched a concerted campaign against Usama, who was considered to be a hero in the Islamic world. Yet, terrorism continued to raise its head in different forms. A conscientious group in the world regards US military actions as the greatest acts of terrorism. Al-Qaida or Osama Bin Laden had carried out actions to teach a lesson to the West only, which spread terrorism in the name of Al-Qaida or Usama. In anti-terrorist actions, it appeared that the United States has earned a license to sacrifice human lives. It is on the basis of this license that it carried out actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Islamic countries.
Yet, the silence of those who call themselves to be champions of humanity is surprising indeed. It is also meaningful. The very same world, which justifies Israeli terrorism in Palestine and the latest acts of terrorism indulged in Libya by the United States and its allies, is now heaving a sigh of great relief after Osama Bin Laden's killing. This relief may not last long for the United States and its allies. This is because those who raise their voice against oppression, tyranny, and excesses, are never alone. The United States believes that by killing just one individual, Osama Bin Laden, it has achieved its goal, and is jumping and springing in jubilation. Should that jubilation remain, the world may get the message of peace. But it is necessary to assess the might of those forces that spread the network of Al-Qaida so that the jubilation at Usama's killing may not turn into a major tragedy.

Peace and Stability
US President, Barack Obama has got the credit of killing the most wanted person, Osama Bin Laden, during his presidency. At the same time, he should take note of the factors that helped Al-Qaida network to emerge with a bang. Undoubtedly, the number of those who were attracted by the ideology of Usama and Al-Qaida has largely declined in the world. Even in the Islamic Arab world, people no longer raise the slogan of 'Long Live Usama' and carry his photographs with the same enthusiasm as they earlier used to show. Yet, the strength of those who shout 'Death to the United States' has not dwindled either.
Obama need to seriously ponder why some groups who want peace and stability in the world hate the United States and raise the slogan 'Down with the United States.' It is also his moral duty to condole the deaths of those who have lost their lives at US hands. All peace-loving people in the world, including those in the United States, who had committed the blunder to raise and strengthen a formidable force of Taliban in Afghanistan during the 1990s against the former Soviet Union should also ponder over this. The opinion gaining ground about Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence or Taliban at the international level has been further fortified by Osama Bin Laden's killing. India's stand has also got a fillip with regard to the Mumbai terror attacks. There is need that the United States and its allies should give up their partial line of action in eliminating terrorism.

India Must Continue Efforts To Bring Conspirator Headley to Country

Finally, the US national of Pakistani origin David Coleman Headley admitted to the crime of his involvement in the conspiracy of the Mumbai attack before a Chicago-based court. Even before his admission to the crime, news reports has started emanating about it due to which the entire world had got to know that a deal was struck between him and the US Government.

According to it, if he divulges to the US Administration all information about the Mumbai strikes and other terrorist activities linked with it then he will not be awarded capital punishment. Simultaneously the United States announced its decision that Headley will not be handed over to India and Indian agencies can only interrogate him.

Activities in Pakistan
It clearly manifests that the US Administration, for special reasons, is trying to save him. Headley has been facing the charge that he acted as a double agent between the US Administration and the terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiyiba. Earlier, he was once apprehended for smuggling heroin from Pakistan to the United States. He was sentenced to two years' imprisonment on admission to the crime. He was subsequently set free to resume his activities in Pakistan.

The situation in respect of Headley is so complex that it is hard to readily perceive it. Yet, it has once again raised finger to the US tactics. It is intriguing to note a country leading the global war on terror is adopting double standards on terrorism.

Tackling Terrorism
The state of affairs of the US Administration by and large is such that while it feels the heat of fire when it engulfs its own house, but when some other house is set ablaze then it looks to it as if some sport is being played. The way the United States has saved a person from going to the gallows who led the conspirators of the Mumbai attack leaving more than 166 people dead and wounding hundred others and the way it exonerated him by making him confess to the crime and refusing to hand him over to India, the US Administration can be termed a major culprit.

The calculations of the US Administration to tackle terrorism are such that in order to restrain Al-Qa'ida leaders it is securing the support of Pakistan which intelligence agencies are in collusion with the terrorist organization for carrying out terrorist activities in India, but it is turning a blind eye to it. The United States will realize all this only when the heat of terrorism is once again felt by its own country in some form or the other. Even as an attempt has been made to save a dangerous conspirator like Headley, it does not realize that he can continue to be a cause of headache for itself also because seven US nationals were also killed in the Mumbai mayhem.

If it had not happened then the mindset of the US Administration would not have been confined to saving Headley and instead he would have been set free after a brief term of imprisonment. Now, if Headley is given the death sentence then the chief reason behind it would be the killing of some US nationals in the Mumbai attack.

Conspiracy Against Mumbai Attacks
In the wake of Headley's admission to the crime, the Pakistani Government also stands exposed, for until now Pakistan has been harping on its stand that the Mumbai attackers were not its nationals or the conspiracy for the Mumbai attacks was not hatched in Pakistan. It has come to the fore that Headley had been frequently visiting India with a view to survey the spots that were to be targeted by the Lashkar-e-Taiyiba. He had, in fact, taken a video footage of those locations. He has been frequenting Pakistan in order to feed intelligence inputs to Pakistan-based terrorists.

It should be clear to the Indian Government from the sequence of events that instead of depending on others to counter terrorism it should gear up on its own. It would be futile to carry out war on terror in such a way. We feel that India should not relax its endeavors on the issue of bringing Headley to the country because he is the prime accused for India, and not the United States.

India-Pakistan Talks: A Review

A number of problems between Pakistan and India have been awaiting solution since the partition of the Indian-Pakistani subcontinent. Major problems among these are Kashmir, Sir Creek, distribution of water, Siachen Glacier, and now terrorism is also a problem that has contributed to widening of the gulf between the two countries.

In addition to leadership-level talks between the two countries, dialogues were also held at ministerial and secretaries level between the two countries during the last 63 years to solve the problems. During the course of time, wars were also fought, which broadened the gulf of mistrust further, and the Mumbai attacks in the year 2008 pushed the level of mistrust to an extreme end.

The latest, the foreign secretary-level talks between Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao and her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir was held after a long time, which ended without any positive results. The Pakistani Government is making efforts to resolve the Kashmir issue and other disputes. However, the Indian Government's stance was limited to talks on terrorism only. Now, these talks again proved meaningless and serving no purpose, and became a thing of the past like those held previously.

Salman Bashir declined to hand over the mastermind of the Mumbai terror attacks, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, to India, saying that it is futile to link the Hafiz Saeed issue with the dialogue process. Meanwhile, Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao raised the terrorism issue at the talks with Salman Bashir and demanded the arrest of Hafiz Saeed because India has been the victims of terrorism attacks from the Pakistani side since a long time. India also entrusted to Pakistan a dossier of the list of 40 terrorists, but whether Pakistan would make any comment on it, is doubtful.

The manner in which the two sides were engaged in filling the blanks shows that the dialogue was held without much preparation. Those who consider this to be another failure of India's foreign policy cannot be totally dismissed. This is because our rival country, which had made India agree to talks even if that meant coming to New Delhi, seems to have been successful in claiming this to be a diplomatic victory. It could achieve this feat without changing its viewpoint after 26 November 2008.

Ministerial Level Talks
The first session of Pakistan-India ministerial level talks was held on 27 December 1962 in Rawalpindi. Pakistan was represented by Foreign Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and India by its Foreign Minister Suran Singh. These six-phase talks concerning the Kashmir issue remained inconclusive. The second phase of these talks was held in New Delhi from 16 to 19 January 1963, while the third phase from 8 to 11 February ended inconclusive in Karachi. However, it was decided to hold one more meeting in Calcutta (Kolkata) to find new ways for solution to the problem. Hence, the fourth phase of talks kicked off on 11 March in Calcutta where the proposal of Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was agreed on, saying the Kashmir problem should be solved on the basis of economy and not religion. Yet, no permanent solution to the problem was reached, and it was decided to take the matter forward and holding of another session of talks was agreed.

Meanwhile, Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru once again emphasized on solution to the Kashmir and other issues. The fifth phase of ministerial-level talks began in Karachi on 22 April 1963, which ended without yielding any results. The sixth and last phase of these talks began in New Delhi on 15 May 1963, which proved unsuccessful on 16 May when Pakistan suggested making the Kashmir an international issue. In this way, these ministerial-level talks comprising six phases concluded without yielding any results.

There had been no ministerial or diplomatic contact between the two countries for almost seven years; rather, India attacked Pakistan in 1971, resulting in disintegration of the country into two parts (inception of Bangladesh); Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and the Indian prime minister signed Shimla Pact thereafter.

On 31 July 1971, the Pakistan-India diplomatic staff held bilateral negotiations at Rawalpindi to bring the political situation to normalcy. On 29 November 1974, the diplomats from the two countries held negotiations at New Delhi to remove ban from the bilateral trade, imposed in 1965. On 24 January 1975, Pakistan and India signed a trade agreement at Islamabad. Negotiations on Pakistan-India trade were arranged at Karachi from 12 to 13 January 1976.

The Indian cricket team, after a 17-year gap, came to Pakistan on a two-month long tour on 24 April 1978. On 4 February 1980, Indian Foreign Secretary R.D. Sethi along with a four-member delegation came to Pakistan to hand over Indira Gandhi's letter to President Ziaul Haque, in which meetings with Pakistani Foreign Secretary S. Shah Nawaz for bringing relationships of both the countries to normalcy and situation of Afghanistan were discussed.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Ghulam Ishaq Khan and his Indian counterpart Narasimha Rao held a two-phase meeting on 10 June 1981, in which discussions were made on the international situation and the bilateral relationships. Pakistan and India held negotiations on No-War Pact and bilateral relationships on 30 January 1982.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Yaqub Khan held a 50-minute meeting with his Indian counterpart Bali Ram Bhagat to discuss bilateral relationships. The second round of this meeting was held in New Delhi on the issue of Siachen Glacier.

In October 1978, the two countries arranged negotiations at Islamabad on the Wooler Barrage dispute. On 31 December 1988, multiphase meetings were held between Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and her Indian counterpart Rajiv Gandhi. On 1 January 1989, Benazir Bhutto and Rajiv Gandhi signed three bilateral accords: No attack on each another, solution of bilateral taxation dispute, and cultural cooperation.

Secretary-Level Negotiations
The first round of the secretary-level negotiations between the two countries was held at Islamabad on 17 July 1990, in which Foreign Secretary Tanvir Ahmed Khan represented Pakistan, while Indian Foreign Secretary Machkana Darbe represented his country. These negotiations were of seven phases. The second round was held in New Delhi from 10 to 11 August 1990, third round in Islamabad between Pakistani Foreign Secretary Sheheryar Khan and his Indian counterpart Machkana Darbe and J.N. Dixit from 18 to 20 December 1990 and seventh round in Islamabad from 2 to 3 January 1994.

In these negotiations, which were held after a 17-month gap, nuclear nonproliferation, Kashmir, and Siachen disputes and reduction of weapons were discussed. However, these negotiations didn't bear any fruit. On 28 March 1997, Pakistan-India negotiations at the foreign secretary-level resumed in New Delhi after the lapse of three years. Shamshad Ahmed Khan represented Pakistan, while Salman Haider represented India. The second round of these talks was held in Islamabad from June 19 to 22 1997.

Negotiations at the foreign secretary-level restarted at Islamabad on 15 October 1998 after a gap of 13 months, in which Shamshad Khan represented Pakistan, while Raghunath participated from the Indian side. Discussions were made for the restoration of confidence building environment. As a result of these meetings, Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee visited Pakistan in 1999.

In 2003, the Pakistan-India contacts were restored at the foreign secretary-level, in which the India forwarded 12 suggestions for confidence building and stress was laid on the reopening of land, water and air routes. Pakistan showed positive response to almost all of the suggestions. However, it partially rejected one of the suggestions, and also imposed some conditions.

Also, in addition to this, four suggestions were presented from Pakistan's side: Increase in the number of delegation staff and starting Lahore-Amritsar bus service in place of increase in number of buses on Lahore-Delhi route were suggested. On 6 January 2004, a meeting was held between General Pervez Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee during the SAARC leaders' conference in Islamabad where both of them agreed to hold purposeful negotiations in February for restoration of relationships.

As a result, negotiations at the secretary-level were held from 15 to 17 February 2004 in Islamabad, which broke down the three-year deadlock. The second round of these talks started in Islamabad from 27 to 28 December 2004, in which Foreign Secretary Riaz H. Kokar represented Pakistan, and from the Indian side Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran forwarded 20 suggestions for restoration of confidence over strategic and regional issues and the Kashmir dispute.

This peace process fell in jeopardy after the seven bomb explosions in Mumbai trains on 11 July 2006, in which approximately 200 people were killed. As expected, India put the responsibility of the explosions on Pakistan and talks at the foreign secretary-level were halted. And it is also said that the Pakistani diplomatic staff was deported from India. However, the deferment lasted for a very little duration and, once again, negotiations started at the foreign secretary-level in New Delhi from 14 to 15 February 2006. In the third phase of this meeting, the Khokhrapar Monabao border was opened on 1 February 2007.

An agreement was signed in March 2007 to prepare combined mechanism against terrorism. However, important, complicated and solution-seeking issues between the two countries remained unresolved. And most importantly, India kept rolling back on its own 12 suggestions that it had forwarded for confidence restoration in October 2003.

During the SAARC Council of Ministers meeting on 7 December 2007 in New Delhi, Pakistani Caretaker Foreign Minister Inamul Haq met his Indian counterpart Pranab Mukherjee and emphasized on negotiations. Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee visited Pakistan from 21 to 22 May 2008, and another meeting was held in Islamabad for the evaluation of the fourth round of Pakistan-India negotiations.

On 27 June 2008, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi visited India and invited his counterpart for negotiations, after which the fifth phase of negotiations at the foreign secretary-level started on 21 July 2008. Under these negotiations, friendly cooperation in various sectors was ensured and discussions were made on suggestions of availability of resources for easy issuance of visas and increasing people-to-people contacts.

Pakistan and India agreed for confidence rebuilding over the Kashmir dispute and steps for amalgamation of the divided families. However, no agreements over the Kashmir dispute and other issues came to forth.

Disastrous Point
26 November 2008 proved to be a very fatal day for the Pakistan-India peace process when approximately 170 people lost their lives in the massive terrorist activities in the Indian city of Mumbai. India held Pakistan responsible for these activities and one again the negotiation process suspended. And now India is laying stress on negotiations only over the agenda of terrorism.

And news published in various dailies show the bias that India at the moment does not want to deviate from its stance and talk about other issues. One this occasion, we are recalling/remembering these words of the Indian prime minister, which he had spoken on 12 July 2001 for war: "If India and Pakistan remain busy in peaceful and sincere bilateral negotiations for removing mutual differences, then none of the problems could linger unresolved."
Assessment
If the responsible people sitting on the negotiations tables recall these words of Vajpayee, without any doubt, peaceful environment will be established in the region, which will guarantee development of all.

The most important aspect of the 25 February talks is that Pakistan's foreign secretary came here and our foreign secretary talked to him. Even if both of them repeated their old allegations full of resentment, at least it broke the silence. It should be noted here that during the time when formal talks between the governments remain stopped, politicians on both sides spread much more hatred among their people. Before leaving, Pakistani foreign secretary extended an invitation to the Indian foreign secretary to come there. We must continue this sequence.

To conclude, I am also recalling a quote of Jawaharlal Nehru, which he had uttered soon after independence: "A prosperous and secure Pakistan would benefit India; with which (Pakistan) we can establish close and friendly relations." In the light of these words, India should not miss this opportunity at any cost. And it (India) should take such steps that help Pakistan become a stable and prosperous country, so that it also has positive impact on India.

Pakistan's Negative Attitude in Fresh Talks With India

The beginning of secretary-level talks between India and Pakistan is a positive development, but not getting any concrete result out of it, as usual, is a negative aspect. The Pakistani delegation must have known well about India's complaints, but even then it did not come to India for talks with any positive message from its side. Our delegation headed by Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao deserves to be commended that it sat down for talks with full preparations. Not just one but three dossiers were handed over to Pakistan.

Terror Issue
The first dossier was about the Mumbai terror attack, while the second one was about the threat by terrorist Ilyas Kashmiri, and the third one about absconding Indian criminals hiding in Pakistan. We can be reassured that the post of Indian foreign secretary is being held by a skilled woman diplomat. She rightly raised the Pune explosion issue before the Pakistani delegation. While there was a lot with Indian delegation to give and say to the Pakistani delegation, it seemed as if the Pakistani delegation had come here to "pass time".
To irritate Indians, Pakistan again sang the Kashmir tune. Pakistani Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir went to the extent of repeating that India had a hand behind terrorism in Baluchistan. It is another matter though that they did not have any proof to substantiate the same.

Impact of Pune Explosion
After the death of 15 persons in the Pune explosion, India could have refused to talk, but still it favored talks. These talks were proof of India's goodwill. Yes, the Pune explosion did have an impact in the sense that the entire dialogue was converted into brief talks.

The main issue and regrettable fact is that Pakistan is not doing anything in the direction of stopping terrorism directed against India. When Nirupama Rao must have said that both countries would keep in touch in the future, Salman Bashir obviously must have been very pleased because for Pakistan, the show of talks is more important. After returning to Pakistan, Bashir would, perhaps, publicize that India is compelled to talk and there would be talks in the future.

Maintaining Positive Attitude
It should be noted here that the Indian Government had decided to hold talks again with Pakistan with a positive attitude, but this positive attitude could be maintained only if we continue to exert adequate pressure on Pakistan. Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, the mastermind of the Mumbai terror attack, is openly holding rallies in Pakistan and issuing threats against India, but the Pakistani Government cannot see this truth.
The Indian delegation has done the right thing by also raising this issue during the talks. India would have to reply to Pakistan's pack of lies by always speaking the truth. Some day, it would be ashamed. Some day it would improve. We must continue to talk with this hope.

Pune After Mumbai

A terrorist strike in any part of the country before the beginning of a dialogue is nothing new. Whoever might have been responsible for the Pune attack, his purpose was undoubtedly to humiliate India and to scare Indians.
It can easily be assumed that only terrorist organizations flourishing in Pakistan or their supporters could have been motivated by such malicious intentions. Unfortunately Pakistan is determined to assure that such forces continue to be defiant.

Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
Active terrorist organizations across the border were recently given the opportunity to publicly threaten India, and some support was also extended to them. Such an attitude will obviously encourage anti-national forces. The argument that some organizations want to create situations to prevent bilateral relations from becoming normal does not hold much water.
It is by now quite clear that Pakistan is least interested in taking action against such organizations. As a matter of fact, they form an integral part of its foreign policy and diplomacy. Just as it is reluctant to take the Taliban to task, Pakistan is unwilling to take any action against organizations like Lashkar-e-Taiyiba.
The Indian Government is surely aware of this fact. Nevertheless, its conclusions on the talks to be held with Pakistan no 25 February will be awaited. Terrorism and talks cannot go side-by-side, nor is such a situation desirable.

Diplomatic Maneuvers
It may not be possible to cancel the talks at this stage. But no one has stopped India from protesting in international forums against Pakistan taking advantage of terrorism in its diplomatic maneuvers. Failing to launch a strong and aggressive campaign against Pakistan at the international level will, in the ultimate analysis, provide it with the excuse that terrorist organizations will have the upper hand if the two countries do not sort out their problems.
It is quite obvious that Pakistan has succeeded in deceiving the United States. But why is India being fooled by Pakistan?

Question of Internal Security
On the question of internal security, it may be similarly asked why terrorist attacks could not be foiled even in cases where previous information had been received? Explosions were carried out in areas that were more or less on the terrorist radar. This matter should not be taken lightly. It is frustrating to find after the explosion in the German bakery in Pune that the police and intelligence agencies have made no headway after the Mumbai attacks.
In order to prove that internal security has been strengthened after the 26 November 2008 terrorist attack, it is essential to expose those who were involved in the Pune incident. This terrorist attack also points out to the need for streamlining the international security system further.

Robert Gates' Visit To Help Strengthen India-US Defense Relations

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates is in New Delhi to give a new dimension to his country's defense relations with India. Just a day earlier, the US special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke, had also visited Delhi and had exchanged ideas with Indian leaders on the situation in South Asia. However, Robert Gates' visit is significant from several angles.

Regional Security Scenario
After Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh's US visit in November 2009, this is the first Delhi visit by any important official of the Obama Administration. US Defense Secretary Robert Gates held extensive talks with Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh on 19 January on bilateral defense cooperation and regional security scenario. The issue of India-Pakistan relations was also included in the talks.
The United States wants that India and Pakistan should ease tension between them, but India's policy in this regard is quite clear. Only Pakistan has to make efforts for this. Talks between the countries would be possible only when Pakistan honestly takes action against the guilty of the Mumbai terror attack, and destroys the terror infrastructure. But Pakistan is not doing anything in this direction.
Infiltration from across the border continues, and the cease-fire agreement is being violated time and again. India is contributing in Afghanistan's rebuilding, but Pakistan dislikes this.
It is not taking any action against the Taliban who enter into Afghanistan from its border and carry out attacks. In this situation, the United States should further increase pressure on Pakistan, because it is spoiling the security atmosphere in South Asia.

Increasing Mutual Contact
Apart from the prime minister, the US Defense Secretary also held talks with the defense minister about increasing bilateral strategic cooperation, increasing mutual contact between forces of both countries, and providing wider basis to exchange of intelligence inputs.
Talks for buying aircraft and military equipment from the United States have also been finalized. Let us hope that Defense Secretary Gates' visit would provide a new high to strategic relations between the countries.

Punishing Mumbai Attackers

With emergence of fresh revelations relating to the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, the central apprehension gets confirmed that terrorists involved in the attack had direct links with militant organizations active in Pakistan, and the government agency. According to these revelations, the Mumbai attackers were recruited by the Lashkar-e Taiyiba (LeT) and trained by Pakistan's intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). The charges of imparting training, supplying arms and ammunition, and extending monetary support to terrorists have been consistently leveled against the ISI from time-to-time.

There is a long history of enrolment of non-employee operatives and getting terrorist activities carried out by them. Pakistani security expert Asif Jamal has stated in his book that preparation of non-employee elements costs less from the strategic, financial, political, and military aspects. From this viewpoint, it is evident that the Pakistani military and intelligence agencies have been using militant outfits for proxy war against India.

Global War on Terror
After start of the global war on terror, the nexus between security agencies and militant organizations caused embarrassment to Pakistan at the international level. Amid global pressure, the Pakistani Government tried to break the contact between intelligence agencies and militant organizations, on the face of it. Owing to such a pressure, ISI and militant organizations endeavored to cover up their coordination. This coordination continues in a covert manner through former military generals.

During this period, militant outfits expanded the area of their support and influence. This expansion makes a crucial impact on existing military, ISI, and political circles. As a consequence, inductiveness invariably persists in taking action against militant outfits. Militant agencies like LeT are no longer under that control as they used to be in the initial period. These agencies have turned arbitrary. There is all likelihood that training and supply of arms and ammunition was carried out by intelligence agencies, and might be autonomous in respect of taking action.

Tantamount to Harboring Terrorism
The question is how military proves instrumental in execution of activities of militant agencies? If they remain silent even after having knowledge of everything and shy away, even then it is tantamount to harboring terrorism. Security experts maintain that given the relationship between militant outfits and ISI, the breakup of this relationship is not possible without political willpower. Acting as they do as forerunner in the proxy war against India, militant organizations like LeT are duly aware of loopholes in the military and ISI. They do not require any centralized strategy or institutionalized planning for security support from them. In the circumstances, there is no prospect of implementation of verbal assurances and paper promises until pro-militancy loopholes are plugged within the military and ISI.

The Pakistani Government cannot shy away from its responsibility by thrusting militant activities on non-employee operatives. The government will have to take the responsibility of ties between non-employee operatives and employees. The Pakistani Government can win the confidence of the international community by acting against organizations responsible for incidents like the Mumbai attack. This will make its intention clear to unruly officers, generals, and militant organizations.