Pakistan: The jihad lives on

Got to give Musharraf credit, however: each time he declares victory against the jihadists, he gets international headlines -- and probably accolades and more from the State Department. From Asia Times, with thanks to RB:

KARACHI - Contrary to the much-touted claims of the government of President General Pervez Musharraf having taken concrete measures to uproot the extremist jihadi mafia and its terror network in Pakistan, a cursory glance over the activities of four "banned" militant organizations in the country shows they are once again back in business, with changed names and identities, operating freely and advocating jihad against infidels to defend Islam.
While banning six leading jihadi and sectarian groups in two phases - on January 12, 2002, and November 15, 2003 - Musharraf had declared that no organization or person would be allowed to indulge in terrorism to further its cause. However, after the initial crackdown, the four major jihadi outfits operating from Pakistan - Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HuM) and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM), resurfaced and regrouped effectively to run their respective networks as openly as before, though under different names.

Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, Maulana Masood Azhar, Maulana Fazalur Rehman Khalil and Syed Salahuddin - the respective leaders of these organizations - are again on the loose. The pattern of treatment being meted out to these leading lights of jihad by the Musharraf-led administration shows that they are being kept on the leash, ostensibly to wage a controlled jihad in Jammu & Kashmir (J&K).

After the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, the four jihadi leaders were placed under house arrest in their respective home towns in Punjab, since they were becoming increasingly vocal in their condemnation of Musharraf's policy of "slavery to the Americans". A countrywide crackdown also had to be launched against activists of the jihadi groups who were furious over Musharraf's u-turn on the Afghan jihad. Groaning under US pressure, Islamabad also had to temporarily stop cross-border infiltration into J&K, which eventually reduced violence levels in the Valley. Though most of the jihadi groups accepted the establishment's advice and adopted a "lie low and wait and see" policy, the fact remains that no concrete step was taken by the authorities to dismantle the jihadi infrastructure. This was chiefly due to the fact that the unholy alliance between the state agencies and the jihadi groups was quite old and had an ideological basis....

5 Comments

voletti | March 12, 2005 7:38 AM

Nothing new here, I daresay.

However, a Pukistani newspaper editorial brought out some interesting news. Excerpt:

The federal information minister, Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, has finally confirmed that Dr AQ Khan helped Iran in its nuclear-weapons programme by providing centrifuges to enrich uranium. His statement puts to rest the controversy over the exact nature of Dr Khan’s assistance to Iran. Of course, Mr Rashid was careful to reiterate that Dr Khan’s enterprise had no institutional backing from the state of Pakistan.
Why did Mr Rashid choose to spill the beans now? The confession comes just days ahead of the visit to Pakistan of the new US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. Another development on the Iran front is equally interesting. The United States wants India to wait another six months or so before finalising a gas pipeline deal with Iran. This pipeline, which has to go overland to India via Pakistan, has been in the works for many years. Only recently, and as a result of both India’s growing need for gas as well as the thaw between India and Pakistan, has New Delhi come round to accepting its urgency. It is a project that creates mutual dependence and is beneficial to the three parties involved. It is interesting that the US has not asked India to scuttle the deal but delay it for a few months.

So, is Iran next? I for one wouldn't complain too loudly...

Seculartalk | March 12, 2005 11:05 AM

Iran was an ally till it turned a foe. Iraq was one till it turned its back. Now it is time of Pakistan.Contingency alone seems to be the driving force for US foriegn policy.
Pakistan has always been a lawless terrorist state. It is sure to bite the hand that feeds now!

Nostrodamus | March 12, 2005 8:25 PM

If the United States will win the War On Terror , it will have to eventually invade Pakistan as well. It is just a matter of time.

To ignore this fact is to delude ourselves as to whom our enemies are in this war.

Nossy

dby | March 13, 2005 3:31 AM

Invade Pakistan ?
Its a festering sore, you might lance it, but never invade.
Iran - surgical air strikes to destroy their nuclear dreams, but no invasion.
Syria - now that's a different story, and Assad knows that, which is why he is playing puppy dog right now.
Re. Syria and Iran, i'd be more inclined to work with the Kurds, and keeping Turkey on side, establish Kurdistan from northern Iraq, eastern Syria and western Iran, all with majority Kurdish population.
The Turks just might go for a strong non arab non iranian, allied, Kurdistan....maybe maybe. Lots of Kurds in Turkey, lots of Turks in Kurdistan, could work.
Would be a major defeat for the arabs, which they so deserve, and for Iran, ditto.

Course, re Pakistan again, we could help the Baloch people regain their freedom, which they are fighting for now within Pakistan. Could also free the Balochs on the Iranian side of the border - hmmm.

Jabba the Tutt | March 13, 2005 9:55 AM

I'd like to see the entire non-Muslim world come together and ask Muslims, if they would like to be on the receiving end of muslim-tactics by non-muslims. Say random bombings of muslim civilians, the slaughter of muslim tourists, the collection of 'charity' to fund psycho-killers, who will be left alone as long as they kill muslims, attacks on busses with muslim passengers, laws declaring muslims legal inferiors, enslavement of muslims, suing muslim individuals, mosques and organizations and expulsion of muslims from non-muslim countries. The list is not complete.