Jihad Watch: Pakistan admits aiding jihad in Jammu and Kashmir

October 8, 2006

Pakistan admits aiding jihad in Jammu and Kashmir

Question for the ISI: Which fronts of the jihad haven't you helped? From Rediff: "Pak admits having helped insurgency in J&K"

Pakistan has admitted that it might have helped insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir at "some time" but claimed it is now "trying our best" to prevent infiltration of militants into India.

"Jihad, insurgency or whatever you want to call it in Kashmir...Yes, Pakistan may have helped the jihad at some time but it was not started by us and now we are trying our best to stop people from crossing," Pakistan's Ambassador to the United States Mahmud Ali Durrani said.

He was delivering a lecture at the South Asia Programme of the School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University. When asked what Pakistan was doing to stop terrorist outfits like the Lashkar-e-Taiyba from crossing into Kashmir, he said, "To the best of my knowledge Lakshar-e-Taiba [sic] is a banned organisation. They are no more in Pakistan," Durrani said.

However, even two years ago, the LeT had money collection boxes in the markets of Rawalpindi, he said. "There were these hundreds and thousands of these boxes. That is finished and Lashkar-e-Taiba does not have the luxury of those funds... and the organisation has been banned," the Pakistani envoy claimed.

"We are trying our best. We have put military as well as intelligence assets in areas from where people went. There is no serious cross border movement today in Kashmir," Durrani claimed.

He said there were "vast areas" in which both India and Pakistan had responsibilities. "Both parties have responsibilities. If we can't hypothetically stop every guy from crossing over, the other side has responsibility too. So it is a joint issue. It has been addressed," he said.

Posted by Marisol at October 8, 2006 7:33 AM
Print this entry | Email this entry | Digg this | del.icio.us

Comments
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)

Denials/admissions of guilt? Does it really make any difference? Very few Muslims are prepared to fight fellow muslims on behalf of nonmuslims unless they have a sectarian need to do so.

The sooner we stop subsidising Pakistan and start treating it like the enemy it truly is the better.

Posted by: MisIslamist

at October 8, 2006 7:51 AM

Decades of American aid to Pakistan, of supplying the extra sums that paid for A. Q. Khan's nuclear project, of American military aid including top-of-the-line F-16s, the smiles and wiles of Pakistani generals winning over Pentagon counterparts, with that mantra about Islam being a "bulwark against Communism" (and so it was, but so were the Nazis and the Fascists), looking the other way when the Taliban were created and nurtured in madrasas in Pakistan, ignoring the diplomatic and financial and logistical support given by Pakistan to that same Taliban when, in the early 1990s, it began to enter Afghanistan and seize control (nota bene: the Taliban had nothing to do with defeating the Soviet troops, though Bernard Lewis on a Hillsdale cruise last July apparently thought they did -- but that is the least of his many confusions, and not the most dangerous), and supporting those who harried the Kashmiri Pandits, who killed Hindu villagers, who put bombs in Mumbai a decade ago and did it only yesterday, who attacked the Parliament in Delhi, who make life in India in many places unsettled and physically dangerous for the Hindus who still are not permitted to enjoy a life, devoid of fear, in their own country.

That is Pakistan. That is "our ally" on the "war on terror" that Captain Queeg is conducting. That is the "staunch ally" that has helped us find Bin Laden, that is helping us, in a thousand ways, to suppress the Taliban, Al Qaeda's close ally and supporter, in Afghanistan. Just ask Karzai. Ask any Afghani who is not a supporter of the Taliban to measure the size of his gratitude toward America's "ally" Pakistan.

Posted by: Hugh

at October 8, 2006 8:02 AM

Hugh, while I am also disgusted with Pakistan, and hold thatAmerican aid has to be curtailed, I fear that our alternatives to "Captain Queeg" will be even more anxious to prove their good intentions and waste more of our tax dollars.

Posted by: Kepha

at October 8, 2006 8:47 AM

The ISI doesnt realize that when it comes to payback time from India, it will be in tears. India has already dismembered Pakistan once. How many more dismemberments does that country have to undergo before the ISI sees reason ?

The ISI is also economically draining Pakistan by continuing this war against India. A huge percentage of the Paki GDP goes into keeping parity with India and this will only worsen as India continues its march towards becoming an economic superpower.

Posted by: bajirao

at October 8, 2006 10:07 AM

My feelings towards India are mixed.

The Kashmir problem is the result of muddling it throughout, without a clear sense of direction or policy. Indians did not anticipate the entry of Afghan jihadis into the scene after 1989 and their foolish ignorant leaders actually loosened controls in Kashmir after the violence unleashed by the jihadis, believing it was a popular upsurge. Promptly, a well planned ethnic cleansing took place in Kashmir. Hundreds of thousands of Hindus had to leave their homeland of Kashmir, where their forefathers had lived for thousands of years. This was a failure of Indian government to protect its own people.

Despite all the advantages that come from having good, brainy people, India has made it a point to ALWAYS take a course of action that is most harmful to its own interests. Just a few examples:

1. It did not opt for an exchange of population with Pakistan at the time of independence, although Jinnah was very keen to do so.

2. It did not ensure a common civil code, thus encouraging obscurantism and sharia among the growing muslim population.

3. It did nothing to prevent inflows of Arab money to finance fundamentalism among the chronically poor muslims and the setting up of thousands of mosques and madrassas across the country.

4. It chose a centralised leftist path of growth and thus crippled its enterprising people, through most of its post-independence history. And instead of aligning with its "natural allies" like the US, it chose a congenitally hostile attitude towards the west.

5. It has had a policy of quotas and reservations in education and jobs for unfit people from large politically important groups to practice a form of reverse apartheid (as is happening now in South Africa). This has led to a takeover of its government by below par performers across the board. As a result, the government has become a corrupt and ineffective behemoth unable to anticipate or deal with the enemies of the state. Muslims are soon to be incorporated into this favoured group, given their numerical clout. With muslims entering the Indian police and army in a big way, and the rapid growth of its muslim population, India may have to be written off from a free world pov.

Posted by: Dunk

at October 8, 2006 10:57 AM

From http://www.jang-group.com/thenews/feb2006-daily/05-02-2006/oped/o3.htm

the total amount that Pakistan has gained through its we-are-your-ally-against-terrorism extortion, seems to be in excess of $40B....

"America sent our way a paltry $91million in 2001. Then came September 11. In 2002, we got a wholesome $1,151 million. In 2003, Bush announced a five-year $3 billion aid package. In 2004 and 2005 we received $411 million and $726 million, respectively. Thanks to Bush, the World Bank -- where America has 265,219 votes -- committed a three-year $4.5 billion loan. Thanks to Bush, the Asian Development Bank -- where America has 565,919 votes -- committed $1 billion a year for the next three years. Japan resumed her yen loans, the equivalent of $500 million a year, and the UK promised an additional $150 million a year. Additionally, expatriate Pakistanis keep sending back an average of $350 million a month.

To top it all, the US Department of Defence has been depositing a cool $100 million a month into our treasury for the last four years. The US forgave $3 billion worth of bilateral debt, and then convinced the Paris Club lender nations to reschedule a large portion of our $38 billion bilateral debt on easy terms. Add it all up -- and thank Osama -- for the total bonanza is going to be a colossal $40 billion"

Terrorism pays - just ask Pakistan!!

Posted by: AJack

at October 8, 2006 11:30 AM

Hugh good comments. You point out the Taliban had nothing to do with defeating the Soviets, exactly right. The Soviets left in 1989 and the Soviet Union ended at the end of 1991. The Taliban were created by the Pakistan ISI in 1993 to 1994.

Ajack's post is very importan, and this is a good find this web page. Pakistan's Moeen Qureshi was a VP at World Bank in 1980's and became PM of Pakistan briefly in early 1990's. Pakistan first got IMF and World Bank assistance in the early 1980's.

By c. 1990 they owed 16 billion. They feel that they don't owe the money because they defeated the Soviets, in their mind, for us. They think they carried our coals in the war against the Soviets by being on our side against India. India has many links to the Soviets including links between their intelligence services.

Musharraf makes this clear in his book. Apparently in every meeeting before 9-11, they told the Americans that America owed it, they didn't owe America, and shouldn't have this foreign debt.

The current PM of India seems to either have been an intelligence officer in the economics field or be aware of certain incidents over the years, some involving IMF and World Bank. Dunk's points on India are very good. It was long aligned with the Soviets and that included intrigue in physics in the 1930's and 1940's.

India may have chosen an intelligence officer with experience in international institutions to offset Pakistan's contacts and links in that area. The above is speculative and should be considered a hypothesis.

Posted by: Old Atlantic

at October 8, 2006 12:42 PM

'Communal riots' update:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2116918.cms

Old Atlantic

India's current PM - Manmohan Singh - was once the Governor of the Reserve Bank of India - their equivalent of the Fed. His signature can be seen on several currency notes from the '80s. He became Finance Minister in 1991, and became PM because of the political backlash at the idea of an Italian born Sonia Gandhi becoming the PM of India. Although I'm no longer sure that in future, that's a non-starter.

Posted by: Infidel Pride

at October 8, 2006 12:52 PM

Where is that in-bred Naseem .... I bet he says it wasn't pakistan it was the blonde's who did it!!!

Posted by: vonbueren

at October 8, 2006 1:10 PM

Infidel Pride, good points. The reason he may have some intelligence experience, or knowledge of intel is related to some assignments from his bio and a speech he gave in Moscow, as well as other bits of info. From his bio:

Leader, Indian Delegation to :

Indo-Soviet Monitoring Group Meeting (1982)
Indo-Soviet Joint Planning Group Meeting (1980-82)

Member Indian Delegation to :

(1973-79)
Annual Meetings of IMF, IBRD & Commonwealth
Finance Ministers (1972-79)

From his webpage
PM's bio

Note this material was on his wiki bio was removed at some point. You can see it in older versions using history.

Speech Moscow State University

Dec 5, 2005. This speech had some references to figures in physics that relate to various intrigues over the decades including gaining atomic know-how.

Posted by: Old Atlantic

at October 8, 2006 1:12 PM

Note IBRD is part of the World Bank.

Posted by: Old Atlantic

at October 8, 2006 1:15 PM