Saturday, October 03, 2009

Stating the obvious - ISI is a terrorist organization

Since the fiasco after Sharm El_Sheikh, cHindu has this annoying and asinine thread of painting the Indo-Pak relationship in a positive vein when the actions of Pak to contain terror within has failed by all accounts. For the average Indian, the whole business of peace with Pak is a bunch of crock. Simply put the biggest export out of Pak has been terror. Asking them to stop terrorist activities is a bit like asking an elephant not to poop. There has been no real activity from the Pak side handling the suspects of the Mumbai attacks, including arresting the key people involved.
Finally cHindu in a whim of patriotism decides to support the Indian cause. Score one for patriotism.

Given the ups and downs in the bilateral relationship, the trust deficit, and the need to prepare the ground for confidence-building over the long-haul, India is entirely justified in reserving judgment until the trial actually commences and makes visible headway.

It rebuffs Pak's stalling techniques,
But the problem of Lashkar’s terrorism is not simply legal. Sooner or later, Pakistan has to realise that these kinds of terrorist groups have to be confronted politically. Islamabad’s insistence on “evidence” and other legal niceties is all very well but those are not the tools it is using to deal with the threat the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and al-Qaeda are posing to it.

But the topping is the statement on ISI's control over its terrorist minions,
The Inter Services Intelligence directorate may think it can manage the LeT and kindred groups for all time to come and that they will never pose an existential threat to Pakistan in the way the TTP does. Such a belief is seriously misplaced. The threat posed by such terrorist groups may be uneven but its impact on the future of Pakistan is uniformly destructive...Unfortunately, the ISI has not yet taken a decision to make the course correction that Pakistan so desperately needs.

Really do you think that the ISI wants a course correction? It has control over the country. It gets to play with the funds from the US to dispose as it will. It has a corrupt Govt. lead by an inefficient moron (Zardari). Why would it want to change course? But cHindu has never been one with common sense.


Pilid said...

The fundamental problem with this sort of thinking is not just that it is borne out of a deceptive self-serving logic but it does not reflect reality at all. We have seen it not just from this newspaper which has repeated this line ad nauseum since the 26/11 attacks but also from S.M.Krishna who is supposed to know better. The reason the ISI makes a distinction between outfits like LeT and others it is fighting in Waziristan is, as B.Raman pointed out in the wake of the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team, that there is not a single recorded instance of a domestic terrorist attack within Pakistan conducted by the LeT. When the Pakistani military/government has so many actual enemies, pray why would they want to add to that list by including the LeT which after all has served their cause faithfully over the years? The fact remains that Pakistan does not see a pressing reason to act against this group which is why all the complaining from India's side is not going to change anything.

Dirt Digger said...

Great point there. If LeT organizes attacks on India and its funding for the most part comes from ISI and Saudi supported roots, the ISI at the bare minimum is responsible for negligence and at the worst masterminding the whole effort.
India's effort of negotiating with Zardari is immature as it does not address the ground reality of the powers of the Army and ISI. The wishful thinking that bringing Zardari to the table makes him a legitimate power should be avoided as he could be knocked out of power very easily.

I, Me, Myself ! said...

If you read Sid's article in today's paper, he makes a similar argument about LeT. He cites examples to show how the reverred family run Congress party has invested in unruly elements for short term benefits and suffered in the long term. He extends this same analogy to LeT too, saying that if Pak is just content that since LeT (oops, sorry JuD) is not attacking on its soil, it is safe not to touch it, it might come back to bite it.

However, the article then drifts into why we should continue to "encourage" Pakistan in dealig with counter-terrorism and somehow keep talking to them.

I don't understand - why on earth should we "encourage" Pakistan to look at the writing on the wall. How do we "encourage" a blind person to see? Back channel diplomacy involving the intelligence agencies will never work. What will they talk about? Biryanis and Kababs?

Sid particularly seems to want us to take initiative is resuming the dialogue and this is the fundamental point on which I strongly differ with him.

- Sudhir

Article is here:

Anonymous said...

The faith reposed by this blog in the Mount Road Mahavishnu (copyright held by the late Murasoli Maaran) is a bit amusing - if only the EiC would see sense or there were a change of guard.
The plain unvarnished fact is that the paper has almost always been a cheerleader for the establishment, in particular the current ruling dispensation (with the rare exception that proves the rule), along with the rest of the craven crowd that likes to call itself the 4th estate.
If you look back over the decades, you will see a dreary underlying continuity - just look at the reaction of the paper's stalwarts to the emergency of 1975. On the day after, many newspapers showed some spunk by displaying black borders on the front page or writing bitterly critical editorials. What did your favorite newspaper, the one that you love to hate, have? An editorial on Sea Food Exports.
Plus c,a change c'est la m^eme chose.