May 22, 2002

The India-PAK situation, still hotting

The India-PAK situation, still hotting up: Pakistani troops attack Indian Kashmir village, Britain withdraws 150 diplomatic staff because of terrorist threats.

And here's a report on Musharraf's "jehadi plan" from the Hindustan Times (via Rantburg):

A new Pakistani jehadi group, the Jamaat-e-Milli, is believed to have supported the Kaluchak terrorist attack in Jammu. A Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) report says it is one of a new crop of jehadi groups being used by Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf to strengthen his influence among Islamic militants.

Musharraf's problem is he has had to crack down on terrorism to show results to the US. Old jehadis, who remember how he helped set up the old terrorist groups, have excused him because they believe the US has forced him to show some action on the ground. However, a crop of younger, more militant jehadis believe he has sold out to the US.

To control them, Musharraf has set up new organisations. And to show them he is till true to jehad, he has helped them launch attacks in Kashmir, which is why terrorist activities have intensified there. This, Musharraf reckons, will help contain violence in Pakistan — especially the kind directed at Westerners.

Jehadi pamphlets circulating in villages along the Line of Control and the new training camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir are also part of Musharraf's campaign to re-establish his jehadi credentials.

But there is evidence that Musharraf's plans are going awry. The more militant jehadis have formed splinter groups that are not ready to accept his authority.


It's hard to keep track of these organizations: they seem to change their names every week or so. I think Priutt's comments on this are correct, though. Musharraf may not be behind it all, as this article claims, but his relationship to the "jehadis" is, shall we say, complex. To what degree he may or may not be a "true believer" (in the bin Ladenite-apocalyptic sense) as opposed to a Machivellian manipulator of these dark forces doesn't matter that much: the dark forces are spinning out of his control. As for Musharraf himself, I'm sure Glenn Reynolds is right that he's more rational than Suman Palit believes (though I think he could still slip off the deep end, as Bennett observed recently.) He doesn't seek his own annihilation, which is what a full-on war would eventually mean (and I don't believe "eventually" would take that long, either.) If he can't control the provocations of those who appear to desire to spark just such a scenario, we're relying solely on the forbearance and good will of India, bolstered by whatever incentives the US can offer, to avoid or forestall it. And that's only if he can hang on to sanity plus power. Unfortunately, the rationale for Indian forbearance is the same as that for PAK "pre-emptive" stupidity: the technological and strategic currents over the long-term clearly run in India's favor.

I don't blame the Brits for wanting to get out of the way.

Posted by Dr. Frank at May 22, 2002 12:17 PM | TrackBack