Pune blasts lid off Pak’s future terror plans

Phalgun Shuddha Saptami, Kaliyug Varshha 5111

The Pune blast of February 13, 2010 comes just over a week after a rally in Islamabad on February 5 at which Abdur Rehman Makki, deputy to Jamaat-ud-Daawah/Lashkar-e-Tayyeba chief Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, had thundered that Kashmir had become a cold issue, but India’s denial of river waters to Pakistan had ensured that every farmer in Punjab had lined up with his tractor and plough ready to over-run India. A report in a national daily nf February 6 titled JuD vows to take Kashmir by force, also quotes him as saying, that once jihadis were only interested in Kashmir but the river water issue had ensured that “Delhi, Pune, Kanpur”, all were fair targets. The jihadis, he added, would fill the waters of the Ravi river with blood to avenge what he turned as India’s denial of river water to Pakistan.

Earlier, the JuD had organised a Kashmir Solidarity Conference at Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, on February 4. This was the organisation’s first public appearance under its own name after its banning by the UN Security Council in December 2008 as an alias of the LeT. Attended virtually by who’s who of the jihadi organisations, it unanimously adopted a strident resolution stating, “If the rulers cannot help Kashmiris, they should open the field for the Kashmiri Mujahideen instead of erecting hurdles. “They (Mujahideen) will deal with India.”

India had signified its willingness to resume talks with Pakistan, suspended after 26/11, on February 4, the day before Makki’s outburst in Islamabad. Debunking the talks, Makki had said, “Whenever our jihad in Kashmir nears success, India becomes ready for talks.” The latter, he suggested, would not bring Pakistan any gain.

Any argument that the Pakistani Government did not know what was said at the Islamabad rally, will not wash. It was held at the heart of the city, a short distance from the headquarters of the Directorate-General of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). What were the latter’s agents doing?

Had the Pakistani Government been serious about a dialogue, it would have given the LeT/JuD’s record, aborted the Pune strike. It would at least have arrested Makki, which would have indicated a desire not to spoil the atmosphere for the talks. It did nothing of the sort, which is hardly surprising considering that it had allowed the JuD not only to hold the Kashmir Solidarity Day rallies all over Pakistan, but to sponsor the Kashmir Solidarity Conference in Muzaffarabad.

This was in sharp contrast to the manner in which the Kashmir Solidarity Day was observed on February 5, 2009, when JuD activists acted under the banner of Tehrik-e-Azadi Kashmir but gathered on the roads under the organisation’s own banner. It issued receipts for donations in the name of Falah-i-Insaniyat (Humanitarian Welfare Foundation — FIF), a charitable organisation which is a front of the JuD. It continued to operate in disguise thereafter.

In May 2009, the FIF was very much in evidence at the camps in Mardan and elsewhere for people rendered refugees by the Pakistani Army’s offensive against the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan that began in Swat on April 24, 2009. A report by Andrew Buncombe and Omar Waraich in The Independent of Britain, entitled Mumbai terror group exploits refugee crisis: Pakistan comes under fire for failure to shut ‘charity’ and datelined May 14, mentioning the role of FIF supporters, triggered a furore.

The Pakistani Government went through the motions of cracking down on the FIF, which, however, continued to work in the camps. A report in The New York Times of July 1, 2009 by Jane Perlez and Pir Zubair Shah under the heading In refugee aid, Pakistan’s war has new front, indicated this.

International pressure forced Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari to amend Pakistan’s Anti-Terrorist Act of 1997 on October 2, 2009. The amendment stated that if “office-bearers, activists or associates of a proscribed organisation formed a new organisation under a different name, upon suspicion of their involvement in similar activities, the said organisation shall also be deemed a proscribed organisation.”

The impression among some that Pakistan finally meant business was strengthened when a national daily reported on January 31, 2010 that the JuD was launching a new cover organisation — Al Noor University (Trust) in Lahore.

Suddenly, the JuD appeared in public on February 4 and 5 spewing fire. Behind this was the conviction in Pakistan’s ruling circles that Americans wanted a quick, face-saving exit from Afghanistan and would make up with what they considered the “good” Taliban to ensure that, and that this gave them leverage as they alone could cut such a deal. A report in a national daily on February 8 under the heading, Pakistan: Vindication on Afghanistan, assertive with India indicates this, as does Jane Perlez’s report in the New York Times of February 9 under the heading, Pakistan is said to pursue role in Afghan talks with the US. This feeling, according to her, was strengthened by scant reference to Afghanistan in President Obama’s State of the Union address on January 27.

What must have finally convinced Pakistan that it could have a decisive say on Afghanistan’s future and bar India from any role in it, was the London conference, where India’s contention of not making any distinction between “good” and “bad” Taliban was rejected, and which announced the establishment of a ‘trust’ fund of $500 million to woo the good Taliban. Not only that, India was publicly humiliated by making Foreign Minister SM Krishna sit in the second of the three rows of seats for those attending it. And this, despite India’s massive contribution to development in Afghanistan!

The Pune blast suggests that Pakistan now believes that it can not only have its way in Afghanistan but renew terrorist attacks on India. If this is the case even before the US and NATO forces have left Afghanistan, what would its attitude be after they have gone and it is left flush with funds, its arsenals vastly enhanced by the massive arms aid it has received, and the jihadi groups intact and raring to strike? The entire country must strain every nerve to prepare to cope with the situation — and from now on!

Source: Daily Pioneer

Also See

Hang terrorist Mohd Afzal

Mohammad Afzal is a Kashmiri terrorist who attacked parliament in 2000. Supreme court has given death sentence but congress is protecting this anti-Indian.