Fraudz,
Sectarian groups, Jihadi groups created for Kashmir by Pakistani agencies, militancy are all interlinked.
You cannot destroy one without taking on the other. Here’s the editorial from the latest Friday Times paper.
**Hype and reality **
Najam Sethi’s E d i t o r i a l
Before 9/11 General Pervez Musharraf was perceived internationally as a “pariah” leader of a “rogue” state. But last week in America he was on an unprecedented high as Western leaders called him a “true friend” and heaped accolades on him. Everywhere, he billed himself as a reformer, a moderate and enlightened leader of the Islamic world. The hype reached a crescendo when India’s prime minister, Manmohan Singh, claimed to open a “historic new chapter” in relations with Pakistan based on the “sincerity and boldness of General Musharraf”. The icing on the cake was the killing in Nawabshah of Amjad Faruqi, the “most wanted” Al-Qaeda terrorist in Pakistan. Clearly, it’s time to separate the hype from reality.
General Musharraf admits that Amjad Faruqi was responsible for attempts on his life. He was the chief operative of Abu Feraj, the top Al-Qaeda Libyan hiding in Waziristan. So we can rejoice in his elimination. But hold on. **Wasn’t Faruqi flushed out of the house of a leader of the Jaish-i-Mohammad, a jihadi outfit? Didn’t he begin his career by joining Harkatul Ansar, the jihadi militia that emerged after a merger of Harkat Jihad-e-Islami with other Deobandi militias? Wasn’t his uncle Hanif already a member of Harkat-e-Jihad Islami which also became the leading militia under the Taliban? Didn’t he go to Afghanistan in 1986 for training as a jihadi? Didn’t he join the sectarian Sipah Sahaba and later the sectarian Lashkar-e-Jhangvi? Didn’t he go repeatedly to Afghanistan to widen his links with Al Qaeda? Wasn’t he involved in the attack on the American consulate in Karachi and in the attack on Islamabad’s Protestant Church two years ago? Indeed, wasn’t Faruqi also one of the jihadi hijackers of the Indian airliner whose passengers were held hostage until jihadis like Omer Sheikh and Maulana Masood Azhar were freed from Indian jails in 2000? Didn’t Omer Sheikh, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and Amjad Faruqi jointly plan the kidnapping of the American journalist Danny Pearl in 2002 who had nothing to do with Kashmir or India? Didn’t Faruqi behead Pearl? **
The point here is not to establish why Faruqi and the others were such wanted men. The point is to trace their natural transition from sectarian and/or state-sponsored anti-India jihadis to anti-American Al-Qaeda operatives who are all out to get General Musharraf. They all struck roots in the state-sponsored jihad in Kashmir and later naturally branched off into the Al-Qaeda orbit.
But there’s more to it. Faisal Saleh Hayat, the former interior minister, has publicly accused activists of the Jamaat-i-Islami, a component of the Muttahida Majlis Amal (MMA), of sheltering wanted Al-Qaeda terrorists. Some professional doctors are also mixed up with these parties of the MMA and Al-Qaeda. This implies an unholy alliance or link between the anti-India jihadis, the anti-American Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the anti-Musharraf MMA. In their eyes, the war against the “infidel Hindus” is part of the war against the “infidel Westerners” and their “American stooge” Pervez Musharraf and his “puppet” Shaukat Aziz.
General Musharraf’s reaction to all this is: “I cannot pack up the jihad until the Kashmir issue is resolved”. But if the Kashmir issue hasn’t been resolved by jihad in the last fifteen years despite tens of thousands of deaths, how much longer will we have to wait for General Musharraf to find a solution to Kashmir so that he can “pack up” the unholy rectangle of jihad, Al-Qaeda, Taliban and MMA – political Islam which is out to get him and Pakistan?
General Musharraf has had problems in coming to terms with reality. There is confusion in his mind about the role of political Islam in nation building and national security. At Agra in 2001 he set up Kashmir-related preconditions for a dialogue. Then, faced with the prospect of war in January 2002, he promised not to export jihad. By January 2004, he had abandoned the core issue approach and opened a composite unconditional dialogue with India. Some months ago he unilaterally shrugged away the UN resolutions. However, two months ago he inexplicably insisted on a “timeframe” for a solution on Kashmir. But last week in New York, he was crowing about a “historic breakthrough” with India without a word about timetables or simultaneity of conflict resolution. Meanwhile, there is no word on the fate of the jihad or the MMA.
His ambivalence towards the MMA is astounding. He nurtured the mullahs at the expense of the PPP. Then shook hands with them over the LFO and gave them a seat in the NSC, plus governments in two provinces. But this is the same MMA that is viciously opposed to his American friends, that is aiding and abetting the anti-American Taliban, that provides succour to the jihadis, that refuses to sit in the NSC with him, that wants him to quit the army, that harbours the terrorists. As if that wasn’t enough, he has now conceded a role to the MMA in resolving the “terrorist” issue in Wana.
If this isn’t confusion worst confounded, it can only be rank opportunism. Sooner or later, Musharraf will have to clear the cobwebs of his mind. That is when, we hope, reality will get the better of hype and we shall finally see the way forward.
The fact is that the sectarian violence in Pakistan is not fundamentally a foreign driven thing, but a side-effect of a continued set of policies by Pakistani governments since the late 1970s.
Until Musharraf and co realize that they cannot pick and choose their crackdown on terrorism, such monsters will continue to thrive in Pakistan.