India News Online » News Analysis » Indian Subcontinent » 

India maintains pressure on hijackers issue

	January 24, 2000

Maintaining its pressure on Pakistan, India which last year demanded that Pakistan hand over the hijackers of its plane to Kandahar, has now taken up the issue with the International Civil Aviation Organisation after Pakistan rejected the Indian accusation of its involvement in the incident. Pakistan has also come under pressure from the US when in addition to a team of four US Senators, US Assistant Secretary of State, Karl Inderfurth, flew to Islamabad to warn the Musharraf regime against promoting and sponsoring terrorism and telling it to get cracking on the terrorists. That the was seriously on the side of India in its dispute with India was proved by the decision of the two countries during the Jaswant Singh-Talbott talks in London to form a joint working group on counter terrorism, the first meeting of which will be held in Washington early next month. After coming under flake for blunders on the hijacking issue - first allowing the plane to leave from Amritsar without any attempt to stop it and then caving in so easily to the hijackers demand at Kandahar, the Vajpayee Government meeting to review the security situation in Kashmir has decided to embark on a pro-active offensive strategy to meet the challenge of terrorism in the State. But, that Pakistan is unlikely to mend its ways was proved when RDX was recovered from a train toy after an ISI agent was nabbed by Delhi police. The military ruler of Pakistan in his first ever interview to an Indian newspaper said in a clear and loud message for him Kashmir is the mother of all the contentious issues with Pakistan and other issues were, in his words, “aberrations”. He expressed himself in favour of bilateral talks provided the core issue of Kashmir was specifically addressed.



India takes up with ICAO

It was in this background that India in a note verbal to the President of the International civil Aviation Organisation cited legal grounds on which the hijackers should be extradited to India by Pakistan. Mr. A.P. Singh, the Indian representative at the ICAO headquarters pointed to the relevant articles of the 1971 Montreal Convention for suppression of unlawful acts against the safety of civil aviation of 1971 and article 11 of the Hague convention for Suppression of Unlawful seizure of Aircraft of 1970. These two conventions could be invoked for the extradition of the hijackers of the IC-814 flight. The note sought to reiterate Islamabad’s obligations to the ICAO and the message which India had officially communicated to Pakistan on Jan. 15 through the Pakistan High Commissioner in New Delhi. The note asserted Indian Government’s jurisdiction over the offences committed by the hijackers and their accomplices “since the offences were committed on board and on an aircraft registered in India.” At a press briefing in New Delhi on Jan. 19, the Foreign Office spokesman drew attention to Article 4 of the Hague Convention according to which, in the event of hijacking, the State of registration of the hijacked aircraft has jurisdiction over the offences. Pakistan was also obliged to extradite the hijackers, as referred to in Articles 7 and 8 of the Hague Convention, according to which hijacking is deemed an extraditable offences, the spokesman said. India asserted in the letter note that “There is strong ground to believe that the hijackers are currently in Pakistan which has the legal obligation as a State party to these conventions to take them into custody and extradite them to India.”



Pak rejects charges

Pakistan has, however, rejected accusations of involvement in the hijacking of the Indian Airlines plane saying the charges were part of “a vain attempt to malign Pakistan” and “deflect criticism” from New Delhi’s “mishandling of the incident.” A Foreign Ministry spokesman said in Islamabad on Jan. 16, while referring to the Indian High Commissioner in New Delhi being called to Foreign Office to be told to extradite the hijackers, that the Indian demarche delivered to the envoy merely repeated “the now familiar baseless allegations which have been already dismissed by Pakistan.” The spokesman said, the unfounded allegations against Pakistan were not supported by even a shred of credible evidence.

The Foreign Secretary, Mr. Lalit Mansingh, had summoned the Pakistan High Commissioner, Ashraf Jehangir Qazi, to Foreign Office on Jan. 5 and delivered a demarche demanding that Pakistan should stop the anti-India propaganda by released terrorist Masood Azhar and hand over the five hijackers of the Indian plane. The envoy was told that India reserved the right to take further measures as appropriate if Islamabad failed to act according to international and regional conventions it had signed.

Rejecting the Pakistani explanation that the hijackers were not Pakistanis or in Pakistan, the Foreign Office spokesman, Mr. R.S. Jassal, said on Jan. 15 that the fact that the terrorists whose release was demanded by the hijackers were Pakistani nationals and as the first destination chosen by the hijackers was Lahore, there is strong ground to believe that the hijackers are currently in Pakistan.

Political observers say the tough stance by the vajpayee government was aimed at audiences at home and abroad and it coincided with reports that US and British representatives had urged military ruler Pervez Musharraf to rein in militant outfits based in Pakistan. A group of Us Senators and the US Assistant secretary of State, Karl Inderfurth as well as the British chief of defence staff, Charles Guthrie, had held separate meetings with Gen. Musharraf telling him in no uncertain terms that Pakistan should immediately rack down on militants and disband groups operating from its territory. At home, the Government demand appeared to have been necessitated in part by the criticism faced by the Government for releasing the terrorists. The RSS and BJP’s own hardliners were upset over the decision which they believed had tarnished the party’s “tough” image. The Government is now trying to assure the critics that it is not sitting idle but doing its best to bring the hijackers to book.



Informed sources in London, the venue of the Jaswant Singh-Talbott talks on nuclear and terrorism issues, say the hijackers of the Indian airliner have been located in the first steps taken under the new cooperation to counter terrorism. The location was not disclosed and this information was taken by the US Coordinator on counter-terrorism, who was also present at the London talks, to Islamabad where he accompanied Karl Inderfurth.

Indian intelligence sources, continuing to trace the path the hijackers took to enter India and then travel to Kathmandu to hijack the plane, say that four of the five hijackers entered India via Bangladesh to reach Mumbai through two West Bengal districts. While one group comprising Shahid Akhtar Saed and Sunni Ahmad Qazi sneaked into Malda from Rajshahi, the other party of Mistri Zahun Ibrahim and Shaqir crossed over from Dinajpur in Bangladesh and travelled to Siliguri. Both groups entered India on separate dates. In Mumbai, the four hijackers holed up in flat No. 707 of Golden Soil Colony in Jogeshwari West which was taken on rent by the hijackers’ associates who also had obtained for them fake Indian passports. Later while two of them went to Calcutta and then to Kathmandu via Jalpaiguri, the remaining two took a train to Gorakhpur close to Uttar-Pradesh Nepal border and reached the Nepalese capital by bus.



Giving details of his encounter with the hijackers, the pilot of the Indian plane, Devi Sharan, in an interview to Khaleej times of Dubai, said he had to take off from Amritsar without refueling after the hijackers put a pistol on his temple and began a count-down from 30. They threatened that they would shoot if he did not fly because the count-down had ended. And when the countdown reached two, he powered the throttles and took off from Amritsar. He said, the leader of the hijackers, frustrated over the way the negotiations were going on cried on at least three occasions and wept on his shoulders, but he soon recovered his nerves. In dubai, where the plane remained parked for well over four hours before it took off for Kandahar, a senior police official responsible for airport security, Faridoun Mohammed Naguib, said, given the way they made their demands, the hijackers appeared to be highly professional.

At Kandahar airport, sources say the Taliban were quite cooperative with India and after a meeting of the Shura [Advisory Council] on Dec. 26, a statement warned the hijackers of disastrous consequences in case any of the hostages were harmed. But, this attitude changed after the arrival of Brig. Rashid Akhtar, the ISI chief of operations in Afghanistan. According to Prof. T. Shreedhar Rao, an expert on Taliban affairs in the Institute of defence studies and analyses, New Delhi, on arriving at Kandahar on Dec. 27, Brig. Akhtar pressurized Talban to change its stance. This led to deploying of more armed men around the aircraft followed by the surrounding of the airfield with armoured personnel carriers and other heavy weapons. Prof. shreedhar says, Pakistan was able to exert pressure on Taliban as it reportedly controls taliban administration till tehsil level. But, at the sometime, he says, the taliban never expected the Indian Government to cave in so far. they probably thought the crisis would continue for some more days to wear down the hijackers.



ISI’s Nepal connection - India conveys concern

India has conveyed its serious concern to the authorities in Nepal about the laxity of its police to prevent the spread of ISI-related activities in that country as was recently demonstrated by the recent discovery of fake Indian currency notes in that country. Sources say, the issue will be raised by the Indian side at next week’s meeting of the Indo-Nepalese Joint action group in Kathmandu. The Home Ministry in New Delhi is understood to have asked for a clarification from the Nepal Police as to why they allowed a Pakistani Embassy staff, accused in the fake currency racket, to leave the country without a proper interrogation. The Nepalese authorities did not take the Indian side into confidence in the matter, as had been the usual practice in such cases in the past.

Meanwhile, after India’s ambassador to Nepal, K.V. Rajan, briefed Foreign ministry officials in New Delhi on the developments in Kathmandu after the assessment in New Delhi is that Nepal’s Foreign Minister Ram Sharan Mahat is behind the attempt to water down the Pakistani angle despite the best intentions of Prime Minister, Mr. K.P. Bhattarai whose position is weak and may quit in less than six months. This has perhaps prompted leaders like Mahat to assert themselves. Mahat’s independent line became clear soon after the hijack when Indian investigators were refused permission to visit Tribhuvan international airport on the plea of sovereignty. Later, the Nepalese Foreign Ministry extended diplomatic immunity to a clerk in the Pakistan High Commission who was arrested with counterfeit Indian currency and allowed him to return to Islamabad. the clerk was not eligible for diplomatic cover and officials felt that he should have been tried in Kathmandu. South Block officials thus say, Mahat is too close to Pakistan and their assessment is that he would do everything within his powers to scuttle any move to establish Islamabad’s complicity in the hijack.





Musharraf’s interview - obsession with Kashmir

Gen. Musharraf, in keeping with his rough tenor,has blandly denied Pakistan’s sponsorship and encouragement to cross-border terrorism. In a 50-minute long interview to the Hindu correspondent in Islamabad, he made it clear that for him all contentious issues other then the key and core issue of Kashmir were peripheral and no amount of bus or cricket diplomacy would succeed in improving Indo-Pak relations if the Kashmir issue was relegated to the background. He also demanded that India end its campaign of vilification against his military regime and change its attitude of questioning legitimacy of his government.

Answering questions, Gen. Musharraf said, while India should trust him that he was not a hardliner, the reality of the situation must be understood: the bilateral talks could succeed if Kashmir issue was specifically addressed. He said, the bus diplomacy and the cricket diplomacy in the past has failed because the core issue of Kashmir was not being addressed in all seriousness. “There is only one dispute, the Kashmir dispute...others are just aberrations, minor differences of opinion which can be resolved”, he said. Gen. Musharraf refuted the impression created by earlier remarks that he had said that there was a change in policy and that Kashmir would have to be discussed first before all other issues. Maintaining that he was not against a simultaneous discussion of all issues if Kashmir was given priority in emphasis, he said, he was against the “apologetic” tone of the references to the Kashmir dispute in the Lahore agreement. Insisting that he had no problem with the existing framework for bilateral discussions such as the Shimla agreement and the Lahore accord, he maintained that bilateralism had failed because the main issue, the Kashmir dispute, had been “sidelined”. He said, he was not against bilateral dialogue with India, but the Kashmir dispute should not be sidelined in these talks “because that is the only dispute.”

Replying to other questions, the Gen. rejected suggestions that Pakistan was providing support and cover for acts of terrorism such as the recent hijacking of the Indian airliner, denied that the hijackers were in Pakistan, affirmed that Pakistan did not support hijacking, vowed not to allow the hijackers to come to Pakistan and proceed against them if they are caught, denied knowledge that Maulana Masood Azhar, one of the three freed militants, was a Pakistani national, claimed that he had received no suggestion either from the Us or Britain to ban and clamp down on the various terrorist groups involved in the Kashmir insurgency, said, he was hurt by India’s campaign to get Pakistan declared a terrorist State and strongly refuted the suggestion that he was the main architect of the kargil episode. the former Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, was also involved in it, he said, maintaining that “Everyone was on board”. “I still stand by it - whatever was happening in Kargil, everyone knew what was happening”, he declared.



Without directly referring to Gen. Musharraf’s call for Kashmir-specific dialogue in his interview with the Hindu newspaper, External Affairs Minister, Jaswant singh, has ruled out a dialogue with Pakistan till Islamabad created a proper environment by abjuring violence, giving up encouragement to cross-border terrorism and ending the daily cry of Jehad against it. “These are not preconditions, these are essential integrals for the creation of a proper environment”, the External Affairs Minister said in an interview to BBC. Mr. Singh, who was in London in connection with the 10th round of talks with the US deputy Secretary of State, Strobe Talbott, on the issue of signing the CTBT, said, “We remain committed to dialogue and reconciliation. But, it is obvious that for this, not as a precondition but as an integral of the dialogue process itself, a proper environment be created”. He said, Pakistan has to recognize that this compulsive hostility that it demonstrated towards India must cease. Pakistan simply cannot have a position of perpetual confrontation towards India which will cause irreparable damage, he said.



New pro-active strategy



Learning a lesson or two from the recent hijacking with the full involvement of Pakistan, the Vajpayee Government has decided to embark on a “pro-active” and “offensive strategy” to meet the challenges in Jammu and Kashmir. At a high-level meeting chaired by Prime Minister Vajpayee and attended, among others by the Home and defence Ministers, governor and Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, the chief of Army Staff, Gen. Maok and the Home and Foreign secretaries as well as representatives of various security services in New Delhi on Jan. 17, the security situation was reviewed in the state where the militants have stepped up terrorist activities in the aftermath of the Kargil conflict. It was decided at the meeting to raise “specialized battalions of the Central paramilitary forces” specifically trained for waging counter-terrorist operations. Another decision was to enhance deployment along the Line of Control and international border. The stress appeared to be on intensifying the counter-insurgency measures. But, the most concrete decision of the evening was to divide the counter-insurgency grid into 49 sectors as part of a three-tier command and control structure under the unified headquarters. It was also decided to set up an additional UHQ for areas north of Zojila. While the State Police and the intelligence apparatus is already being strengthened, security forces were also asked to adopt a pro-active approach against terrorists in the hinterland and to establish areas domination both during day and night, a statement on the meeting later said. The review meeting also decided to carry out round the clock operations in the city based upon pinpointed intelligence to neutralise terrorist modules in the city. It was decided to use the Village Defence Committees in the counter-insurgency operations and to provide the village based teams with sophisticated arms and modern communication equipment.

Talking to newsmen later, Mr. Advani recognized that whereas the Government had managed to achieve a turn-around in the undeclared proxy war in the 1997-98-99 period, the post-Kargil situation had changed qualitatively. As the Home Minister pointed out, even though the security forces have managed to kill the hordes of suicide squads, perhaps the militants have had the upper hand in the battle of publicity.

Pakistan’s military rulers have asked the ISI-sponsored outfits, based in Pak-occupied Kashmir and Kashmir itself to undertake suicidal missions on the Indian security forces. Western diplomatic sources say, over three dozen terrorist organisations on its pay have been told to either perform or lose support.

With Pakistan making a “do or die” bid in Kashmir in response to the grim situation, sources say, at the high level meeting called by the Prime Minister, representatives of the army and other security forces demanded a matching response from the Government including permission to make surgical strikes at military camps across the Line of Control. Pakistan’s latest bid to heighten the tension in the valley includes dumping of sophisticated weapons, infiltration of highly motivated and trained men into India, increased abductions and killings of VIPs, attacks on radio and TV stations, airports and railway stations and causing communal violence in Jammu. The indication of things to come surfaced with repeated attacks on camps of the security forces, hijacking of the Indian airlines plane and assassination of political leaders. The recovery of 10 high explosive rockets from Jammu and dumping of other weapons elsewhere in the state also pointed to the same strategy.



Pak attack repulsed

The Pakistan army joined the proxy war on India with a direct attack on an Indian post PP13 in the Akhnoor sector in Jammu and Kashmir in the early morning of Jan. 22. But, Indian forces repulsed the attack and in the counter-offensive killed 17 Pakistani soldiers as well as destroying ammunition dumps and a post known as Tower Post 12. . Pakistan admits to casualties but says only two soldiers were killed and 5 are missing. India lost two soldiers. It was the sixth attack since the kargil war which concluded in July. Giving details of the attack, the head of Army’s Northern Command, Maj.Gen. P.P.S. Bindra, said early morning on Jan. 23, more than 25 soldiers of Pakistan’s Balooch Regiment launched a surprise attack on the Indian post with the support f heavy artillery, rocket launchers and recoilless guns and field guns, killing a junior commissioned officer and a soldier. the alert Indian troops repulsed the attack and in the fierce battle which lasted more than two hours, at least 17 Pakistani soldiers were killed on the spot.

Pakistan for its part has blamed Indian troops for the attack. The Foreign office and military spokesmen in Islamabad told newsmen that Indian forces crossed the LoC at 3.30 am and attacked a Pakistani post between the two channels of the Tawi river, preceded by intense India mortar fire which damaged the bunkers of the Pakistani posts. They claimed that at no time did Pakistani troops crossed the LoC. Foreign Office spokesman, Tariq Altaf said Pakistan would lodge a strong protest with the Indian Government and also bring the matter to the notice of the UN Military Observers group.

Indian officials who blame Pakistan for the attack said, Islamabad is resorting to such unprovoked attacks to keep the Kashmir issue alive especially at a time when the US has shown its inclination to mediate on the issue after the hijack episode.



Inderfurth’s blunt message to Pakistan

A strong unequivocal message on the need to curb terrorism from Pakistani soil was delivered by the US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Mr. Karl Inderfurth, in his meeting with the Military ruler, Gen. Musharraf, and his Foreign Minister, Abdul Sattar, in Islamabad on Jan. 21. He told the Pakistani leaders bluntly to locate and bring the hijackers of the Indian Airlines plane to justice and crack down on militant violent groups on its soil that are threatening foreign nationals. The message was conveyed on behalf of the Clinton Administration when the US Assistant Secretary of State, Karl Inderfurth, visited Islamabad on Jan. 21 and called on Gen. Musharraf, and his Foreign Minister, Abdul Sattar. Talking to newsmen after talks, Mr. Inderfurth made it clear that US concerns on terrorism vis-a-vis Pakistan now had the status of a “core issue” between the two countries. Acknowledging that the hijacking issue figured in his talks with Gen. Musharraf and Mr. Sattar, Mr. Inderfurth said, there is a clear need to take steps to find the hijackers and bring them to justice. He said, he received assurances from Pakistan Government that “they have every intention to undertake such a mission.” He said, he believes the hijackers could not simply disappear from the earth and only if they are brought to justice will underscore the message that such actions cannot go unpunished. Asked whether the US had asked Pakistan to crack down on groups such as Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, Mr. Inderfurth said, he expressed grave concern regarding terrorism stemming from the region that directly threatens the US and the US hopes the Pakistan Government will take steps against such extremist groups which carry out acts of violence inside Pakistan as well as in the region, including Harkat-ul-Ansar and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen.

Mr. Inderfurth, who was accompanied by Mr. Michael Sheehan, State Department Coordinator on counter-terrorism also held a meeting with the Taliban Administration Minister, Amir Khan Kuttaqi, who specially flew out for the meeting from Afghanistan.

Separately, four US Senators who last week visited Pakistan, have warned that US relations with Pakistan will deteriorate if Islamabad does not remove Washington’s concerns over issues of terrorism, democracy, nuclear non-proliferation, Islamic extremism and religious freedom to all citizens in Pakistan. The senators said in a statement at the conclusion of their visit to South Asia, “Pakistan faces a window of opportunity for improving upon this relationship but that window could close if there is no progress in addressing the concerns we raised.” According to the statement, in each of their meetings with Pakistani leaders, including Gen. Musharraf, they raised five issues: urgent need to address the threat of terrorism and militant religious groups, publicly declaring a road map for the restoration of democracy that sets forth a firm time line and clear objectives; engage in broad economic reforms to permit conditions that will permit democratic reforms to take root, sign CTBT and contribute to global efforts to control the spread of nuclear weapons and to ensure the political, religious and economic freedoms of all its citizens. The delegation was led by Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle

About their meeting with India’s External Affairs Minister, Mr. Jaswant Singh, in New Delhi, before they proceeded to Islamabad, the Senators said, they conveyed that India had the resources to become a “major player in the international scene in the 21st century. But, they said, if India is to reach its potential right, it must recognize that this role carries with it significant rights and responsibilities which include normalizing of relations with Pakistan and engaging in a sincere effort to resolve the Kashmir crisis and joining in efforts to stem the spread of nuclear weapons.



Indo-US JWG to counter terrorism

Incidentally, Mr Inderfurth and Mr. Michael Sheehan, were in London before they proceeded to Islamabad, joining talks in the British capital between the External Affairs Minister of India and the Deputy Secretary of State, Strobe Talbott where the two sides divided their time discussing how to encourage India to sign the CTBT as well as exploring ways of cooperation to curb the growing menace of international terrorism. At the end it was decided to form a Joint Working Group [JWG] on Counter-terrorism, the contours of which had been worked out earlier when Mr. Sheehan visited New Delhi which was followed by a visit of two Joint Secretaries from the Indian foreign Ministry to Washington. The JWG will hold its first meeting in Washington early next month.

In the field of counter-terrorism institutionalized cooperation between India and the US reflects the convergence of mutual interests. It puts India in the close company of the US when an interested terrorist group seeks to define its targets. Pakistan is likely to see the setting up of the Indo-US joint working group as further evidence of Washington’s growing proximity to New Delhi at the expense of its earlier friendship with Islamabad. For such a change in the south Asian equation, Pakistan has only itself to blame, for had it not sought to add fuel to the fire in Kashmir by sending in Islamic jehadis and collaborating with the taliban to convert th Pak-Afghan region into a virtual haven for terrorists, the US may not have abandoned its trusted ally of the Cold War days. But, terrorism and India’s growing importance as a market as well as its future as a major power have evidently persuaded the uS to shed its earlier somewhat inexplicable antipathy towards India.

Pakistan’s ISI has disturbed peace all over India with the help of mercenaries. Jammu and Kashmir, the North east and even Delhi have seen the terrorist activities of the ISI and its hired agents. The USA too has been a victim of international terrorism sponsored by Pakistan. Its staff h has been subjected to violence on Pakistani soil. Four years ago in January, a blind Egyptian cleric and nine of his followers were given long prison sentences for plotting to blow up the UN office buildings, FBI offices, highway tunnels and many landmarks in and around New York in a single day of terror. The World Trade Centre in New York was also blasted. A Pakistani national has been convinced and sentenced for firing on CIA employees at their headquarters in the USA and recently a number of US offices in Pakistan were subjected to car bomb attacks. Osama bin Laden too is a symbol of destabilization and death dealing activities operating from the hideouts in Afghanistan controlled by Pakistan’s protege, the Taliban.

No wonder therefore, political observers say, any Indo-US JWG will have to begin with the recognition of the fact that Pakistan has been sponsoring terrorism of which India and the US are the common victims.

The Indian Government is faced with the twin challenge of stepped up terrorist violence in Jammu and Kashmir as reflected by daring attacks on the security forces, paramilitary and police personnel and post-hijacking problems, especially the formulation of a strategy to ensure against recurrence of such tragedies. To build world opinion against transborder violence, New Delhi has called upon major powers to declare Pakistan a terrorist State. But, despite the increasing clamour in India for declaring Pakistan a “terrorist State” and the Prime Minister’s affirmation that he had urged the USA to do so, an influential section in the USA is still convinced that the Administration should view Pakistan as a bulwark against terrorism in that region. At the coming meeting of the Indo-US JWG on counter terrorism, India is once again expected to renew demand for declaring Pakistan a terrorist State. The impression gained during the tenth round of talks in London between Mr. Jaswant Singh and Mr. Talbott was that the US has not outright rejected India’s charge that terrorism by Pakistan is being State-sponsored and the US authorities are studying the evidence, both circumstantial and direct given by India in support of its charges against Islamabad. India’s ambassador in the US, Naresh Chandra explains that the process of declaring even Harkat-ul-Ansar as a terrorist State by the US last year took time. The legal aspects are studied before any decision is reached. It is not easy to declare a State terrorist without full examination of all aspects which include the national security concerns of the US as well because it knows that it is the prime target for Islamic fundamentalist groups.

The Americans are aware of the global reach of terrorists who are operating from either Pakistan or Afghanistan. The problem is not just India’s alone Masood Azhar, who was released by the Indian authorities in exchange of the hostages, had planned the murder of the Pope in Manila five years ago and had been to Saudi Arabia and Sudan for raising funds and recruiting volunteers.



Proxy war - short-lived euphoria in Indo-Pak relations



A deadly mix of three issues - Kargil intrusion, coup in Pakistan and the hijacking of Indian plane has claimed a heavy toll of Indo-Pak relations in 1999 although the year had started on a promising note, what with the two Prime Ministers, Mr. vajpayee and Mr. nawaz Sharif, seeking to build upon their personal rapport, to take concrete steps to reverse the adversarial trends. The much-hailed bus diplomacy produced the Lahore Declaration with its framework for negotiations and the memorandum of understanding, redefining their relationship as nuclear powers. The euphoria was short-lived, as the massive intrusion of Pakistani troops into kargil and the subsequent armed conflict washed away the gains, so painstakingly achieved. New Delhi felt cheated by the betrayal of the trust reposed in Islamabad. The thought that Pakistan’s armed forces were busy planning the Kargil misadventure when their Prime Minister was swearing by the peace agenda produced bitter disenchantment. New Delhi, it was clear would be highly wary in its response to any fresh move for a dialogue. But, despite the changed posture, the resumption of talks was not ruled out. Another blow as administered when the democratic Government was dismissed in November last year and Pakistan once again found itself under military rule led b the chief of the armed staff, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, widely perceived in New Delhi as the architect of the Kargil operation. New Delhi made no secret of its stand - to confine the dealings with Islamabad to the working level. The hijacking masterminded, as it was by Pak-based terrorist organisations, infuriated India. It completed the dissimilarity between the situation now and 12 months ago. The hijacking and the spurt in terrorist attacks on Indian military establishments in Kashmir has put the proxy war by Pakistan on a new higher pedestal.



The Pak proxy war began during the regime of President Zia-ul Haq through his ISI but gained momentum particularly at the end of 1989 when the then Janata Government at the centre sent Mr. George Fernandes, Mr. Arif Mohammed Khan and Mr. I.K. gujral to persuade - in fact - coerce - the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, to release five top militants for the release of the daughter of the then Home Minister, Mufti Mohammed Sayeed. Militants rejoiced on that fateful day on the streets of Srinagar. Since then, the minorities in Kashmir, especially the Pandits, have been turned out of the State at the point of the militants’ guns and the terrorists have not spared even Muslim shrines like Charar-e-Sharif, the mausoleum of the great Sufi saint Sheikh Noor-ud-din. the reason for this increase in the activities of the terrorists during the last decade or so is traced to a weak-need and reactive but not proactive policy towards the instigators of this so-called proxy war by Pakistan. Mere statements by the present government that they will adopt a proactive policy are meaningless unless they are implemented in practice. As remarked by former Foreign Secretary T.N. Kaul, who died last week, when the US Government fired missiles into Afghanistan in 1998 against the Taliban and their agent, Osama bin Laden as a reprisal against attacks on US embassies in Africa, it had been suggested to the BJP-led coalition government that this was a most suitable psychological moment when they could and should have wiped out some of the training camps of the militants ate least in PoK, if not in Pakistan. No one, certainly not America, could have dared to criticize India at that time. However, the government only declared that they would adopt a pro-active policy and did nothing to implement. On is reminded of the warning given by Lal Bahadur Shastri in 1965 to Pakistan that any intervention in Jammu and Kashmir would be regarded as an aggression against India which would hit back at times and places of its own choosing not only in Pok but against Pakistan itself. This warning was implemented and proved effective. Again in 1971, Indira Gandhi responded to Pakistan’s declaration of war by not only bringing about a signal defeat for Pakistan but also the surrender of 90,000 prisoners of war in Bangladesh and also occupied 5000 sq. miles of Pakistani territory in west Pakistan. However, the gains India made were not utilised to bringing about a final solution of the Kashmir problem with Pakistan either along the Line of Control which was established under the Shimla agreement or even a better line strategically more suited to Indian security and defence by taking over Haji Pir, Skardu, Muzzafrabad and other strategic spots across the then established ceasefire line by re-establishing a more reliable line of control. Nor did the central Government take any measures to improve the internal situation in Jammu and Kashmir. On the contrary, the Ministers from the ruling parties at the centre set up their own stooges and sycophants as proxy rulers inside J&K. they went even so far as to dismiss the duly elected government of Dr. Farooq Abdulah. India has failed to exercise the right of hot pursuit or to bomb the training camps of militants and pockets of resistance in PoK and on the Indian side of the LoC. This is not only sad but also shameful.

In Kandahar, India has demonstrated beyond doubt that it can and will surrender to a terrorist outfit under the prevailing circumstances with the Taliban Government obviously not willing to cooperate beyond a point. Indian Government did not adopt any tough and extreme option like storming the plane or even infiltrating commandos or sharp shooters into the plane in the garb of engineers and medical staff which was permitted to enter the hijacked plane for repairs and for treatment of passengers. After an initial tough stand it surrendered abjectly to the demand of the terrorists that Maulana Masood Azhar and two other top terrorists be released. This surrender by the government makes Dec. 31, 1999, a day of national shame in which India has emerged as the softest f soft state which has can be held to ransom by anyone.





Roots of Pak covert war

Meanwhile, the “roots” of Pakistan’s covert war began on Jan. 1, 1949 when Jawaharlal Nehru agreed to a ceasefire that enabled Pakistan to retain a third of Kashmir. Military experts say that the onward advance of Indian troops would have enabled them to recover the entire territory within four to five months more from dec. 1948. j despite this, Nehru agreed to the ceasefire, a year after the first mistake of taking the Kashmir conflict to the UN. This gave Pakistan the confidence that Indian weakness in victory [sometimes called magnanimity] could be relied upon to prevent any severe costs being levied on that newborn country by Nw Delhi.

‘It is this Pakistani confidence in the inability of India to bring itself to deliver a telling blow that has inspired its repeated forays into India. Just as Prithviraj Chauhan’s idiocy allowed the escape [and subsequent reappearance] of Mahmud Ghauri, India’s repeated forgiving of Pakistan may one day let that country succeed in its ruthless drive to vivisect this country. The 1949 ceasefire was preceded by the surrender of the Pakistan balances in 1947 and followed by concessions over Kutch in 1965, diplomatic retreat at Tashkent [1965] and Shimla [1972], followed by the 1999 Kargil episode when for the first time New Delhi conceded the Pakistani demand that any conflict between them should get localized to the region of infiltration. Small wonder then that the ISI masterminded the hijacking of an Indian Airlines flight, a move which lurid any immediate prospect for peace in Kashmir.

Islamabad, political observers say, will continue with its policy of covert war on India till such time as it rids itself of the belief that New Delhi will not retaliate in any serious way. It is this perception that is at the root of the tension between India and Pakistan, a state of affairs caused by Islamabad’s not-so-covert war against New Delhi. Only when this perception is replaced by fear that India will retaliate in force to such mischief will the ISI stop its terrorist activities.

In the hijacking episode, both Islamabad and its Taliban satellite were aware that the Vajpayee Government would not resort to force against them, not even a show of it. Thus they were able to secure three terrorists instead of the one they had originally demanded. Destruction through artillery fire of militant camps across thee Line of control as well as a full alert across the entire Indo-Pak border, would have served to concentrate minds in both Lahore and Islamabad. New Delhi could have announced that it was planning to supply armaments to the Northern alliance as a away of forcing the Taliban to disown the ISI operatives who had committed the act. Instead, Mr. Jaswant singh by carrying the three Islamic militants on his plane to deliver them to the hijackers ruined years of principled opposition to a regime linked with both narcotics and terror, for returns that are not evident at the moment. Unless Pakistan is given a practical example of how the costs to it will rise to unbearable levels, should it continue with its covert war, political observers say, the aggression against India will continue. It would be foolish to separate covert from conventional war into two compartments. . War is war and should be tackled by all available means.