Why is Islamabad arresting Afghan Taliban?

RupeeNews | Moin Ansari

If one is to believe the American media, the Pakistanis are in cahoots with the Afghan Taliban. So why is it that Islamabad is arresting Afghan Taliban.  Shifting sands of Regional Scenarios. This is vexing question in the vortex of the Afghan conflict.

Has Pakistan changed direction, or are there new realities in West Asia. ‘Arrested’ Taliban to be reintegrated in Kabul government. It seems that Pakistan is arresting the “Taliban” who have either become too independent or those who will not play ball with the ISI. This is in return for a real and exclusive role in Afghanistan, a role that excludes Delhi.

Gareth Porter of course sees a Pakistani conspiracy behind every tree and collusion between the US and Pakistan on Afghanistan.

Statements by Pakistani officials to journalists prior to the arrest indicate that the decision to put Baradar in custody is aimed at ensuring that the Taliban role in peace negotiations serves Pakistani interests. They also suggest that Pakistani military leaders view Baradar as an asset in those negotiations rather than an adversary to be removed from the conflict.

Pakistan has long viewed the military and political power of the Taliban as Pakistan’s primary strategic asset in countering Indian influence in Afghanistan, which remains its main concern in the conflict.

…Pakistanis had insisted to the United States that all peace negotiations in Afghanistan should be channeled through ISI. The Pakistanis also wanted all contacts with the Taliban by other parties, including the CIA, to stop. Gareth Porter. Counterpunch.

There is plethora of opinions on the subject. Gareth Porter of course believes that there is huge conspiracy between the US and Pakistan.

New Delhi: The scales have tipped in favour of Pakistan in the diplomatic stand-off between the two Asian rivals following the Mumbai terror strikes fourteen months ago. Soon after 26/11, Islamabad was in the doghouse and under intense international pressure to clean up its act. Pakistan has, however, extricated itself from a difficult situation, when it was regarded as a major headache for the international community, to becoming a major stake-holder in Afghanistan and in ensuring stability in the region.

It has helped the US and Nato forces depend on the Pakistan military to win the war against al-Qaeda and Taliban. India has contributed in a small measure too. If Manmohan Singh had his way and engagement with Pakistan began soon after the meeting with his counterpart Yousaf Raza Gilani at Sharm-el Sheikh last year, then New Delhi would have been seen as talking from a position of strength. But the public was not in a mood to humour Pakistan’s civilian government. Relevance to the US gives Pak advantage in talks with India.

• Afghanistan’s punishing war is entering a new phase and Pakistan has made it clear it can and must play a leading role. BBC

• “Pakistan now wants to dominate any kind of dialogue that takes place.” BBC

• “America is history, Karzai is history, the Taliban are the future ”Former ISI head Gen Hamid Gul. BBC

• Reports from Kandahar last month speculated that Mullah Baradar would soon be arrested because of growing tensions with Mullah Omar. BBC

• “Pakistan has accomplished two objectives,” …”They’ve shown us in the West they’re willing to co-operate and they’ve taken out someone they didn’t control.” (Lt Col Tony Shaffer–Center for Advanced Defense Studies in Washington.–Intelligence officer in Afghanistan 2003). BBC

• “Pakistan’s ISI can play a role in negotiations and I support that role. “Pakistan has an influence in this area and has a legitimate security interest.” (US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, on a visit to Kabul, told BBC’s Persian TV)

• Baradar’s arrest has revived the ISI’s traditional Pentagon and CIA links and will come to the fore more and more in the next few months. In fact, Richard Holbrooke, the US special envoy for Af-Pak, arrived in Islamabad on Thursday to thank Pakistan for this big catch. DNA India

• “we have opened all doors” to co-operation with Nato and Afghan forces in Afghanistan… (General Kiyani). BBC

• “our strategic paradigm has to be realised”. For Pakistan, this means a friendly Afghanistan that is part of its sphere of influence – and where India, still regarded as a threat, plays no major role (General Kiyani press briefing in February). Terror Central exposed: Proof of Indian Subversion of Pakistan

The sudden significant capture of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, second in charge in the Taliban hierarchy, comes at a crucial point.

Talk of negotiation is now taking centre stage, a strategy in parallel to a powerful military assault against Taliban strongholds in southern Afghanistan.

“There has been a change in Pakistan’s attitude,” said Pakistani author Ahmed Rashid, who has written extensively about the close links between Pakistan’s military intelligence, the ISI, and Taliban leaders.

“Pakistan now wants to dominate any kind of dialogue that takes place.”

Frustration

Mullah Baradar, reported to have been picked up by Pakistani and US intelligence agents in the southern Pakistani city of Karachi, may have become too independent.

“ America is history, Karzai is history, the Taliban are the future ”
Former ISI head Gen Hamid Gul

Sources in Kabul say he and his envoys have been involved in secret talks with the Afghan president in Kabul, his representatives in southern Afghanistan and outside the country.

One senior Afghan official who, like others, is not commenting publicly for now, said: “This may be good for public opinion but, for us, it can have a negative impact.

“It was easier for us to talk to him.”

A Western source involved in the process expressed frustration this channel was now being exposed and, for the moment, stopped.

More arrests have now been reported including two Taliban “shadow governors” who reported to Mullah Baradar.

Reports from Kandahar last month speculated that Mullah Baradar would soon be arrested because of growing tensions with Mullah Omar.

The two men have been close confidants. The Taliban leader had appointed him as one of his two main deputies after the movement was ousted from power in 2001.

Mullah Baradar rose to become the key military commander as Mullah Omar found it increasingly difficult to operate in the open.

“Pakistan has accomplished two objectives,” remarked Lt Col Tony Shaffer, who served as an intelligence officer in Afghanistan in 2003, and is now at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies in Washington.

“They’ve shown us in the West they’re willing to co-operate and they’ve taken out someone they didn’t control.”

Pakistan has always denied senior Taliban leaders are living on its soil, saying they go back and forth across the porous border with Afghanistan. Pakistan’s push for new role in Afghanistan, By Lyse Doucet, BBC News. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/8521823.stm, Published: 2010/02/19 02:09:40 GMT

The new reality is the exponential congruency of ideas between the Pakistanis and the Americans. This is based on mutual need. The Pakistanis want the Americans to leave Afghanistan free of the Bharati (aka Indian) infestation.

…  Pakistani move as the logical culmination of the policy decision he had reported earlier. He told Radio Free Europe he hoped Baradar would be treated as a “guest” rather than as a prisoner, and would be used to “start some kind of negotiations” involving the Taliban leadership, the Afghans and the U.S.

Kamran Bokhari, director of Middle East Analysis for Stratfor, a private strategic analysis firm, suggested that the Pakistanis may indeed be treating Baradar as a guest rather than as a conventional prisoner. “I’m not sure whether this is an arrest in the usual sense of the word, or a cover for a Pakistani effort assert its influence on Baradar,” Bokhari told IPS.

Bokhari, who has maintained contacts with Pakistani intelligence officials, said he “wouldn’t rule out” the possibility that Baradar would be allowed to participate in negotiations while in Pakistan’s custody. Gareth Porter. Counterpunch

The Americans want a face-saving exit from Afghanistan. A victory for President Obama in Kabul will surely help avert a defeat in Washington.

“Pakistan is riding the luck of the devil. In fact, Afghanistan has helped Pakistan time and again to become relevant to the international community,” says former foreign secretary Salman Haider. The change in tack by the US and Nato forces, articulated in both Istanbul and the London conference, has given Pakistan the opportunity they need to once again become an important political player. DNA India. Relevance to the US gives Pak advantage in talks with India, Seema Guha / DNA, Monday, February 22, 2010 0:16 IST

The recent conference in London on Afghanistan as well as American moves in Afghanistan seem to suggest that Europe and the Americas have been designated the US sphere of influence and Asia and Africa have been designated the Chinese sphere of influence.

This US policy seems to have reversed the Bush Administrations policies of building Bharat as a counterweight to China. There are complex reasons for the reversal in American decision making. The prime reason for the change in policy is due to the global financial crisis which strangulated the Bush Administrations quest for global primacy. The financial fiasco seems to have asphyxiated the Neocon plan for a new American century which would have perpetuated America a global superpower for the next one hundred years.

If President Obama can step out of the trap in Kabul, he can possibly avoid the trap laid out to defeat him in Washington.

U.S. officials portrayed the apprehension of Baradar as the result of a “secret joint operation” involving the CIA and ISI, and a senior Pakistani official was quoted by Time magazine as saying the CIA had identified the “general area” of Karachi in which Baradar was located.

But Rick “Ozzie” Nelson, who served on the staff of the National Counter-Terrorism Centre’s Directorate of Strategic Operational Planning from 2005 to 2007, told IPS Baradar could not have been captured without an ISI decision that it was in Pakistan’s interest to do so. “Arguably, ISI could have picked up Baradar at any point,” said Nelson. Gareth Porter. Counterpunch

Pakistan will exact a heavy price for cooperation in Afghanistan and putting in place a coalition government  in Kabul–an Afghanistan free of Indian encroachment. It seems that much is guaranteed.

Key asset

Unlike the Bush administration, Barack Obama’s team has been urging Pakistan, privately and publicly, to take action against the Taliban leadership and their sanctuaries in the tribal areas, as well as in cities like Quetta and Karachi.

Since 2001 the Pakistan military has moved against al-Qaeda and more recently, Pakistani Taliban leaders. But it’s long made it clear it won’t move against the Afghan Taliban and other powerful Afghan commanders linked to the insurgency.

Islamabad has regarded its long-standing Taliban connections as a key asset in neighbouring Afghanistan.

Now that the Afghan government and its Nato allies have made reintegration of low-level Taliban fighters – and reconciliation with more senior commanders – a key priority, Pakistan wants to play a role in bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table.

Pakistan’s army chief, Gen Ashfaq Kayani, has been indicating their readiness.

Sphere of influence

In a rare press briefing in February, he made it clear “we have opened all doors” to co-operation with Nato and Afghan forces in Afghanistan.

But he also asserted “our strategic paradigm has to be realised”. For Pakistan, this means a friendly Afghanistan that is part of its sphere of influence – and where India, still regarded as a threat, plays no major role.

Washington seems to accept Pakistan can be a broker.

US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, on a visit to Kabul, told BBC’s Persian TV: “Pakistan’s ISI can play a role in negotiations and I support that role.

“Pakistan has an influence in this area and has a legitimate security interest.”

The former ISI head, retired Gen Hamid Gul, talked about this relationship with his trademark bluntness. Speaking to me in an interview on the BBC’s Newshour programme, he said: “America is history, Karzai is history, the Taliban are the future.”

Pakistan, he warned, “would be unwise to cut all contacts and goodwill with the future leaders of Afghanistan”.

A growing role for Islamabad causes unease in Kabul. President Karzai and key members of his team have repeatedly criticised the role of the ISI in providing sanctuary to Taliban leaders. Pakistan’s push for new role in Afghanistan, By Lyse Doucet, BBC News. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/8521823.stm, Published: 2010/02/19 02:09:40 GMT

Gareth Porter does not bank on US-Pakistani cooperation–rather he thinks that the Pakistanis are taking control of the Taliban that the CIA wants to expropriate for itself.

Baradar not only had met with Afghan and Saudi officials in early 2009 but had authorised subordinates to conduct negotiations with Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s half-brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, in southern Afghanistan.

Former Taliban Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil insisted in an interview with IPS last month that Mullah Omar is still the Taliban leader who “makes the decisions”, and that Baradar “is saying whatever he is told.”

The Pakistani move to take control of Baradar appears to be the second major instance of Pakistani defiance of U.S. policy in Afghanistan in the past two months. Gareth Porter. Counterpunch

Lyse Doucet of the BBC has a more even keel on the subject than Counterpunch. Doucet reports with more facts and less opinion.

‘Exaggerating’

The president has made it clear he wants any reconciliation to be an Afghan-led and controlled process.

There’s been no official announcement from Kabul yet to Mullah Baradar’s capture.

A few years ago, Kabul opened contacts with another senior Taliban leader, Mullah Mansoor Dadullah, who had also fallen out with Mullah Omar, only to have Pakistan capture him in early 2008. At the time, a senior Afghan intelligence official expressed anger and dismay.

Dutch journalist Bette Dam, author of a recent book on Hamid Karzai, has written of years of contacts between the president and Mullah Baradar, who are both from the Popalzai tribe.

Mullah Baradar is said to have come to the rescue of Hamid Karzai when he was threatened by Taliban fighters in the southern province of Uruzgan after the 9/11 attacks.

On her most recent visit to Uruzgan in December, Ms Dam said that she had been informed that Mullah Baradar made a visit to Kabul last year.

Afghans in the province – the birthplace of Mullah Baradar – also spoke of “how powerful and increasingly independent he had become in the Taliban movement, establishing his own committees and charities, and operating though his own tribal networks”.

The question now is what impact will his arrest have on any future negotiations with the Taliban and on Pakistan’s role in this process.

It is pedagogical to note that  that several US drones took out Haqqani’s sons in Norther Waziristan. The US of course considers the Haqqani’s Network as a Pakistani sponsored operation. The targeted murder of the Haqqanis in North Waziristan seems to give credence to Ports’s theory of a rift between the CIA and the ISI–each going after each other assets, to gain control of the Taliban before and after the peace talks.

The Pakistani move to take control of Baradar appears to be the second major instance of Pakistani defiance of U.S. policy in Afghanistan in the past two months.

Last December, the Obama administration put strong pressure on Pakistani leaders to crack down on Siraj Haqqani, the top insurgent leader in eastern Afghanistan who operates out of a sanctuary in Pakistan’s Northern Waziristan and is known to be a long-time ISI asset.

The Pakistani leaders reacted to the pressure with “public silence and private anger,” according to a New York Times report Dec. 14. Gareth Porter. Counterpunch

Doucet praises the Pakistani cooperation and contradicts Gareth totally.

Biggest blow

Islamabad is being hailed in Washington for its co-operation with the US.

For the Americans, this success comes only weeks after the CIA suffered its biggest blow in decades. It lost seven operatives when a double agent detonated a suicide vest at their base in the eastern province of Khost.

But many key details of this latest operation are still unclear. Reports are now emerging that Mullah Baradar may have been detained earlier than the dates cited in the original story in the New York Times.

It’s also still not clear how much involvement US intelligence had in the raid and how much access they have to this valuable source, who has an enormous store of knowledge about the movement, including their contacts with the ISI.

One Western source in Kabul said that the Americans were exaggerating the level of co-operation.

US intelligence officer Col Shaffer argues that what happens next is of key importance.

“We should watch very closely what happens,” he remarked. Pakistan’s push for new role in Afghanistan, By Lyse Doucet, BBC News. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/8521823.stm, Published: 2010/02/19 02:09:40 GMT

According to press reports, the arrested Taliban are to be used to expedite the reintegration process. This news of the arrest of the Taliban from Karachi had jolted many analysts into wondering which way the war was going. A Pakistani-Afghan Taliban war would exacerbate the situation in West and prolong the conflict. Many analysts wondered about the game plan of the Pakistan Army and the Islamabad government. Certainly this prolongation of the war in Afghanistan was not favored by the Pakistani people.

Then the other shoe dropped and it all began to make sense. The Taliban “arrested” in Karachi are to be included into the new coalition government.

One wonders why the Taliban were “arrested” if they are to be included into the new government in Kabul. The US media is crowing about the arrest, and both the New York Times and the Washington Post have multiple stories about the joint Pakistani-US operation. The ISPR spokesman of the Pakistani Army openly admitted to the arresting the Taliban.

India Under Threat

Despite India’s demonstration of its military and economic prowess beyond its borders, very recent events have demonstrated the extreme vulnerability of its internal security. On February 7, India test fired its nuclear capable Agni 3 missile from Wheeler Island in the Bay of Bengal.

This missile has a 3500 km range and its range covers vast areas of China and Pakistan. Reports said that: ‘pin point accuracy was achieved’. Defence Minister Antony announced recently India’s plans to raise two mountain divisions in North East India ‘not against China but as a part of the policy to strengthen armed forces in that region’. Meanwhile India has committed $ 1.3 billion in development assistance and infrastructure in Afghanistan.

Home grown threat

On February 10 in a remote camp in Midnapore (West Bengal) 24 jawans (soldiers) of the Eastern Front Rifles in the Sildha camp were killed by Maoist guerrillas who arrived on motor cycles and four wheeled vehicles. Reports said that these poorly trained soldiers deployed to combat the Maoist guerrillas in an operation launched by the central government known as Operation Green Hunt against the guerrillas were sitting ducks.
Naxal Leader Kiserji had said that the attack was an answer to the government operation against them and asked that it be called off.
This movement that commenced in 1967 following the split of the Communist Party of India was recently described by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as the greatest security threat to India. The movement has spread to 220 districts across 20 states and affects 40 per cent of the geographical area of the country. It controls a region known as the Red Corridor extending over 92,000 sq miles and the Indian intelligence organisation, Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) estimated the strength of the Naxalites last year at 50,000 regular cadres in mass organisations with millions of sympathisers. The affected states are: West Bengal, Chattisgarh, Orissa, Andra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Jhakarland, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

Wretched of the Earth

This movement that has lasted for over four decades comprises the Wretched of the Earth of India. They are tribals, untouchables, and other spurned castes but also include radical students in large numbers as well as intellectuals. Some of the Naxals identified have been alumni of well known colleges whose products include leading Indian politicians. But the movement has failed to attract the support of mainstream political parties.
Reports speak of the state machinery systematically annihilating student supporters. Human rights groups have expressed concern about disappearance of such students and some estimates speak of 5000 Bengali students and intellectuals being killed. At the inception of the movement it was declared that assassination of ‘class enemies’ was an objective and that revolutionary warfare was to take place not only in the countryside but everywhere. Well known leader Majumdar was arrested and died in custody under ‘mysterious circumstances’. The movement poses a serious challenge to the Indian state but can it be eliminated by the use of force as is being presently attempted?
To those observers of the rise of India under free market capitalism the high rise buildings of Mumbai with vast areas of slum land around demonstrates the paradox of modern India.
The Naxalite movement originated during the days of Nehruvian socialism under Indira Gandhi. Socialism it is said has the capacity to make every one poor and did little to alleviate the abjectly poor. Now under free market capitalism, the rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer. How long will it take for the wealth to trickle down from the high rise buildings to the slum lands of Mumbai?

Al Qaeda threat

An incident of even graver threat to the security of the Indian state was witnessed on February 13 when a bomb went off in a popular restaurant in the western city of Pune killing eight and injuring 33. This was the first such attack in India after Mumbai terrorist attack in November 2008. The Pune attack was significant in that responsibility for the attack was claimed by an organisation styled the Indian Mujahideen. This group has been identified by the Indian media as a front created by the Islamic terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba ( LeT ), operating from Pakistan and another Islamic terror organisation Harkat-ul-Jihad to cover the tracks of the radical Students’ Islamic Movement of India.
It is now suspected that most of the bombings that took place in Indian cities last year were directed by LeT and carried out by the Indian Mujahideen.
A consolation for the United States and other western countries has been that even though India ranks third in terms of Muslim populated countries it has been largely left untouched by Islamic terror of the al Qaeda variety. President George W. Bush made specific mention of this in his speeches as president. If Islamic radicalism grips the Indian Muslim population of 160 million (13.3 percent) of the total Indian population, it could have immense destructive potential not only for India but entire South Asia.
Al Qaeda last week also threatened India against staging international sporting events such as the World Hockey Cup and the Commonwealth Games. A leading commander of the organisation Inlays Kashmiri had warned the world not to send sports people to India, Asia Times an online internet channel said. However indications were that most countries were ignoring the threat.

Indo-Pak talks

India’s perennial problem of Kashmir remains unresolved. Kashmir is the font of most of South Asian ills and continues to be so. The two countries last week decided to hold talks at foreign secretary level on February 25 despite strong objections made in certain quarters in India that the talks should not be held in view of the Pune bombing. Indo-Pakistan talks that commenced in 2004 came to a halt after the Mumbai attacks but the Indian government and most of India’s geopolitical strategists held that nothing could be lost by holding the talks.

Courtesy: http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2010/02/21/india-under-threat/

Gen. Kayani On India’s “Cold Start” Attack Doctrine

The Pak army chief gets candid about India, and unresolved issues

MARIANA BAABAR

Worldview From GHQ:

• Stridently opposed to India’s role in Afghanistan
• India shouldn’t train the Afghan National Army
• Gains from backchannel diplomacy need not be the starting point, especially on Kashmir
• Principal focus remains Kashmir
• Worried by India’s military doctrine: Gen Kapoor’s statements on a cold start strategy “under a nuclear overhang”.

For decades now, Pakistanis have watched on their TV screens images of the corps commanders’ conference room at the Pakistan army General Headquarters in Rawalpindi. The images are invariably beamed every time the generals meet. And invariably, the images would show dour officers seated around a long table, engaged in discussions on the country’s future. Of course, these TV grabs are supposed to evoke a sense of awe, conveying to the audience who really holds the reins of power in Pakistan. It’s in this room that contemporary history has been shaped—generals are known to have walked out to stage a coup, call for election, or reprimand civilian governments trying to assert themselves.

Into this room I walked in gingerly on February 12, Friday. Present along with me were a clutch of former generals and strategic thinkers. The room reeked of history, of power, but today also an expectation of disclosures significant to diplomacy and the region in general.

Perhaps my expectations rose because of the timing of General Ashfaq Parvez Kiyani’s briefing, held as it was in the week during which India had invited Pakistan for talks. For a man who was at best reticent during his earlier tenure as director-general, isi, it was surprising to find the army chief expressing his thoughts on strategic issues with a candour quite remarkable for a general.

During the three-hour interaction, he smoked six cigarettes, each time replacing the one in the cigarette filter before it had become a stub (he didn’t light up in the first hour) as he proudly talked about the successful army operations in Swat, Malakand and South Waziristan. The myth had been broken, he said, that no army could take control of South Waziristan and hold it. Heliborne operations at 8,000 feet in South Waziristan were the largest ever in South Asia, he declared,  and for which the US didn’t pay a cent.

The conversation turned to India. Questions flew thick and fast. As Outlook heard Gen Kiyani speak on strategic issues, it was easy to draw some conclusions: Pakistan won’t countenance a significant role for India in Afghanistan; New Delhi’s recent military pronouncements worry Islamabad immensely; the gains from backchannel diplomacy, launched during Pervez Musharraf’s rule, need not necessarily be the starting point for Islamabad now; and Kashmir remains Pakistan’s principal focus.

At one point during the interview, Gen Kiyani intoned emphatically, “Yes, we are India-centric.” He then went on to spell out his reasons, taking quite seriously Indian army chief Deepak Kapoor’s cold start doctrine articulated in December last. General Kiyani said, “We have unresolved issues, a history of conflict and now the cold start doctrine. Help us resolve these issues so that we can shift our attention from the eastern borders to the west. Let us normalise these burning issues. We want peaceful coexistence with India. After all, India has the capability, and good intentions can change overnight.” Strong words these.

Islamabad remains worried about General Kapoor’s statements at a closed-door seminar at the Army Training Command, Shimla, where he underlined the need to bolster India’s capability to wage a two-front war (against Pakistan and China). He had wanted India to develop a cold start strategy—of launching quick offensives (presumably against Pakistan) “under a nuclear overhang”. New Delhi’s disclaimers that it didn’t share Kapoor’s views had no takers in the GHQ.

General Kiyani also opposed the idea of India training the Afghan National Army. “Strategically, we cannot have an Afghan army on my western border which has an Indian mindset. If we have an army trained by Pakistan, there will be better interactions on the western border.” Expect an intense jostling for space between India and Pakistan in Afghanistan.

Partly, the jostling for space arises from Pakistan’s need to remain relevant in the region, at a time New Delhi has inched closer to Washington and gallops ahead economically. Kiyani said as much, “Our objective is that at the end of all this (Afghanistan), we should not be standing in the wrong corner of the room and should remain relevant in the region. This is our greatest challenge.”

Kiyani’s remarks, and those of many others in the government, have etched out the backdrop to the talks between India and Pakistan. For one, it seems quite probable that Pakistan would want to start fresh on Kashmir, not inclined to consolidate upon the scheme agreed upon by Musharraf and Manmohan Singh. Reportedly worked out through protracted backchannel diplomacy, the two sides had agreed to provide self-governance in the two parts of Kashmir, undertake demilitarisation in phases there and, ultimately, establish a joint mechanism to administer the two parts.

Reflecting the military’s thinking (which controls Islamabad’s policy on Afghanistan, India, the US and nuclear policy) was foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, who declared, “We know nothing of this backchannel diplomacy. There is not a shred of paper present in the foreign office on this.” Countering him was his predecessor, Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri, who toldOutlook, “What’s he talking about? Why this flip-flop? The files are present at the president’s office and President Zardari must have seen those when he commented, soon after he took office, that the nation would hear some good news on Kashmir soon. (If you do this flip-flop), no one will take you seriously….”

The political class seems to be veering around to the view that Pakistan must begin afresh on Kashmir. As Pakistan Muslim League (Q) leader Mushahid Hussain says, “Many problems have accumulated since the time Musharraf left. India now boasts of a cold start doctrine, there is also the looming water war, the situation in Balochistan and India’s role in Afghanistan. The Pakistan army also feels that India left no stone unturned to isolate it internationally.” About the backchannel diplomacy under the current dispensation, Hussain said, “To my knowledge, only one meeting has taken place, between Indian diplomat S.K. Lambah and (ex-foreign secretary) Riaz Mohammad Khan in Bangkok.”

At the GHQ interaction, Kiyani confidently said that the world was finally listening to Pakistan’s story. It should give a certain heft to Islamabad as it engages with New Delhi. Perhaps it was also the reason why India did not overplay the Pune blast, aware that the wind perhaps has shifted direction post-Mumbai.

Pakistan is winning its risky games

There are a tonne of theories as to what motivated Pakistan’s shadowy Inter-Services Intelligence agency to suddenly co-operate in handing over an old ally. Were they making sure he did not make a deal behind their back? Were they buying some influence with the Americans? Or was it a stern warning to the Afghan Taliban to stay in line?

by Erik Randolph
Guardian

There has been plenty of tub-thumping over this week’s capture of Taliban commander Mullah Baradar, but all it really signifies is that Pakistan holds all the cards in the strategic game being played out across central and southern Asia.

President Barack Obama is well-known for his love of poker. It is a comforting image for the rest of the world: the stony-faced thinker, calculating the odds, in the game for the long haul. But when it comes to the bluff, no one can touch Pakistan’s military establishment. Consider the complexity of the game it is playing.

America’s enemies are based in their country, but they can still wring $7.5bn in aid from Washington. Their population hates the idea of colluding with the Americans, but Pakistan quietly allows US drones, platoons of marines and CIA agents to operate in its territory. It fights its own insurgency with some parts of the Pakistani Taliban while doing deals with its affiliates. Known terrorists are free to hold public rallies in broad daylight calling for attacks on India, and yet India still finds itself pressured into holding a new round of peace talks.

While India spends billions of dollars in development aid and construction projects in Afghanistan, Pakistan bides its time and then demands that India pack its bags and head home as the price of its cooperation with the US. And who can blame it? After all the bloodshed Pakistan has suffered in the past nine years, should it really have to stomach its sworn enemy setting up camp on the western flank?

Meanwhile, the west has one priority – getting out of Afghanistan before it drags all their governments into the gutter. In its obsessive focus on every detail of Operation Moshtarak and the Afghan surge, Mullah Baradar’s arrest looks like a big tactical victory. But for Pakistan it will barely muster a footnote in the much broader narrative.

There are a tonne of theories as to what motivated Pakistan’s shadowy Inter-Services Intelligence agency to suddenly co-operate in handing over an old ally. Were they making sure he did not make a deal behind their back? Were they buying some influence with the Americans? Or was it a stern warning to the Afghan Taliban to stay in line?

In the end, the truth is unimportant. Baradar was dispensable and he was dispensed with. The Pakistani establishment can sell his arrest to the Americans as a sign they are co-operating, sell it to Mullah Omar and Kabul as a reminder of who’s boss, and it can brush the whole thing under the carpet to its own citizens. Is it a change of strategy, or just a bluff? We are unlikely to ever know for sure.

Compare that with the game being played by the Americans. They, too, know that everything comes down to perceptions. That has been the mantra ever since Stan McChrystal took over as US commander in Afghanistan last summer. But look at the task he faces: selling to voters back home that an end is in sight (while President Hamid Karzai says he needs another 10-15 years to finish the job), selling to civilians in the war zone that they can be protected (despite the inevitable civilian casualties), selling to the Taliban that their butts will be kicked (if only we knew where they were).

Is anyone buying? No. It is not the fault of the troops on the ground, who are now thoroughly versed in the intricacies of counter-insurgency. But playing the game of perceptions is difficult in a country shot through with “ethnic paranoia, national self-doubt and conspiracy theories”.

And if you are trying to play a tense game of high-stakes poker, it is probably best if you don’t show everyone your cards before you start. By telling the world that the troops would start shipping out in mid-2011, that is exactly what Obama did.

It is not his fault, of course. He had to offer a sop to the anti-war contingent. Plus, the US has none of the advantages available to the Pakistanis. They have known all the players in this game for decades. They know how they think, what they are planning, who can be trusted and who needs to be kicked off the table.

At the same time, they are also engaged in a game with India, one which is ultimately far more important to them. If you want a clear statement of the futility of America’s current surge in Afghanistan, take this line from a recent editorial: “The war on the western front will not be solved if Pakistan’s army continues to regard India’s army on the eastern front as the major threat.” If that is true, then the west might as well pack up and go home today.

Sure, there are talks planned between India and Pakistan next week. But you would be hard-pressed to find a single person on this side of the world who thinks any progress whatsoever is going to be made. It has been 63 years since they started arguing and fighting over Kashmir, and so far neither side has shown any interest in budging from its original stance.

Whatever glimmers of hope might have existed when the talks were announced earlier this month evaporated when the explosion ripped through the German Bakery in Pune at the weekend. Now all the Indians want to talk about is terrorism, and Pakistan can stick to the line that it does not the support the jihadists in its midst.

There is huge risk in the games Pakistan plays. It has lost of hundreds of lives to its own Taliban insurgency and its intelligence agencies could easily lose control of a jihadist front in Kashmir that has its own agenda and its own momentum. India has the fortitude to withstand only so much, and another series of terrorist strikes like it experienced in 2007 and 2008 may well prove more than it can stand.

While Pakistan remains in some semblance of control, there is hope that some form of compromised stability might be achieved across the region. But if its handle on the situation slips even slightly, the whole pack of cards could very quickly collapse.

JF-17 Thunder joins PAF’s fighter fleet

ISLAMABAD: The first squadron of JF-17 Thunder aircraft formally joined the fighter fleet of Pakistan Air Force on Thursday.
“The formal induction of JF-17 aircraft in the PAF is in line with our resolve to face all challenges with poise and self-confidence,” Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman said while speaking at the induction ceremony held at a PAF operational base.

He said the PAF had invested in force multipliers like air-to-air refuellers, unmanned aerial vehicles and airborne early warning and control aircraft to enhance its capability to undertake complex operations.

“The new state-of-the-art inductions make it imperative that we train hard and prepare well to induct and integrate the new systems professionally and safely. The achievements of PAF leave no doubt in my mind that we are immensely capable and, as a team, can set and achieve still higher standards”.

He said Pakistan was a peaceful nation with no aggressive designs and wanted to live in peace with honour.

He said the new systems were being inducted to keep pace with technology and maintain credible conventional balance of force, without which peace could not be ensured in South Asia.

Defence analysts term the induction of JF-17 in the PAF fleet a milestone. They stress that strengthening the military has become all the more imperative in the wake of Indian hegemonic designs.

They said that although India and Pakistan were about to resume dialogue, history bore testimony that the neighbour had always used talks as a ploy to buy time.

They referred to the reckless statement by Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor and the recent incidents of violation of the Line of Control and the Ceasefire Line.

Hindu Suicide Bombers: US, UK, Australia issue warnings to citizens travelling to India

First Published By Pakistan Daily

The United States, the United Kingdom and Australia have issued travel advisories to its citizens in view of the critical security situation in India.

Recently, a bomb blast at a bakery frequently visited by foreigners in Pune has raised suspicions that Indian Hindu terrorist organization, which can go so far to block celebration of St Valentine Day, may carry out further attacks and suicide bombings on foreigners.

According to media reports, a US travel alert said “American citizens have been advised to be alert to the continued possibility of terrorist attacks in India as terrorists and their sympathizers are capable of attacking US citizens.”

In its travel alert, updated after the blast, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) of the UK government said: “British nationals are reminded to remain vigilant in public places”.

“There is a high general threat from Hindu terrorism throughout India. Recent attacks have targeted public places, including those frequented by westerners and expatriates.”

Australia, in its alert said: “We advise you to exercise caution in India at this time because of the high risk of terrorist activity by Hindu militant groups…We continue to receive reports of possible threats against prominent business and tourist locations, in Mumbai and New Delhi”.

---

Terror Central exposed: Proof of Indian Subversion of Pakistan

RupeeNews

Secret Document Bares Indian Subversion in Pakistan

NEW DELHI, Feb 13 (APP): Even as India and Pakistan were actively engaged in laying a framework for normalizing their relations in the aftermath of Operation Parkaram (Dec 2001- Oct 2002), R&AW’s Counter Intelligence Team X (CIT-X), assigned to conduct subversive operations targeting Pakistan was working relentlessly to destabilize the country.

According to well placed sources, the details of these plans came to light once a copy of the classified document detailing these activities was accidently lost and became available for public scrutiny.

The strategy to advance the interaction with Pakistan on the diplomatic channels, while perpetrating acts of terrorism on a parallel track was envisaged after the failure of Indian spell of coercive diplomacy vis-a-vis Pakistan during the Premiership of Atal Bihari Vajpaee.

The document lays out the extensive espionage network dovetailed into the diplomatic missions in Central Asia, particularly Afghanistan and Middle East which the Indian under-cover intelligence operatives utilize to rake trouble not only in FATA but in Pakistani hinterland as well.

As per details given in the purloined paper, agents for anti-Pakistan subversion were trained in 57 training camps established in the IHK, East Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Assam.

Activists of anti Pakistan nationalist groups were the focus of Indian search for recruits who received cash, weapons and ammunitions from undercover RAW operatives masquerading as Al Qaeda agents. While sections of the Taliban have been named as perpetrators of some of the most heinous and bloody acts of subversion in Pakistan, it were their Indian handlers who manipulated the invisible strings. Mossad’s tactics of infiltrating Palestinian resistance acted as model and provided the modus operandi for CIT – X to stir insurgency on Pakistan’s Western border than, hitherto fore, had remained free from a military threat.

Apart from concentrating on the FATA Region, stoking the fires of sub-national movements in Pakistan can be identified as one of the vulnerable area where Indian Agencies are focused, reveals the document.

Targeting interior regions of Sind province, Seraiki belt and the Northern Areas of Pakistan forms pivots of the Indian plan, receiving riveting and ceaseless attention of CIT-X, reveals the classified document.

India to spend further $200 Billion for arms

While Pakistani leaders and judiciary are locked in an unending internal battle and the armed forces are engaged in an ongoing treacherous terrorism network Pakistan’s arch rival India has embarked on a huge armament programme that is seen as genuine threats to both Pakistan and its strategic ally China.

According to a latest report New Delhi has planned to spend as much as US$ 200 billion on defence acquisitions over the next 12 years acquiring state-of-the-art war planes, sophisticated helicopters, tanks and nuclear-propelled and nuclear-arm submarine.

An India Strategic defence magazine has reported that nearly half of the Indian defence funding, or $100 billion, will go to the Indian Air Force (IAF) which would need to replace more than half of its combat jet fleet as well as the entire transport aircraft and helicopter fleet.

According to a study the Indian army had the largest requirement of helicopters while the navy needs both combat jets, helicopters, and a fleet of nearly 100 carrier-borne combat jets.

The details of the study is due to be published in March but according to a brief report released in India Strategic’s DefExpo show daily published Monday India’s plans to acquire surveillance aircraft, lesser in capability though the IAF’s Phalcon AWACs and the navy’s P8-I Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) are also being worked out while pilotless intelligence aircraft (drones) generally called UAVs, including those armed, are also on the top of the list of the three arms of the forces.

The briefing noted that India’s “three services as well as the Coast Guards and paramilitary organisations needed satellites and net centricity.”

The report further added that IAF has a plan to build 45 combat squadrons (about 900 aircraft), up from its maximum effective strength of 39.5 squadrons a few years ago. Many of its aircraft have been phased out due to simple ageing.

India also plans to buy the 126 jets, as well as advanced helicopters and other defense equipment, to modernize its mainly Soviet-vintage defense forces. India, which is among the world’s top arms importers, has earmarked 1.42 trillion rupees ($30.5 billion) as capital expenditure on defense for the current fiscal year through March 31.

Meanwhile there are reports that India was also considering to buy Eurofighter “Typhoon” fighter aircraft which is now being on display a defence Expo in India.

Indian Air Force (IAF) officials are gearing to thoroughly examine the capabilities of Eurofighter as part of a plan to acquite medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) programme.

The Eurofighter is expected to undergo trials until March in Jaisalmer and Leh particularly to test Eurofighter’s desert and high altitude performance. According to reports from Indian there is general consent that the performance of the aircraft but Indians were still looking for a special price. Defence experts say that the Eurofighter is competing against Dassault’s Rafale, Saab’s JAS 39 Super Gripen IN, Boeing’s F/A-18E/F-IN Super Hornet, Lockheed Martin’s F-16IL and Russia’s MiG-35.

More Hercules planes for India

Meanwhile the American Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) is also negotiating with the Indian Air Force a deal to sell an additional six Super Hercules C-130J military transport planes.

Lockheed Martin already has an order made in February 2008 for supplying six Super Hercules planes in a deal worth about $1 billion and the first Hercules plane is expected to be delivered to the Indian Air Force in the last quarter of 2010.

Lockheed Martin has early this month completed a third phase of trials of its F-16 Falcon fighter plane hoping to win over a $10 billion contract from the Indian Air Force to supply 126 combat jets.

According to latest reports India is to receive from Russia Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier; six (Krivak III) Talwar class Frigates (3 already delivered); 45 MiG-29K & MiG-29 KUB planes for the Indian Navy — 16 + 29; 280 Sukhoi-30 MKI fighter jets; 63 IAF MiG-29 Baaz modernisation planes; six IL-76 (Platform for Phalcon AWACS) (one already delivered); 1,500 tanks T-90 tanks; Nerpa nuclear submarine (to be leased to the Indian Navy this summer); PAK FA T-50 (Fifth Generation fighter aircraft, jointly developed with India); BrahMos cruise missile (joint developed with India) and INS Arihant (nuclear submarine) being developed by India with Russian help.

From the United States the Indian armed forces have made the following deals: six C-130 (FMS) transport aircraft; P8I-8; C-17 (FMS)-10, Naval ship INS Jalashwa; 145 BAe M777 Light Weight Howitzer (FMS) guns.

From Israel India has reached the following defence contracts in recent years: six Phalcon AWACS (1 delivered); Barak missile system; Spyder missile system; Heron UAVs; Ground sensors; Thermal Imaging Devices and Air Defense Missile System (Joint Development).

India reached a deal to receive from Britain

66 Hawk Advanced Jet Trainers and Queen Elizabeth class carriers they’re building.

Indian navy will receive six Scorpene submarines from France and two Fleet Tankers (Finmeccanicca) from Italy.

India Increases Defence Budget — While urging citizens to ‘eat rats’…

Threats To Pakistan’s Strategic Nuclear Assets

Shahid R. Siddiqi

Indian explosion of its nuclear device in 1974 drew only a customary “show of concern” from the Western powers. But Pakistan’s nuclear program, initiated in response to the Indian acquisition of nuclear weapons, evoked immediate and “serious concern” from the same quarters. Ever since, Pakistan has been under immense pressure to scrap its program while the Indians remain uncensored.

That Western discriminatory attitude can also be seen by the religious color it gave to Pakistan’s bomb by calling it an ‘Islamic bomb’. One has never heard of the Israeli bomb being called a ‘Jewish Bomb’, or the Indian bomb a ‘Hindu Bomb’, or the American and British bomb a ‘Christian Bomb’ or the Soviet bomb a ‘Communist’ (or an ‘Atheist) Bomb’. The West simply used Pakistan’s bomb to make Islam synonymous with aggression and make its nuclear program a legitimate target, knowing full well that it merely served a defensive purpose and was not even remotely associated with Islam.

With India going nuclear soon after playing a crucial role in dismembering Pakistan in 1971 and enjoying an overwhelming conventional military superiority over Pakistan in the ratio of 4:1, a resource strapped Pakistan was pushed to the wall. Left with no other choice but to develop a nuclear deterrent to ward off future Indian threats, Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto declared: “Pakistanis will eat grass but make a nuclear bomb”. And sure enough, they did it. Soon, however, both he and the nuclear program were to become non-grata. Amid intense pressure, sanctions and vilification campaign, Henry Kissinger personally delivered to a defiant Bhutto the American threat: “give up your nuclear program or else we will make a horrible example of you’.

And a horrible example was made of Bhutto for his defiance. But he had enabled Pakistan to become the 7th nuclear power in the world. This served Pakistan well. India was kept at bay despite temptations for military adventurism. Although there has never been real peace in South Asia, at least there has been no war since 1971.

Ignoring its security perspective, Pakistan’s Western ‘friends’ refused to admit it to their exclusive nuclear club, though expediency made them ignore its ‘crime’ when it suited their purpose. But driven by identical geo-strategic interests in their respective regions and seeing Pakistan as an obstacle to their designs, Israel and India missed no opportunity to malign or subvert Pakistan’s program.

Due to its defiance of Indian diktat, Pakistan is for India an obstruction in its quest for domination of South Asia and the Indian Ocean region. Israel’s apprehension of Pakistan’s military prowess is rooted in the strength Pakistan indirectly provides to Arab states with whom Israel has remained in a state of conflict. Conscious that several Arab states look up to Pakistan for military support in the event of threat to their security from Israel, it is unsettling for Israel to see a nuclear armed Pakistan.

Israel can also not overlook the fact that Pakistan’s military is a match to its own. The PAF pilots surprised Israeli Air Force, when flying mostly Russian aircraft they shot down several relatively superior Israeli aircraft in air combat in the 1973 Arab Israel war, shattering the invincibility myth of Israeli pilots who believed themselves to be too superior in skill and technology. The Pakistanis happened to be assigned to Jordanian, Syrian and Iraqi air forces on training missions when the war broke out and, unknown to the Israelis then, they incognito undertook combat missions.

After successfully destroying Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, Israelis planned a similar attack on Pakistan’s nuclear facilities at Kahuta in collusion with India in the 1980s. Using satellite pictures and intelligence information, Israel reportedly built a full-scale mock-up of Kahuta facility in the Negev Desert where pilots of F-16 and F-15 squadrons practiced mock attacks.

According to ‘The Asian Age’, London, journalists Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark stated in their book ‘Deception: Pakistan, the US and the Global Weapons Conspiracy’, that Israeli Air Force was to launch air attack on Kahuta in mid 1980s from Jamnagar airfield in Gujarat (India). The book claims that “in March 1984, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi signed off (on) the Israeli-led operation bringing India, Pakistan and Israel to within a hairs breadth of a nuclear conflagration”.

Another report claims that Israel also planned an air strike directly out of Israel. After midway and midair refueling, Israeli warplanes planned to shoot down a commercial airline’s flight over Indian Ocean that flew into Islamabad early morning, fly in a tight formation to appear as one large aircraft on radar screens preventing detection, use the drowned airliner’s call sign to enter Islamabad’s air space, knock out Kahuta and fly out to Jammu to refuel and exit.

According to reliable reports in mid 1980s this mission was actually launched one night. But the Israelis were in for a big surprise. They discovered that Pakistan Air Force had already sounded an alert and had taken to the skies in anticipation of this attack. The mission had to be hurriedly aborted.

Pakistan reminded the Israelis that Pakistan was no Iraq and that PAF was no Iraqi Air Force. Pakistan is reported to have conveyed that an attack on Kahuta would force Pakistan to lay waste to Dimona, Israel’s nuclear reactor in the Negev Desert. India was also warned that Islamabad would attack Trombay if Kahuta facilities were hit.

The above quoted book claims that “Prime Minister Indira Gandhi eventually aborted the operation despite protests from military planners in New Delhi and Jerusalem.”

McNair’s paper #41 published by USAF Air University (India Thwarts Israeli Destruction of Pakistan’s “Islamic Bomb”) also confirmed this plan. It said, “Israeli interest in destroying Pakistan’s Kahuta reactor to scuttle the “Islamic bomb” was blocked by India’s refusal to grant landing and refueling rights to Israeli warplanes in 1982.” Clearly India wanted to see Kahuta gone but did not want to face retaliation at the hands of the PAF. Israel, on its part wanted this to be a joint Indo-Israeli strike to avoid being solely held responsible.

The Reagan administration also hesitated to support the plan because Pakistan’s distraction at that juncture would have hurt American interests in Afghanistan, when Pakistan was steering the Afghan resistance against the Soviets.

Although plans to hit Kahuta were shelved, the diatribe against Pakistan’s nuclear program continued unabated. Israel used its control over the American political establishment and western media to create hysteria. India worked extensively to promote paranoia, branding Pakistan’s program as unsafe, insecure and a threat to peace. The fact is otherwise. It is technically sounder, safer and more secure than that of India and has ensured absence of war in the region.

The US invasion of Afghanistan provided another opening for Indo-Israeli nexus to target Pakistan’s strategic assets. This time the strategy was to present Pakistan as an unstable state, incapable of defending itself against religious extremist insurgents, creating the specter of Islamabad and its nuclear assets falling in their hands. Suggestions are being floated that Pakistan being at risk of succumbing to extremists, its nuclear assets should be disabled, seized or forcibly taken out by the US. Alternatively, an international agency should take them over for safe keeping.

Pakistan has determinedly thwarted the terrorist threat and foiled this grand conspiracy. The terrorists have either been eliminated or are on the run. Pakistan has made it clear that it would act decisively against any attempt by any quarter to harm its nuclear assets. But if the game is taken to the next level, the consequences would be disastrous for the region.

The Indo-Israeli nexus is losing initiative. But as long as the American umbrella is available Afghanistan will remain a playground for mischief mongers. It is now up to the US to walk its talk and prove its claim that it wants to see a secure and stable Pakistan. It must pull the plug on conspiracies to destabilize Pakistan.

Legality of Indian Claim on Kashmir

Following the World War-II, there has been an unremitting resistance by the people of Subcontinent against the ruling British colonial power. Under the swelling pressure of the people of subcontinent, the British Government finally had to announce the partition of the Subcontinent on June 3, 1947. However, the British Parliament formally passed “The Indian Independence Act-1947” on July 17, 1947. As per provision of Article-I of the Independence Act, India was to be partitioned into two Dominions namely “India” and “Pakistan” from 15th day of August 1947.

However, Article 7 of the Indian Independence Act very clearly states that from 15th August 1947, “the suzerainty of His Majesty over the Indian states lapse and with it lapses all treaties and agreements in force at the date of the passing of this Act between His Majesty and the rulers of Indian states”. Consequent upon this, all powers and functions, which were exercisable by the British Government in relation to the Princely States, also ceased.

All agreements of British governments with either rulers or states also lapsed on 15th of August 1947. Since the state of Jammu and Kashmir was a Princely State with a special autonomous status, therefore, it can be very conveniently said that on 15th day of August 1947, the Maharaja Sir Hari Singh was not the permissible ruler of the state of Jammu and Kashmir as all his treaties with British India lapsed on that day.  Once he was not a ruler of the state, he had no right to sign the instrument of accession (if at all he signed that) with the new Indian dominion. This title to the state was granted to him by the British Government (East India Company) under the Treaty of Amritsar  (Kashmir Sale deed) signed on 16 March 1846 and  lapsed on  the appointed day of 15th August 1947.

Besides, on July 25, 1947 in his address to special full meetings of the Chamber of Princes held in New Delhi, Lord Mountbatten categorically told all princes of Princely States that they were practically free to join any one of dominions; India or Pakistan. He however clarified that, while acceding to any dominion they could take into account geographical contiguity and wishes of the people. In case of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, either of the above factors was favouring state’s accession to Pakistan, but Maharaja Hari Singh did not accept this basic precondition of accession.

Indian claim that its forces landed Srinagar Airport on October 27, 1947, only after signatures on Instrument of Accession by Maharaja and the Indian government is also fallacious. Indeed, a heavy contingent of Patiala State was involved in fighting against the Kashmiri rebellions in Uri Sector on 18 October 1947, which means that they were very much inside the State`s territory much earlier than October 27, 1947.

On 24 October 1947, Kashmiris formally declared their independence from Dogra Raj and established their own government with the name of Azad (Free) Kashmir Government.  Following this Maharaja Hari Singh sent his deputy Prime Minister Mr. R.L. Batra to New Delhi for Indian military assistance to his Government against those revolted and tribal from NWFP who joined their brethrens against a tyrant rule. He (Batra) met the Indian Prime Minster and other prominent Indian leaders and requested for assistance without making any mention or promise of state’s accession to the Indian Union. The Indian government instead sent Mr. V.P Menon (Indian Secretary of State) to Kashmir to assess the situation on the spot by himself on 25 October 1947.

After assessing, the situation in Kashmir Mr. V.P Menon flew back to New Delhi on 26 October 1947, together with Kashmiri Prime Minster Mr. Mahajan, who met top Indian leadership, seeking military assistance. He was refused to get that until state’s formal accession with India.  On this Kashmiri Premier threatened the Indian leadership that if immediate military assistance was not granted, he would go to Lahore for negotiations with Pakistani leadership over the future status of the state. In a parallel development, Sheikh Abdullah met Indian Premier, Jawaharlal Nehru, on the same day, October 26, 1947, who agreed to despatch military assistance to the Kashmir government.

As stated by Mahajan, the Kashmiri Prime Minister, that V.P. Menon accompanied him to convince Hari Singh for accession of the State with India on 27 October 1947.  Under the compulsion, Hari Singh signed the instrument of accession on the same day i.e. 27 October 1947, which was later taken to Lord Mountbatten (Indian Governor General), who also signed that on the same day (27 October), which was practically difficult.   V.P. Menon, however, states that all these formalities of signatures were completed on 26 October 1947, which is impracticable. This version, however, seems concocted as even contradicted by pro Indian Kashmiri Premier.  Both however are unanimous on one point that Indian state forces landed at Srinagar airfield in the morning of 27 October 1947 and a battalion of Patiala State received them there, which was already there.

In his travel account, Kashmiri Prime Minister Mahajan has described that he had refused to return to Kashmir and hand over powers to Sheikh Abdullah until Srinagar airfield had been physically taken over by the Indian forces. This creates doubt as to whether Mahajan and V.P Menon even went to the State (Jammu) for getting the signatures of Maharaja Hari Singh on the Instrument of Accession before 27 October 1947. This is further confirmed by variation in the statements of V.P. Menon and Mr. Mahajan (Kashmiri Prime Minister) regarding their travel to Kashmir either on 26 or on 27 October 1947 for getting the signatures of Maharaja Hari Singh.

However, whatever be the case the factual position is that; Maharaja Hari Singh was not in favour of State’s accession to Indian Union therefore, he only requested the Indian government for military assistance without any pre-condition of accession. Indeed, the accession documents and letters to Lord Mountbatten were initiated through the Joint efforts of V.P Menon and pro India Kashmiri Premier Mahajan, as wished by Indian Government and Hari Singh was forced to sign it on the evening of 27 October 1947 or thereafter. Whereas, Indian forces landed on Srinagar airport on the early hours of 27 October 1947. The time calculation of Mr. V.P Menon’s (Indian Secretary of State) visit  to Srinagar, Delhi, Jammu and vice  versa does not fit in with the concocted story of the signing of the  Instrument  of Accession.

Even if there is an instrument of accession between Maharaja Hari Singh and Indian government, it provides a number of safeguards to the state’s sovereignty, e.g. Clause 7 of the instrument says, “Nothing in this instrument shall be deemed to commit me in any way to acceptance of any future constitution of India …”.  Whereas, Clause 8 of the Instruments says,  “Nothing in this Instrument affects the continuance of my sovereignty in and over this state…….”.

Supposedly, the all instrument of  accession was signed by the Maharaja and Indian government, it was clearly mentioned in his reply to Maharaja’s letter by Lord Mountbatten that after the restoration of law and order in the State of Jammu and Kashmir and the expulsion of the raiders,  its future will be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the State. The same stance was taken by UNO in its over 23 resolutions, passed from time to time. Besides, over the years, Indian leadership had been reiterating their commitments to Kashmiris, Government of Pakistan and to the world community that after the restoration of peace in the state, its future would be decided as per the wishes of the people of Jammu and Kashmir through UN mandated plebiscite. However, with the passage of time India refused to fulfil her commitments/obligations, which means she had ill designs right from the very beginning.  Nevertheless, implementation of these resolutions and the fulfilment of Indian commitments is still awaited.

Another significant fact is that, had there been any accession treaty between the state of Jammu and Kashmir and the Indian government, why it could not be published in the Indian White Paper of 1948? This has left a great disbelief regarding the conclusion of any such agreement. Yet another very serious reservation arises, had Kashmir been part of the Indian Union, why it was given a special status under the provision of internal autonomy through Article 370 of the Indian constitution? It is momentous to mention that the Indian government did not accord a similar status to any other state under this provision. Indeed, out of 560 Princely states, over five hundred joined India, but none was accorded this special status.

Through this status and a number of commitments, India kept luring in Kashmiri masses to become its part. Upon failure of winning their commiserations, India forced its way, through a fake assembly resolution in mid 1950s and thereafter started calling the state as its integral part. United Nations, however, through its resolution, No.2017 of 30 March 1951 and S.3779 of January 24, 1957, made it absolutely clear that; any action which Kashmir Constituent Assembly may have taken or might attempt to take to determine the future shape of state or any of its part would not constitute the disposition of the state and that election  of State’s Constituent  Assembly cannot be a substitute for plebiscite. Thus, this act of India was a blatant violation of the UNSC resolutions that India had accepted too.

Inaccuracy of Indian claim of accession can be judged from the top-secret letter addressed to British Government by Mr Alexander Symon, UK High Commissioner to India. In this letter, he briefly described the events until 4.00 P.M on October 1947, as; ten Indian aircrafts loaded with arms and troops were despatched to Kashmir from New Delhi on the morning of 27 October 1947. Until 4 P.M of 27 October 1947, Mr V.P. Menon has not reported from Jammu, which mean accession documents were either not signed or signed by Hari Singh on 27 October 1947, and there were only rumours of Kashmir accession to Indian Union without any confirmation.

Indian antagonistic approach can be imagined from the fact that Kashmiri Administration had requested for a Standstill Agreement with both India and Pakistan. Pakistan, however, accepted this offer but India owing to its pre-planned evil designs did not accept it. Instead of accepting it, India started interference in state’s affair through leaders like Sheikh Abdullah. Finally, they paved the way for illegal interference in the state’s affair through military invasion by her forces in October 1947.

From July to October 1947, with the connivance of Indian leaders like Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Patel, and V.P Menon, three Kashmiri Prime Ministers were changed one after the other. Pandit Kak, the State’s Prime Minister, was indeed favouring state’s accession to Pakistan or to keep it independent. He was a strong opponent of states accession to India, in spite of being a Hindu Pandit.  Mahajan, who replaced Pandit Kak as new Prime Minister was a non-Kashmiri. He was a Judge of East Punjab High Court and has been the member of Radcliff Award, and hence a party to giving away the Muslim majority areas of Gurdaspur to India. He was very close to the top Indian leadership. To get him appointed as a Prime Minister of the state was through a planned strategy to force Maharaja from all around for surrendering to Indian Union.

In the light of the above-mentioned facts it can be very conveniently said that the Indian claim over the state of Jammu and Kashmir is completely illegitimate and unsubstantiated. India is negating its own commitment with Kashmiris, Pakistan and world community. Indian leadership should realize this and adopt a realistic approach for the solution of this outstanding issue as a goodwill gesture. Let UNO settle it under its auspices through plebiscite as per its resolutions.

Dr. R M Khan