Big Deal. What's In A Name?

Please read in continuation of TheOmens From The White House

Possibly in response to strong expressions of unhappiness by the Govt. ofIndia over the statement read out by President George Bush on December20, 2001, describing the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) of Pakistan as an extremistgroup based in Kashmir which has been indulging in terrorism against India aswell as Pakistan, the office of the White House Press Secretary made partialamends through a statement on behalf of the President the next day whichsaid as follows:

"Yesterday, at a ceremony marking the 100th day since the September 11 terrorist attacks, I detailed actions the United States Government has taken in response to terrorist attacks here and abroad.

"At the same time, I announced that the U.S. Government had blocked the assets of two more terrorist organizations:

"- Umma Tameer-e-Nau (UTN), an organization that claimed to feed the hungry and needy of Afghanistan but that in fact provided information about nuclear weapons to al-Qaida; and

"- Lashkar-e-Taiba, a stateless sponsor of terrorism that has conducted operations against Indian troops and civilian targets.

"I also condemned the terrorist attacks against the Indian Parliament and the Kashmir Legislature and extended condolences to the Indian Government and the families of the victims.

"These attacks were meant to strike at India's democracy and kill its leaders, but were also intended to undermine Pakistan, harm the rapidly improving U.S.-Pakistan relationship, and to destabilize the global coalition against terrorism.

"I have strongly condemned the attacks. I call upon President Musharraf to take decisive action against Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and other terrorist organizations, their leaders, finances, and activities.

"President Musharraf has condemned the terrorist attacks on the Legislature in Srinagar and on the Indian Parliament. He has said that he would move against those involved in the attacks. As President Musharraf does so, he will have our full support."

Independently, a spokesman of the State Department was reported to havestated as follows:

"We do know these groups have committed terrorist acts and they intend to sabotage efforts at an India-Pakistan reconciliation and to undermine Gen. Musharraf. We know these groups have bases in Pakistan and how they operate."

While thus trying to make partial amends for the initial statement ofDecember 20, which blatantly tried to reflect the Pakistani projection of the LeTas an organisation based in Kashmir with no presence in Pakistan and callingupon the military junta to take action against them and their leaders, the WhiteHouse and the State Department have persisted with their attempts to exoneratePakistan's junta of any responsibility for their acts of terrorism.

From the Indian perspective, the revised formulations have the followingobjectionable and worrisome features:

They project the LeT and the JeM as having their "bases" in Pakistan without underlining the fact that their headquarters and entire logistics and operational infrastructure are located in Pakistan.
They continue to project their activities as directed against India as well as Pakistan. Even the military regime has never made such an allegation against them.

The Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM), formerly known as the Harkat-ul-Ansar. The State Department itself admits in its report for 2000 that the HUM had signed bin Laden's first fatwa of 1998 against the US and Israel.
The JeM. The State Department's 2000 report expresses suspicions about the JEM's links with bin Laden, but does not say so categorically.
The LeT. The State Department has been silent so far on its links with the Al Qaeda.

In October, 1997, the Clinton Administration designated the HUM, then known as the HUA, as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation under a 1996 law passed on the initiative of the Congress after the New York World Trade Centre explosion of February, 1993. The principal objective of that law was to prevent the presence and activities in US territory of foreign terrorist organisations, which pose a threat to US nationals and interests.
On December 20,2001, the Bush Administration ordered the freezing of the assets and accounts of the LeT in US territory, but has not declared it a Foreign Terrorist Organisation, presumably because it has never threatened US nationals and interests.
The position regarding the JeM is confusing. After the US air strikes on Afghanistan started on October 7,2001, there were reports from Washington that the administration was to freeze the assets and accounts of the JeM without designating it as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation. On October 10,2001, Gen. Mohammed Aziz Khan, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, had convened a meeting of the various components of the clandestine Army of Islam constituted during the Afghan War of the 1980s. Representatives of the HUM, the LeT and the JeM were among those who attended this meeting. Thereafter, the JeM changed its name as the Tehrik-al-Furquan (TAF) and nominated Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, of the Binori mosque, Karachi, as the patron-in-chief and Maulana Mazar Shah as the convenor of the TAF. There was no reference to the present position of Maulana Masood Azhar, the founder of the JeM. It is not clear so far whether the US has issued formal orders freezing the assets and accounts of the JeM and, if not, why not. The December 20 statement of Bush did not refer to the JeM, but that of the following day did.

After the anti-US demonstrations in Quetta, Karachi and other places in October, 2001, he placed under house arrest/detention leaders of religious parties/organisations such as the Jamaat-e-Islami, the Jamaat-ul-Ulema Islam, the Tehrik Nifaz-i-Shariat Muhammadi (TNSM) etc, but did not place any restrictions on the movements and activities of the leaders of the HUM, the LeT and the JeM, which are amongst the components of the Army of Islam used against India. If the LeT and the JeM are trying to undermine the Musharraf regime as contended by the Bush Administration, why didn't Musharraf arrest the leaders of those organisations like he arrested the leaders of other religious organisations? Why this special favour only to these organisations?
An estimated 10,000 plus volunteers of the HUM, the LeT, the JeM and the TNSM went to Afghanistan to join in the so-called jehad against the US and the Northern Alliance. When the surviving members returned after the fall of the Taliban, he arrested the TNSM cadres who had never operated against India, but took no action against those of the HUM, the LeT and the JeM, who are involved in terrorism against India.
The HUM figures in the USA's list of Foreign Terrorist Organisations since October, 1997. Despite this, Musharraf has not taken any action against it for four years except to ostensibly freeze its assets and accounts after October 7,2001.
After the US demarche of December 21, all he has done is to similarly freeze the assets and accounts of the LeT without taking any action against its leaders and their activities. The Markaz Dawa Al Irshad, the parent political organisation of the LeT, has changed its name to Jamaat Ud Dawa Pakistan, nominated one Maulana Abdul Wahid Kashmiri as the head of the LeT in replacement of Prof. Hafeez Mohammad Saeed, who continues to be the head of the Jamaat Ud Dawa Pakistan, and has declared that the LeT has been functioning from Kashmir, without mentioning which Kashmir, for the last one month and has no more any presence in Pakistan.

The Bush Administration seems to have convinced itself that it is in the USnational interest for the army to continue in power in Pakistan with Musharrafat the helm. It would not push Musharraf beyond a certain point to actagainst India-centric terrorist organisations lest these organisations threatenhis continuance in power.

(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. ofIndia, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai)