Mumbai Terror Could Cascade Across Region

Mumbai Terror Could Cascade Across Region

Mumbai Terror Could Cascade Across Region

The bloody terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India, have the potential to cascade across the region. If Pakistan’s army and intelligence service, which have long supported anti-India terrorist groups, are deemed responsible for the attacks, the results could be catastrophic.

In 2001, an attack on the Indian parliament, carried out by Pakistan-based Islamist terrorists, brought the two countries to the brink of nuclear war.

This time, even if it doesn’t go that far, the results could be far deadlier than the attacks themselves, which killed more than a hundred people. The assault could upend the peace process now underway between Pakistan and India. That, in turn, would strengthen the hand of Pakistan’s military establishment, which is already brooding about the new civilian government that replaced President Musharraf, the army dictator. And the army could use the renewed tension to redouble its alliance with radical-right, anti-Indian Muslim groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan. By doing so, the idea of negotiations between various Islamists components of the Taliban movement, on one hand, and the civilian governments of President Karzai in Afghanistan and President Zardari in Pakistan, on the other, might be put on indefinite hold.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

The bloody terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India, have the potential to cascade across the region. If Pakistan’s army and intelligence service, which have long supported anti-India terrorist groups, are deemed responsible for the attacks, the results could be catastrophic.

In 2001, an attack on the Indian parliament, carried out by Pakistan-based Islamist terrorists, brought the two countries to the brink of nuclear war.

This time, even if it doesn’t go that far, the results could be far deadlier than the attacks themselves, which killed more than a hundred people. The assault could upend the peace process now underway between Pakistan and India. That, in turn, would strengthen the hand of Pakistan’s military establishment, which is already brooding about the new civilian government that replaced President Musharraf, the army dictator. And the army could use the renewed tension to redouble its alliance with radical-right, anti-Indian Muslim groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan. By doing so, the idea of negotiations between various Islamists components of the Taliban movement, on one hand, and the civilian governments of President Karzai in Afghanistan and President Zardari in Pakistan, on the other, might be put on indefinite hold.

It isn’t completely clear yet who was responsible for the Mumbai attacks, but it seems almost certain that the terrorists had professional help, and that they have ties — or once did — to the ISI, Pakistan’s intelligence service. The ISI chief, newly installed, is going to visit India to assist in the investigation, which suggests that the attackers, if they once had ISI ties, no longer do. But India’s prime minister has blamed elements “based outside the country,” and India’s foreign minister said “some elements in Pakistan are responsible.”

Bruce Riedel, a former National Security Council expert on South Asia, who led Barack Obama’s advisory task force on Pakistan, has written how the 2001 attack on the Indian parliament may have been carried out by ISI-connected Kashmiri terrorists. The attack, he said, protected Osama bin Laden, then under assault by US forces invading Afghanistan Bin laden was scuttling over the Afghan-Pakistan border, and Pakistan’s forces weren’t there to seal the border, despite Musharraf’s pledge to the Bush administration to help nab Al Qaeda leaders. “By diverting Pakistan’s army to the east, to the border with India for the next year, the Parliament attack helped save Al Qaeda,” wrote Riedel.

The attacks could vastly complicated the problem that Obama will face in Afghanistan, where US and NATO forces are losing the war, and in Pakistan, where Islamist militants have seized control of large areas in that country’s northwest region. Obama is already committed to an escalation of the Afghan war, and if the prospects for negotiations recede, he may be tempted to send even more US forces into that quagmire.

We cannot back down

We now confront a second Trump presidency.

There’s not a moment to lose. We must harness our fears, our grief, and yes, our anger, to resist the dangerous policies Donald Trump will unleash on our country. We rededicate ourselves to our role as journalists and writers of principle and conscience.

Today, we also steel ourselves for the fight ahead. It will demand a fearless spirit, an informed mind, wise analysis, and humane resistance. We face the enactment of Project 2025, a far-right supreme court, political authoritarianism, increasing inequality and record homelessness, a looming climate crisis, and conflicts abroad. The Nation will expose and propose, nurture investigative reporting, and stand together as a community to keep hope and possibility alive. The Nation’s work will continue—as it has in good and not-so-good times—to develop alternative ideas and visions, to deepen our mission of truth-telling and deep reporting, and to further solidarity in a nation divided.

Armed with a remarkable 160 years of bold, independent journalism, our mandate today remains the same as when abolitionists first founded The Nation—to uphold the principles of democracy and freedom, serve as a beacon through the darkest days of resistance, and to envision and struggle for a brighter future.

The day is dark, the forces arrayed are tenacious, but as the late Nation editorial board member Toni Morrison wrote “No! This is precisely the time when artists go to work. There is no time for despair, no place for self-pity, no need for silence, no room for fear. We speak, we write, we do language. That is how civilizations heal.”

I urge you to stand with The Nation and donate today.

Onwards,

Katrina vanden Heuvel
Editorial Director and Publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x