Posted on 11/27/2008 10:10:33 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
An interesting article by Alan Cowell and Mark McDonald in today's New York Times reveals an inconvenient truth about analysts who study terrorism: they often have wildly divergent views about the same events.
Christine Fair, senior political scientist and a South Asia expert at the RAND Corporation, was careful to say that the identity of the terrorists could not yet be known. But she insisted the style of the attacks and the targets in Mumbai suggested the militants were likely to be Indian Muslims and not linked to Al Qaeda or Lashkar-e-Taiba, another violent South Asian terrorist group.
There’s absolutely nothing Al Qaeda-like about it,” she said of the attack. "Did you see any suicide bombers? And there are no fingerprints of Lashkar. They don’t do hostage-taking and they don’t do grenades." By contrast, Mr. Gohel in London said "the fingerprints point to an Islamic Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group."
Fair goes on to make the point that India has a lot of angry Muslims of its own, and has a history of telling the world, "Our Muslims have not been radicalized."
I would point out that the two main competing theories -- a domestic group and outside involvement -- are not mutually exclusive. Extremist groups have been known to share logistical networks (for safehouses, weapons procurement, etc.), and there aren't always bright lines between them. So, it could be that domestic perpetrators of the attack conceived and executed the idea, but operatives turned to Lashkar-e-Taiba or some other group for logistical help and expertise.
UPDATE: Here's a pretty strong clue that points to Kashmir:
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.foreignpolicy.com ...
Let me go out on a limb here and suggest that these guys have connections to the pirate groups in Somalia ~ they take hostages and they toss grenades, etc.
In the end they demand ransom.
Somebody screwed this one up Fur Shur ~
Halloween is pretty far away and I haven’t chosen a costume yet, but I’m not currently planning on being the Mumbai attacks.
The common denominator is Islam
Who cares which branch of the evil was responsible. At the core, it’s the untermensch of Islam.
The Amish are being the attacks!
... plus boats!
I have missed out on some world news. I only knew of Bombay but hadn't heard of Mumbai (my copy of World Almanac also failed to list it among cities). While the TV is all about Mumbai, my newspaper today calls it Bombay.
Mumbai Terror attacks: Urban Jihad comes to India
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/11/mumbai_terror_attacks_urban_ji.php
Walid Phares
As we write this short early assessment of the Terror attacks in Mumbai, events are still unforlding in the financial capital of the sub Indian region. Counter Terrorism units are battling armed elements inside several buildings including the Taj Hotel where hostages have been seized, including foreigners. My first round of monitoring included a discussion with our colleague Animesh Roul who has also posted a report on CTB. I must credit a number of facts and assumptions to him including the projection that the perpetrators -although calling themselves Deccan Mujahideen- are in fact members or trained by Lashkar e Toiba/SIMI (who according to Animesh Roul now call themselves Indian Mujahideen). Here is the condensed report I discussed on Fox News, the BBC, Russia Today TV and other international outlets.
Type of Operation
According to sources in Mumbai, armed groups and individuals have attacked at least ten (if not more) targets inside the city including the Taj Hotel, Oberoi Hotel, a railway Station, the Leopold Café and other locations. More shooting incidents have been also reported at the Trident hotel, a hospital and a highway leading to the airport and Assembly Hall. The terrorists fired indiscriminately against civilians, security elements, lobbed grenades, and killed Counter Terrorism officials. At this writing sources are reporting more than 102 deaths, amd hundreds wounded, in addition to hostage taking. Indian security sources confirmed the use of AK-47s, small arms, grenade, etc. This type of operation, involving a number of small groups and individuals “deployed” across several avenues, In my book Future Jihad I coined these types of forthcoming strikes as “urban Jihad” (Chapter 13). Instead of bombers and suicide bombers, the command sends “Jihadi infantry.” The tactical goal of these actions is to engage in different types of missions: random kilings, chaos, killing of security officers and hostage taking.
Design of the operations
In our estimate, this attack is a “complex” type, where small operations are aimed at creating chaos and triggering security deployment in many areas, while more precise operations could target higher targets such as hostage taking or similar situation. We will probably know more when the dust will settle.
Perpetrators
In view of the historical context, precedents and latest analysis, the most likely groups that may be behind these attacks are the Lashkar e Toiba/SIMI (they now call themselves Indian Mujahideen). These groups are Jihadists, have links to the other organizations in Kashmir but also inside Pakistan with pro-Taliban elements and eventually Al Qaeda. The ideological identification is most likely Jihadist although the group almost surely will issue a more than one release to claim the attack and put it in context.
According to Indian sources this is an operation of a very new type in India. The “emirs” have sent these armed elements in their 20s to strike at Indian psyche. One goal is to sink the Pakistani-Indian rapprochement. In Islamabad, the new Government is engaged in operations against the big Jihadi boys ojn the north western frontier. It is quite possible that the Mumbai attacks aim at triggering tensions between the two old foes so that pressure would be released against the radicals in Pakistan. In any event, this is a large Jihadi operation against one of the emerging economies and the largest democraciy n Asia. The goal is to target India as a power engaged in the War on Terror but also to further destabilize the region, including Pakistan and its neighbor Afghanistan.”
************
Dr Walid Phares is the Director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
Don’t count on it. George Soros and his crowd aren’t particularly religious. They’ve been known to get involved in all sorts of strange investment opportunities.
That's why Indo-English has a strong preference for progressive tenses: present progressive vs. present tense, and so on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.