Posted on 03/13/2010 8:57:34 AM PST by James C. Bennett
WASHINGTON: In a remark that further implicates Pakistan's domineering military in charges of supporting terrorism against India, a US lawmaker has alleged that it may be paying compensation to families of terrorists who attacked Mumbai on 26/11.
The stunning charge came from Congressman Gary Ackerman in course of a hearing he convened on the Lashkar-e-Taiba in his capacity if chairman of a House sub-panel on South Asia on Thursday. "There is, in fact, no reason to doubt that Pakistan's military is likely paying compensation to the families of the terrorists killed in the Mumbai attacks," Ackerman said in his prepared remarks at the start of the hearing.
The lawmaker did not elaborate on the charge against the Pakistani military, which if true would be extremely provocative for India at a time New Delhi is pressing Pakistan to take action against masterminds of 9/11. His office had not returned calls at the time of writing. Nine of the ten Pakistani fidayeen (suicidal) terrorists who attacked Mumbai landmarks eventually died after killing 173 people. A lone captured survivor Ajmal Kasab, is now on trial in Mumbai, largely disowned by Pakistan.
Ackerman’s remark about the Pakistani military’s complicity in terrorism was just one of several at the hearing by lawmakers and expert witnesses that repeatedly implicated country’s army and intelligence agencies and barely stopped short of calling Pakistan a terrorist state. The only token qualification to such characterization came from Shuja Nawaz, a Pakistani-American witness from Atlantic Council, who agreed that LeT was a ''Frankenstein's monster created for the purpose of assisting the Kashmiri freedom movement'' but insisted it ''ended up... with an independent agenda.''
"Successive civil and military leaders of Pakistan supported the movement as a strategic asset to counter a powerful India... by waging a war of "a thousand cuts"' Nawaz, who is the brother of a former Pakistan Army chief Asif Nawaz Janjua conceded, while contending that ''Over time, however, the sponsored organization took a life of its own.''
Broadly expressing dismay over the Obama administration’s lackadaisical approach to the Pakistani military’s use of terrorism, the hearing also challenged the notion that the Kashmir issue was the root cause of the problem between India and Pakistan, a proposition advanced only by Congressman Dan Burton, a long-time supporter of Pakistan. Congressman Ackerman described the idea that resolving the Kashmir issue will end terrorism as ''dangerous nonsense.''
''The LeT's true goal is not Kashmir, it is India. And the LeT is not shy about announcing that its intention is to establish an Islamic state in all South Asia,'' Ackerman said. The witnesses broadly agreed with this assessment.
"There is no doubt in my mind that we have to find ways to resolve the issues relating to Kashmir. But I think resolving Kashmir is not going to solve the problems relating to LeT," Ashley Tellis, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said.
"The murder and mayhem is being conducted by groups that have absolutely no connections to Kashmir. To my mind that is story, the fact that this is a group that has operations in 21 countries, that has an ideology that is completely anti-western, that is opposed to modernity and secularism and all the kinds of values that we take for granted. This group is not going to be satisfied by dealing with the issue of Kashmir," he added.
Heritage’s Lisa Curtis challenged Congressman Dan Burton’s proposition the terrorism problem would not be solved without resolving the future of Kashmir through a plebiscite, saying in her travels to the region she hasn’t heard any support for the idea of a plebiscite and even Gen.Musharraf had dropped the demand in favor of more forward-looking solutions.
Certainly it’s not something to encourage [terrorism]... but, I’d have to say we Americans would need to abolish social security before we could really condemn this. (Remember, the family-members are not the ones who did the deed; American law is clearly based on provable actions to determine culpibility, not on ‘intent’ or ‘capability.’)
I don’t think this is the equivalent of social security, here.
Jihadis have been known to pay families monetary compensation to coerce them to “donate” their wards for terrorist purposes.
It’s acceptable to them, because their religion justifies it, per say.
The seriousness here, is that the Pakistani military establishment is doing it. Not surprising to those aware of Pakistan, however.
Pakistan's domineering military... may be paying compensation to families of terrorists who attacked Mumbai on 26/11Thanks James C. Bennett.
*ping*
>I don’t think this is the equivalent of social security, here.
Social Security has much lighter requirements for disbursement here; like disability. So, in that regard alone, I can’t really fault them.
>Jihadis have been known to pay families monetary compensation to coerce them to “donate” their wards for terrorist purposes.
Now that is less defensible because it’s basically paying someone to murder. Though if it’s employment (somebody has to sew suicide vests together) it isn’t our business either; weapons manufacturing/supply has [fairly] traditionally been excused from “war crimes” prosecution. Further it would be stupid/dangerous to try to prosecute say the makers of Klanisnakov-style light arms because “they’re commonly used in Africa by warlords.”
>It’s acceptable to them, because their religion justifies it, per say.
That’s more of a social (or even spiritual) issue than a legal one. In the Roman-dominated times of the early church it was legal (and religiously justifiable) to leave babies out in the wilderness to die; the church did not approve of the act and so they took these unwanted babies in and adopted/cared for them. Because of that action on the church the practice virtually died out and orphanages came into existence.
So, my view on that, is that to change their society’s view on the moral acceptability thereof Jesus is needed.
>The seriousness here, is that the Pakistani military establishment is doing it. Not surprising to those aware of Pakistan, however.
I’m not familiar w/ Pakistan at all, except for the Pakistan/India conflicts.
No doubt, with the money we have given the Pakistanis...
I was reading a great story just yesterday out of the Asian Times about India focusing its foreign policy around the USA less as we forge a military relationship with Pakistan in exchange for recognizing them as a World Power. You can see in this OP alone why that worries India, is it any surprise that they are now buying fighter jets from Russia?
Here are some insightful excerpts from “India Shifts a New Direction.”
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LC12Df03.html
“Delhi underestimated that Pakistan is the US’s key non-NATO ally in the war and that implicit in this is Pakistan’s expectation to be recognized by Washington as a regional power. In fact, the US has been harping on a fundamental theme: Pakistan has a choice to make, namely, whether it wants to have a comprehensive partnership with the US and NATO; and if so, that it must cooperate with Washington’s strategies in the region.
The prevailing view in India is that the Pakistani military continues to play it both ways. But they may be in for disillusionment as there strong likelihood is that Pakistani army chief Kiani may have begun to explore the potential of the US offer.
Pakistan estimates that it is closer than at any time before to gaining “strategic depth” in Afghanistan - and this time, Washington may acquiesce. Indeed, the US is encouraging Pakistan-Afghanistan harmony in any way it can. However, Pakistan carefully assesses that the US’s regional strategies have significant implications for its “all-weather friendship” with China, its adversarial ties with India, and its troubled relationship with Iran. The US strategies aim at countering China’s rise, fostering a strategic partnership with India and navigating the standoff with Iran on Washington’s terms”
“But there is a big picture, too. The Indian strategic community overlooked that the US war had a hidden agenda. Simply put, NATO’s enlargement into Central Asia, the US’s containment strategy toward China (and Russia and Iran) and Pakistan’s key role in US regional strategy - all these impact India’s interests. Most important, there is a likelihood of regional hotspots such as North Caucasus, the Ferghana Valley, Xinjiang and Kashmir lighting up.”
“In retrospect, Delhi’s hare-brained idea of a US-led “quadripartite alliance” against China, the “Tibet card”, the dilution of a 2003 strategic understanding with Iran, neglect of the traditional friendship with Russia, the lukewarm attitude toward the SCO, exaggerated notions within the establishment regarding the US-India strategic partnership as an alternative to an independent foreign policy and diversified external relationships - all these appear now like dreadful pantomimes out of India’s foreign policy chronicle of recent years that Delhi would rather not think about.”
With all that said, this seems to be necessary sacrifice at the moment and we should give the Pakistanis credit for fighting against the Taliban in the West. They will also do a great deal in the future to help build up the Afghan forces, as once again India’s influence is usurped and they see a drawback in their forces.
As NATO secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen stated, “I would like to encourage Muslim countries to engage in Afghanistan ... Muslim countries have valuable cultural and religious awareness and expertise to bear”.
I am actually aghast at the thought of expressing servitude toward theocracies- much less, Islamic theocracies.
I fail to see why it is a bad idea to dismantle such primitive subcultures to the point that they can see the folly of their ways, or, if it comes to that, destroy them to the extent that they can only indulge in their barbarism without affecting anyone beyond the borders of their hell-holes.
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.