Posted on 09/28/2003 1:31:23 PM PDT by Aaron_A
Pervez Musharraf leads a terrorist state, says DAVID VAN PRAAGH. We forget that at our soldiers' peril.
Today, Canada has the distinction of welcoming the leader of what, by any fair reading of mounting evidence, is a state supporting terrorism. That is disturbing to say the least. But Canadians may soon be among the victims of this terrorism.
Canada is not alone in playing host to President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan. General Musharraf also will visit the United Nations, where Pakistan is a member of the Security Council, and he will address the UN General Assembly. He has been an honoured guest of President George W. Bush in the United States.
This is a critical time in which the civilized world, if it is to win the war or terrorism, needs to be honest and realistic in identifying and confronting the enemy. Pakistan presents a major peril, not only because it supports terrorism on two fronts. It is also a nuclear-weapons state that has illegally exported nuclear technology to North Korea and neighbouring Iran. Astonishingly, it nevertheless poses, and is accepted, as an ally of the forces fighting terrorism.
Despite Gen. Musharraf's promises to President Bush to cease backing terrorism in India's share of the disputed state of Kashmir and in India itself, Pakistan's army, through its Inter-Services Intelligence branch, has never stopped during the past 15 years. In recent weeks it has become clear that the ISI has revived a second terrorist front in a way that almost certainly will lead to casualties among Canadian troops in Afghanistan.
After the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan at the end of the 1980s, the Pakistani military created, armed and commanded the benighted Islamic extremists called the Taliban, who took over most of Afghanistan by 1996. Under the Taliban, the country became the headquarters of al-Qaeda, the international terrorist movement headed by Osama bin Laden.
With the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, Pakistan had little choice but to declare itself an ally of Washington, especially because India had immediately made clear that New Delhi was Washington's strategic ally. But ISI support of the Taliban continued.
Taliban and al-Qaeda gunmen continued to cross the rugged Pakistan-Afghanistan border both ways. In all likelihood, Osama bin Laden lives under ISI protection on one side or the other of the border. A new phase of the struggle for Afghanistan has started, however, with attacks by well-armed, organized Taliban units of as many as several hundred men.
Just as the Taliban's original victory would not have been possible without direct Pakistani assistance, it's highly unlikely the recent assaults could have been launched without a direct ISI role. So far, U.S. troops and a limited number of new Afghan troops have taken on the new Taliban invaders. But the UN-mandated, NATO-commanded international stabilization force, with its large Canadian contingent, is beginning to move out of the Kabul area in order to secure remote provinces. It's inevitable that Pakistan-backed Taliban invaders will engage Canadian troops.
Apart from terrorist campaigns designed to persuade India to give up the Vale of Kashmir and to put Taliban fanatics back in control in Afghanistan, Pakistan, with its nuclear weapons, has the potential of contributing to much wider destabilization.
Its nuclear bomb is a Chinese bomb, and it has an estimated one dozen to two dozen of them. But Pakistan also acquired nuclear components illegally, and this led the United States to refuse to deliver to it some 28 F-16 fighter planes. Moreover, Western officials have confirmed that Islamabad transferred Chinese nuclear-weapons technology to both Iran and North Korea -- in the latter case, in exchange for missiles with which Pakistan's generals targeted Indian cities. Gen. Musharraf threatened to use these nuclear-tipped missiles in 2002.
Western reticence to confront Pakistan grows out of fear that Islamic extremists, either clerics or generals who already control its nukes, will deploy or even use them if they oust Gen. Musharraf. But the Pakistani leader is clearly playing a double game. Mr. Bush's refusal to mediate on the Kashmir issue or provide the F-16s as payment for Pakistan's limited co-operation after 9/11, or even guarantee increased economic aid without an end to terrorism, may well have caused him to step up terrorism instead in Afghanistan and Kashmir.
The best thing that Prime Minister Jean Chrétien can do is inform Gen. Musharraf that Canada has an important stake in what happens in Afghanistan and in the war against terrorism in general. Considering the imminent dangers, it would be better if he did this publicly as well as privately. The worst thing Mr. Chrétien can do is accept an expected Musharraf lecture about Western mistreatment of Muslims, and leave the impression that Pakistan does not present a big problem. That is probably more likely, and it would make a bad situation worse.
Typical leftist thinking.
Cry me a river, Canadians. You only now seem to give a damn since your own may actually be called to defend the West in the War on Terror. You people can't even help by tightening your immigration rules. You make US borders look like the Berlin Wall in comparision. Until, that is, your friendly immigrated terrorists cross our northern border and wreak havoc on us.
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.