STATE TERRORISM: IT HAPPENS IN REALITY!!!

Mumbai mayhem and The unseen hands of modern day spies......Ameen Izzadeen


However loathsome and abominable terrorism is in civilized society, it does not operate in a vacuum. While terrorism is a manifestation of individual or group frustration against what the perpetrator of terrorism sees as injustice, it is also a political tool in the hands of non-terrorist actors, namely the states, to achieve a political end.
Not many analysts have studied this aspect of terrorism, though the topic "state terrorism" is extensively dealt with in the discipline of international relations. Some may insist that states do not participate directly or indirectly in acts carried out by mercenary terrorists or by state intelligence operatives. But in reality, it happens. It happens in Iraq. Remember the capture of two British SAS operatives clad in traditional Arab clothes in Basra in 2005 – with explosives and remote control devices?

Today's murky world of intelligence is a labyrinth of plots within plots. It is no longer the world of Ian Fleming who fascinated his readers with his legendary hero, James Bond. Today's spy has outgrown the days of the double agent. He is a multiple agent. There is also the zero agent, who does not know he or she is being manipulated and handled by one spy agency or another. Many of the so-called terrorists or terror groups with Islamic labels fit into this category.

The knowledge the public has of the world of modern day spies is limited. They probably know that a state's intelligence arm, which acts as the eyes and ears of the state, executes intelligence and counterintelligence operations. But beyond this understanding, citizens – in some cases, even presidents and prime ministers – are in the dark as to what the state intelligence arm does. With their limited knowledge they cannot comprehend covert actions which involve highly secretive and conspiratorial operations designed to serve important but often unadmitted policy objectives.

However, keen students of international politics see a secret motive behind every action of a state and every utterance of state leaders. Their cynicism has only increased since the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States. More than seven years have passed since the terror attack on the iconic symbol of US economic power – the World Trade Centre – and the Pentagon, which signifies the US military power. But hundreds of questions still remain unanswered. The official 9/11 commission report, released in July 2004, also failed to answer them, prompting allegations of government complicity in the attacks. Those who slammed the report and raised doubts were not just those who, at the drop of a hat, would subscribe to a conspiracy theory. They were well respected public officials, professors, aviation professionals, architects and structural engineers.

The full picture of the 9/11 did emerge only later, when the George W. Bush administration – a pawn in the hands of the neoconservative cabal which has infiltrated the US intelligence agencies – attacked Afghanistan and later Iraq. General Leonid Ivashov, who was the Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces when the 9/11 attacks occurred, in an article posted on rense.com, says there's no such thing as international terrorism and that the September 11 attacks were the result of a set-up. "What we are seeing is a manipulation by the big powers; this terrorism would not exist without them."

He goes on to say that what analysts describe as "International terrorism" is a new weapon in today's type of war. And with the complicity of biased media, it becomes the manager of global processes, he adds.

But many people do not view international terrorism through Ivashov's prism, though the 9/11 incidents teach an important lesson: An incident, especially a terror attack, should be viewed not merely by what is evident on the surface but also by the events that follow it and the extent to which a state benefits by achieving its national interest goals.

It is in this context, a cynic would view last week's Mumbai terror attacks. Going by the evidence on the surface and the statements made by Indian officials, none can dispute that it was an attack carried out by ruthless terrorists. But events that are unfolding after the attacks show that the incident was more a conspiracy against Pakistan than India. Those who sent the terrorists to attack Mumbai targets, including the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel – an iconic symbol of India's colonial past and a living monument to its growing capitalist power – were not so naïve as not to know that their action would put Pakistan's head on the chopping block. The attack has, no doubt, pushed Pakistan further into the abyss, from which the new government of President Asif Ali Zardari is trying to come out after years of military rule, in spite of many challenges in the form of a crippling economic crisis and a terrorism problem on its border with Afghanistan.

It is unfair to blame Pakistan for the Mumbai attacks. The Bush administration did not blame Saudi Arabia when 15 of the 19 hijackers who carried out the 9/11 attacks turned out to be Saudis. India did not blame Sri Lanka when a Tamil Tiger suicide bomber killed Rajiv Gandhi. So why blame Pakistan, even if one says that the attacks were carried out by the banned Pakistani jihadi outfit Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LeT).

Some may say that in Pakistan the military is a state within state and therefore the government is not privy to secret operations of the military or the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan's spy agency. They may charge that the ISI is maintaining some links with elements in the LeT or al-Qaeda for strategic purposes. But those who make such allegations must assess Pakistan's culpability in the Mumbai attack by the gains. There are hardly any. Besides, the so-called Pakistani jihadists, members of the LeT, Jaish-e-Muhammad and Tehrik-e-Taleban are at war with the ISI, the Pakistani military and the state. The ISI is, therefore, unlikely to execute an operation which would be detrimental to Pakistan's national interest.

There are others who may point a finger at India's own spy arm, the Research and Analysis Wing. They may charge that the RAW knew the attacks were coming but allowed them to come to pass for strategic reasons. Yet others may see a CIA hand in the attacks.

Instead of engaging in a blame game, both India and Pakistan should come together and carry out a joint investigation. Or both these countries should ask the United Nations to appoint a probe commission, similar to the one that is investigating the Rafik Hariri assassination in Lebanon.

The attack has placed India in a strong position. It is earning the same global sympathy which the United States earned in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. The over-emotional Indian media dubbed the Mumbai attacks India's 9/11 – or 27/11. Like the US 9/11, India's 27/11 is also replete with many unanswered questions, which give fodder for conspiracy theorists, many of whose explanations are not totally unreasonable.

Armed with global sympathy, India is now in a better position to take draconian measures to fight the so-called war on terror within India. The fear of the international human rights community is that India may go the way the Bush administration went – with Patriotic Acts, torture, Guantanamo Bay, etc. Those who will be worst hit by such measures will be the people of Indian-administered Kashmir – the flashpoint for the subcontinent tension.
courtesy...dailymirror.lk