Last month’s terrorist assault in Mumbai targeted not only India’s economy and sense of security; its broader goal was to smash the India-Pakistan detente that has been taking shape since 2004. The attackers did not hide their faces or blow themselves up with suicide jackets. Anonymity was not their goal. They wanted to be identified as defenders of a cause. Unless this cause is fully understood, and its roots revealed across the region, this attack may prove to be the beginning of the unmaking of South Asia.
Regional conflict, involving all of the region’s states and increasing numbers of non-state actors, has produced large numbers of trained fighters waiting for the call to glory. Within both India and Pakistan, economic disparities and a sense of social injustice have created fertile ground for conflict. The use and abuse of religious fervor, whether jihadi or “Hindu fundamentalist,” are striking at the roots of communal harmony across South Asia.
Much of the current trouble can be traced to Afghanistan, whose tragedy could never have remained confined within its designated borders. The dynamics of the region changed when the Afghan freedom fighters of the 1980s were converted into mujahidin through a criminal enterprise in which both the West and the Muslim world happily participated. Pakistan, always insecure about India, became the hub of this transformation. The West thought it had moved on after the fall of the Soviet empire, but the region — and increasingly the global community — continues to pay a heavy price for this unholy project.
The ills of two decades in South Asia can be attributed to the Afghan jihad years: the rise of the Taliban, the dominance of Pakistani-sponsored religious fanatics within the Kashmir freedom movement and the eventual spread of sectarian conflict within Pakistan. In Afghanistan, Pakistan’s military and intelligence agencies sought “strategic depth” against India. Moreover, they wanted payback for India’s role in supporting the revolt in the 1960s and 1970s that led to Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan.
India is not blameless here. It was pursuing a two-pronged strategy — making the argument that all was well in Kashmir (a blatant lie) and supporting ethnic confrontation in Pakistan. Violent intelligence wars between Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence and India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) have become a brutal reality in South Asia.
Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET, “Army of the Pure”), a Pakistan-based militant outfit supporting insurgency on the Indian side of Kashmir, was a product of these years. According to Indian investigators, this group is implicated in the Mumbai attacks. Pakistan’s clampdown on its offices throughout the country essentially confirms this conclusion, though Pakistan is publicly demanding more evidence.
LET was the armed wing of an Ahle Hadith organization, a South Asian version of Saudi-style fundamentalism, whose purpose was to hit Indian forces in Kashmir. Though the group was banned by former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf after the terrorist attacks on the US of Sept. 11, 2001, some of its operators went underground and others joined Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD, “Party of Proselytizing”) — an organization that runs religious educational centers and charities.
Given its established linkages with Pakistan’s intelligence outfits, the group was never targeted strongly. In fact, it was even involved in rescue operations on the Pakistani side of Kashmir after the devastating 2005 earthquake there.
What Pakistan’s military strategists failed to realize was that groups like LET and JUD had local agendas as well — converting Pakistan into a theocracy. Hafiz Saeed, the founder of LET and currently the head of JUD, once proudly argued that: “We believe in the clash of civilizations, and our jihad will continue until Islam becomes the dominant religion.”
JUD, along with many other like-minded groups, radicalized thousands of young Pakistanis. Through its Web and print publications, it also routinely challenged the teachings of the Sufi mystics who originally brought Islam to South Asia by promoting pluralism and love for humanity.
Even while demanding strong action against JUD, India must recognize that Pakistan is itself a victim of terror. Any military confrontation with Pakistan will only empower Pakistani radicals. India also needs to look inward, as anti-Muslim violence in Gujarat and the activities of Hindu fundamentalist groups have potentially created recruitment opportunities for Muslim extremists within India. An amicable resolution of the Kashmir conflict will only help improve peace prospects in South Asia.
For Pakistan, a concerted and sustained effort against all extremist groups operating in the country is necessary. Militants of all stripes must be decommissioned completely and transparently. Equally important for Pakistan is to expand and reform its public education system and improve basic services so that radical groups cannot lure young people into their educational and welfare networks. Otherwise, the status quo can gravely threaten Pakistan’s — and South Asia’s — future.
Hassan Abbas is a fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and Institute for Policy and Understanding.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs