Fifth column: Missing the nuance

The recently-concluded ninth Brics summit held in Xiamen, China was deemed as a great diplomatic success by Indian commentators as the joint communique issued at the end of the summit included the names of the two pro-Kashmiri militant groups – the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) – that have been described as terrorist organisations by the UN and several Western nations, including America following the 9/11 attacks.

Both these militant outfits have been accused of carrying out high-profile terrorist attacks on Indian soil, including the attack on the Indian parliament in December 2001. The attack led to the Indian government mobilising thousands of its troops along the border with Pakistan – the largest troop movement in nearly two decades.

This forced Pakistan to retaliate with its own troop movement amid matching the Indian war rhetoric with own war cries. It was only after the intense pressure from the US, which feared its own war on terror was losing focus, that India had to back down as Pakistan was forced to make public promises to crack down on the extremists that had grown into a formidable force following decades of CIA funding and encouragement.

The inclusion of the LeT and the JeM in the Brics declaration is a stark departure from the previous year when the Chinese refused to oblige India at last year’s summit in Goa when the host government lobbied to get the names of these organisations included in the text of the final summit declaration. Therefore, this year’s declaration does offer some sort of consolation for India.

But seeing it beyond that would mean stretching the realm of diplomacy into a cosmic territory. The declaration comes at a time when ‘Hindu terrorism’ is growing out-of-bounds in India, with open official endorsement. In addition, the Indian authorities, including no less than the current prime minister, have openly and publicly promised to support terrorism in Balochistan and elsewhere as a means to break Pakistan – a tactic that was successfully employed in 1971 and led to the creation of Bangladesh.

It is interesting to note that the Brics declaration expanded the terror list to include the Hizbut Tahrir (HT), an influential extremist group that started in the UK, with reports suggesting it received active support from the British security establishment. The inclusion of the HT in the list signifies that perhaps the list was a last-minute entry into the declaration rather than a sustained diplomatic move as the Indian media and some officials have claimed. This has certainly diminished the value and appeal of the declaration for serious observers.

In addition, the inclusion of the Taliban sounds like someone at the Brics is trying to recreate the post-9/11 scenario where the US ruled the world as per its wishes without any credible challenge. Despite the American failures in the region, aided by its consistently inconsistent policies, the Taliban remain an important political force and believe that they are waging a just war against foreign occupation. They also enjoy public support in swaths of rural Afghanistan. The very UN that had declared them terrorists under intense US pressure has since then de-notified them and supported efforts to rope them in along with other actors in support of a negotiated settlement of the Afghan war.

There is no doubt that ‘Islamist’ militancy, which was promoted during the Afghan jihad as a panacea to all the ills that Pakistan and the Muslim Ummah was confronted with, had seeped deep into the body politic of Pakistan with devastating consequences. The 9/11 tragedy did offer Pakistan a chance to correct the anomaly – interestingly under US pressure that was responsible for the mess in the first place.

However, the policy shift had many massive challenges, ranging from the resource crunch to the lack of counter-insurgency expertise as well as rudimentary intelligence-gathering mechanisms. However, over the past four or five years – as the Pakistani security forces have gained experience and uncoupled their anti-terror operations from the US tutelage – they have made impressive gains. They have done this by bringing people relief in the once free-for-all and unruly Fata, Balochistan and Karachi and the Punjabi heartland where they have largely immobilised sectarian terror groups like the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi.

Interestingly, most of these terror groups are linked to the Indian intelligence agencies, according to the Pakistani claims. These assertions attained credence following the arrest of Kulbhushan Jhadav, the alleged serving officer with the RAW, India’s premier intelligence agency. Jhadav, who reportedly worked in tandem with the Iranian intelligence to foment terrorism in Pakistan, has made several public confessions about the contours of his mission. This has not only caused deep embarrassment to India but has also dented the Indian narrative on terrorism. The Brics declaration mentions the TTP as a terror group, assuaging some Pakistani concerns. But overall, it has failed to appreciate the nuances despite having a detailed guidance on terrorism.

Like so many ‘good terrorists’ that the US and its European allies continue to fund and support for their strategic reasons, the Pakistani state has also maintained a certain ambiguity on groups like LeT and the JeM. No doubt some organisations like the LeT are quite popular in Kashmir and are seen by many as beacons of hope against the massive Indian military presence. But this expectation outweighs the risks associated with continued militancy in the region. There is overwhelming empirical evidence to suggest that any reliance on non-state actors is a strategic blunder. Therefore, it is time to end this ambiguity.

Postscript: The Hizbul Mujahideen, the largest pro-freedom Kashmiri resistance group fighting the Indian military, is not on the list. That offers some comfort to Kashmiri activists as the Hizb remains the only organic resistance movement. Although the Indian authorities continue to obliterate the political aspirations of the Kashmiri people and discourage all attempts to find a peaceful solution, the Hizb should invest in transforming itself into a credible political force that can offer better and long-term prospects for the Kashmiri struggle rather than hinging everything on resistance militancy.

Twitter: @murtaza_shibli