The Indian Tsunami of Terror
Ahmed Hany
December 28, 2008
All of a sudden, nine attacks at different sites in Mumbai, the economic capital of the nuclear India, showed that terrorist groups became more powerful, thanks to bad management of Bush´s War-On-Terror. A group called Duncan Mujahedine or the Good Soldiers claimed responsibility. They are not Qaeda but used similar plans.
The attacks would not be successful if the security gaps in the Indian security system were amended. The US security officials said that they told their Indian colleagues that an attack from the see on Mumbai was possible. The multiplicity of attacks and the duration it took to kill or arrest terrorists showed that they were well trained and heavy armed.
India accused Pakistan of hosting the group and asked its nuclear neighbor to send twenty five men to be tried in India. However, the Indian foreign Minister announced that his country did not plan for a war with Pakistan.
The cause of terrorism in India could be analyzed from different angles. The first angle is the internal conflicts between races and religions. It is known that Moslems and Sikh groups are at odds and violence between them is regular. Many times bombs exploded in trains killing and injuring many victims. Hindus majority have conflicts with both Moslems and Sikh groups. Previously, Sikh terrorists killed Gandhi, Andira and Rajief Gandhi. Lately the BBC broadcast a documentary about the Christians in India and the discrimination and atrocities done by Sikh group against them. Kashmir people want independence from the subcontinent or join Pakistan because about 90% of the population are Moslems. The UN resolution called for a referendum but the Indian governments blocked this resolution. Pakistan and India fought several wars because of Kashmir. When both countries obtained nuclear arms, another terror balance forced them to start a peace process that is not productive until now.
Pakistan is engaged in a war against terrorists and its Taliban version and it would be difficult for any leader to open a new front. Pakistan proposed formulation of an Indian-Pakistani committee to investigate the incident. The Americans said that they had not doubts about Pakistan as perpetuator. However, the Indian accusations of its neighbor forced the Americans to ask Pakistan to cooperate with India to defuse tension in Central Asia.
Therefore, from the internal and regional angles, one concludes that democracy in India failed to solve terrorism problem and the regional tension just added fuel to the already explosive situation. One wonders why democracy failed in the biggest democracy. Poverty is not the cause as India achieved a growth rate and scientific advancement in the last decade that made it one of the rising international forces in the global system. The fact is India was built on tolerance and the Conference Party that was established by Gandhi was based on tolerance. When fundamentalism from Hindus, Sikh and Moslems flared up the Indian world changed. Besides blocking of UN resolution about Kashmir created armed groups that seek independence. The domino effect made states in the north seek independence as well. Although the Mumbai operation was done by Moslem groups, other ethnic and religious groups are armed and they are terrorists as well.
From the strategic situation, one realizes that al-Qaeda just widens the front for the new American Administration at a very critical time that forced the global superpower to ask its NATO allies to send more troops to Afghanistan. Obama might rethink his withdrawal plans from Iraq for fear that the Arab country might fall in hands of fundamentalists and extremists.
At the same time, al-Qaeda wants to make another wedge between Moslems and one of the traditional friends to the Arabs. This enables al-Qaeda to recruit more youth by its deviated propaganda and portrays the world as Moslems and non-Moslems or DAR AL SALAM, countries of peace that are the countries that follow their deviated thinking and DAR AL HARB which are all other countries. China and India agreed to create a security cooperation body to fight terrorism. Most probably, the definition of terrorism would be Islamic terrorism although both countries have terrorist groups that are not Moslems.
The Indian politicians know al-Qaeda tactics and they know the difference between Moslems and Islamists who use Islam for evil purposes. They insisted that Amr Mossa the Arab League Secretary to visit their country as planed. However, the problem is in the Media and some NGOs that used the incident to fuel hate and hostility in the subcontinent.
From the global perspective, it is obvious that spread of chaos in Central Asia is part of the agenda of the outgoing Neo-Cons. The Indians were told about the attacks and it would be from the sea. One wonders why the Indians did not take the proper preemptive measures. One also notice that Israel tried to benefit from the opportunity as it asked the Indians to send its specialized anti-terrorist groups to fight beside them but the request was turned down. It took three months for perpetuators to plan for their operation and the Americans knew and warned the Indians. Why did not the Americans expose them to the Pakistani government or did not tell the Pakistanis to take preemptive measures? Did the Neo-Cons complicate the situation for Barak Obama to force him to complete their path?
War-On-Terror will face failure after failure as long as the definition of terrorism is Islamic only. In fact, this helps al-Qaeda to portray the war as war on Islam. Hence, if the world is to succeed in fighting terrorism then the strategy should be revised. A strategy that stipulates that the world from all faiths and races should confront terrorism due any cause. Double standard policies and blocking UN resolutions in the Middle East and in Central Asia or elsewhere are the real causes of terrorism. Democratization is important but it is not the magical solution of terrorism. It is part of the solution. The real solutions of the terrorism problem are tolerance, enlightenment, economical development, justice and abiding to international laws. Bullying and intimidation by superpowers create small groups of despair people who are willing to die as a method to end their sufferings. Heavy armies do not find a front to attack terrorists. Terrorist groups live among people not on the frontlines. The fact that NATO and US fight Taliban in Afghanistan proves that Al-Qaeda leaders lives in caves in mountains and their silent networks are present everywhere. Most of the countries arrested terrorists that were living and working as normal citizens. After all terrorism is a criminal act and terrorists are psychopaths and this is the field of police forces and security men not army officers.
The Arabs should clear the difference between Moslems and Islamists. They should relentlessly call for an international conference to put proper plans to counteract terrorism. The global force may change tactics in Afghanistan to encourage dialogue between Taliban and the government there that may lead to disengagement of the alliance between Taliban and Al-Qaeda. President elect Obama should answer a simple question why did the American Army occupy Afghanistan in a short time but fought terrorists there for seven years without signs of victory?
The attacks would not be successful if the security gaps in the Indian security system were amended. The US security officials said that they told their Indian colleagues that an attack from the see on Mumbai was possible. The multiplicity of attacks and the duration it took to kill or arrest terrorists showed that they were well trained and heavy armed.
India accused Pakistan of hosting the group and asked its nuclear neighbor to send twenty five men to be tried in India. However, the Indian foreign Minister announced that his country did not plan for a war with Pakistan.
The cause of terrorism in India could be analyzed from different angles. The first angle is the internal conflicts between races and religions. It is known that Moslems and Sikh groups are at odds and violence between them is regular. Many times bombs exploded in trains killing and injuring many victims. Hindus majority have conflicts with both Moslems and Sikh groups. Previously, Sikh terrorists killed Gandhi, Andira and Rajief Gandhi. Lately the BBC broadcast a documentary about the Christians in India and the discrimination and atrocities done by Sikh group against them. Kashmir people want independence from the subcontinent or join Pakistan because about 90% of the population are Moslems. The UN resolution called for a referendum but the Indian governments blocked this resolution. Pakistan and India fought several wars because of Kashmir. When both countries obtained nuclear arms, another terror balance forced them to start a peace process that is not productive until now.
Pakistan is engaged in a war against terrorists and its Taliban version and it would be difficult for any leader to open a new front. Pakistan proposed formulation of an Indian-Pakistani committee to investigate the incident. The Americans said that they had not doubts about Pakistan as perpetuator. However, the Indian accusations of its neighbor forced the Americans to ask Pakistan to cooperate with India to defuse tension in Central Asia.
Therefore, from the internal and regional angles, one concludes that democracy in India failed to solve terrorism problem and the regional tension just added fuel to the already explosive situation. One wonders why democracy failed in the biggest democracy. Poverty is not the cause as India achieved a growth rate and scientific advancement in the last decade that made it one of the rising international forces in the global system. The fact is India was built on tolerance and the Conference Party that was established by Gandhi was based on tolerance. When fundamentalism from Hindus, Sikh and Moslems flared up the Indian world changed. Besides blocking of UN resolution about Kashmir created armed groups that seek independence. The domino effect made states in the north seek independence as well. Although the Mumbai operation was done by Moslem groups, other ethnic and religious groups are armed and they are terrorists as well.
From the strategic situation, one realizes that al-Qaeda just widens the front for the new American Administration at a very critical time that forced the global superpower to ask its NATO allies to send more troops to Afghanistan. Obama might rethink his withdrawal plans from Iraq for fear that the Arab country might fall in hands of fundamentalists and extremists.
At the same time, al-Qaeda wants to make another wedge between Moslems and one of the traditional friends to the Arabs. This enables al-Qaeda to recruit more youth by its deviated propaganda and portrays the world as Moslems and non-Moslems or DAR AL SALAM, countries of peace that are the countries that follow their deviated thinking and DAR AL HARB which are all other countries. China and India agreed to create a security cooperation body to fight terrorism. Most probably, the definition of terrorism would be Islamic terrorism although both countries have terrorist groups that are not Moslems.
The Indian politicians know al-Qaeda tactics and they know the difference between Moslems and Islamists who use Islam for evil purposes. They insisted that Amr Mossa the Arab League Secretary to visit their country as planed. However, the problem is in the Media and some NGOs that used the incident to fuel hate and hostility in the subcontinent.
From the global perspective, it is obvious that spread of chaos in Central Asia is part of the agenda of the outgoing Neo-Cons. The Indians were told about the attacks and it would be from the sea. One wonders why the Indians did not take the proper preemptive measures. One also notice that Israel tried to benefit from the opportunity as it asked the Indians to send its specialized anti-terrorist groups to fight beside them but the request was turned down. It took three months for perpetuators to plan for their operation and the Americans knew and warned the Indians. Why did not the Americans expose them to the Pakistani government or did not tell the Pakistanis to take preemptive measures? Did the Neo-Cons complicate the situation for Barak Obama to force him to complete their path?
War-On-Terror will face failure after failure as long as the definition of terrorism is Islamic only. In fact, this helps al-Qaeda to portray the war as war on Islam. Hence, if the world is to succeed in fighting terrorism then the strategy should be revised. A strategy that stipulates that the world from all faiths and races should confront terrorism due any cause. Double standard policies and blocking UN resolutions in the Middle East and in Central Asia or elsewhere are the real causes of terrorism. Democratization is important but it is not the magical solution of terrorism. It is part of the solution. The real solutions of the terrorism problem are tolerance, enlightenment, economical development, justice and abiding to international laws. Bullying and intimidation by superpowers create small groups of despair people who are willing to die as a method to end their sufferings. Heavy armies do not find a front to attack terrorists. Terrorist groups live among people not on the frontlines. The fact that NATO and US fight Taliban in Afghanistan proves that Al-Qaeda leaders lives in caves in mountains and their silent networks are present everywhere. Most of the countries arrested terrorists that were living and working as normal citizens. After all terrorism is a criminal act and terrorists are psychopaths and this is the field of police forces and security men not army officers.
The Arabs should clear the difference between Moslems and Islamists. They should relentlessly call for an international conference to put proper plans to counteract terrorism. The global force may change tactics in Afghanistan to encourage dialogue between Taliban and the government there that may lead to disengagement of the alliance between Taliban and Al-Qaeda. President elect Obama should answer a simple question why did the American Army occupy Afghanistan in a short time but fought terrorists there for seven years without signs of victory?
Print
Email
