The terrible threat of terrorism

Columnist SULTAN AHMED writes about the dangers of terrorism

Pakistan's external security environment is getting tough. The prime reason is India which is trying to exploit the internal situation in Pakistan as well as the fact it has a military regime which is not ready to hold general elections in the immediate future, unlike in the past when we had four care-taker governments.

The calculated Indian public stance is it wants friendship and a negotiated settlement with Pakistan, but it cannot negotiate fruitfully with Pakistan as long as Gen. Musharraf is at the helm of its affairs. They hold him as the architect of the Kargil conflict, and contend he will not agree to fruitful negotiations with India unless Kashmir becomes the centre-piece of that dialogue. The fact is India wants to avoid any negotiation in which Kashmir figures substantially.

While India conducts a propaganda and diplomatic offensive against Pakistan, making full use of the hijacking of an Indian airline Airbus from Nepal, it is also strengthening its relations with key countries which are not happy with military rule in Pakistan.

Following the tenth meeting between the Indian foreign minister Jaswant Singh and the US Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott within 20 months after the Indian nuclear explosions of May, 1998, they have agreed on setting up a Joint Working Group to counter terrorism and work together to ensure the vanished hijackers of the Indian Airline plane are punished. The first meeting of the Group is to take place in Washington early in February.

Meanwhile, it is certain that President Clinton would visit India this year but his visit to Pakistan remains very uncertain and subject to several conditions political and military.

On the other side, India and Russia have signed an agreement as traditional military allies for the joint production of Sukhoi-30 jet fighters, missiles, submarines and a vast array of other military equipment.

The agreement signed in New Delhi following the visit of the Russian deputy prime minister Ilya Asifovich provides for joint production of the new equipment in both Russia and India, and they could be exported to third countries as well. That means India would become an arms exporter in a big way.

India has a close working relationship in sophisticated arms production with Israel. As Israel is able to get the latest US military technology it may transfer a part of that technology to India. Anyway Israeli arms are cheap compared to the prices India has to pay if it tries to obtain the same from the West.

At the same time Washington has been feeling very uneasy over the alleged cooperation between Pakistan and North Korea in missile production systems. Alleged Northern Korean export of missile technology to Pakistan and a number of other countries has created 'immediate, serious and growing threat to US; forces, interests and allies in Asia and the Middle East,' says Washington.

India is also reported to have opted for the manufacture of chemical weapons in a big way. These weapons which are described as the poor nation's nuclear weapons pose a serious threat to Pakistan in view of the frequency of low level conflicts between them.

Meanwhile striking a militant stance India's defence minister George Fernandes says 'India can beat Pakistan any time anywhere' as if that is simple process. And that inevitably draws the rejoinder from Gen. Musharraf that Pakistan can use its nuclear weapons eventually to save itself.

And the Chief of Staff of the Indian army Gen. V. M. Malik says India has crossed the Line of Control in Kashmir in another conflict with Pakistan, unlike during the Kargil conflict. The augmentation of the Indian military might and the diversity of weapons it opts for, go along with such threatening military pronouncements.

George Perkovich, author of the new book 'India's Nuclear Bomb,' explaining such pronouncements says: 'India wants to be seen as an emerging great power, like China. It diminishes India's sense of self regard to be equated with small and incompetent Pakistan'.

And the Herald Tribune of the US says: India and Pakistan are mired in hate, and smaller and weaker Pakistan has been emboldened to view its nuclear arsenal as its magic shield that will protect it from any harm even if endlessly gives India, the dominant military power in South Asia.'

Perkovitch says in an interview with 'Newsweek' 'Pakistan today has a greater capacity to put nuclear warheads on missiles and launch them tomorrow, than India does.'

And the Financial Times, London, says from Beijing that during Gen. Musharraf's visit to China, the Chinese leaders were not as effusive in their support for Pakistan as they were on earlier occasions. The reason is China does not want heating up the tension between Pakistan and India leading to any kind of military conflict. So while China was fully supportive of Pakistan they were not too unrestrained in their support. Anyway, what is certain is the Chinese leaders do not want a war between Pakistan and India or encourage Pakistan in that direction anyway.

Meanwhile India proposes to increase its military budget far above the 10 billion dollars as it expands and strengthen its mountain divisions after spending Rs. 20 billion in the Kargil conflict. How much is its additional expenditure will be known after the budget is presented in February or March. What is known is India wants its military expenditure to be raised from 2.3 per cent of the GNP to 3 per cent, forcing Pakistan to spend far more and go burst economically in the process, as the Soviet Union did in competition with the US.

India is now receiving support in its anti-terrorism campaign from the UN. Pakistan will soon come under increasing international pressure to sign the newly approved UN Convention on Terrorism, says a report in 'Dawn' from Washington. 'For the first time the convention specifically targets the financial sponsors of terrorist activity, rather than simply the actual perpetrators of specific acts. Through this means the UN can restrain Pakistan from assisting the Kashmiri freedom fighters whom India denounces as terrorists unfailingly.

That means Pakistan's support from the freedom struggle will become a major issue in times to come. While Pakistan maintains its support is political, diplomatic and moral, India charges Pakistan with aiding, abetting and arming the freedom-fighters. And India has been successful in influencing world opinion to an extent in this regard.

Meanwhile a UN official, Kul Gautam of the UN Children's Fund Asia Pacific, has charged Pakistan and Myanmar with boosting military spending at the expense of education and other basic social services. He says global military spending had fallen in the post-cold war world, but has increased in Asia. He says Pakistan has a far higher GNP than Vietnam, and yet Vietnam spends far more of its GNP on education than Pakistan. It is not lack of funds as much as the readiness to give the right priority for education, he says.

As if in anticipation of such criticism Gen. Musharraf has reduced military spending this year by Rs. 7 billion and said the saving would be used for poverty - alleviation and acceleration of economic development.

And Dr. A.K. Khan, the renowned nuclear scientist, now says history has proved that a nation's survival with dignity does not depend on military might only; it is the economic stability of that nation also which makes its people stand tall.

He says our defence capability and nuclear power will become meaningless if we have to beg before the IMF to feed our children.

'We have done enough work to secure our borders and have given a matching response to the enemy on the nuclear front. Now it is time to strengthen our economy.'

The US Assistant Secretary of State Karl Inderfurth flew into Karachi after participating in the discussions with Jaswant Singh in London to understand the position of Pakistan in the current regional situation better and convey India's fears. An acid test of whether the US understands our position and is sympathetic to it will be a decision by President Clinton to visit Pakistan. Only time will tell whether what decision he takes in this regard and what final signals he sends to Pakistan and through that to the world at large.

Meanwhile, terrorism is on the rise in Pakistan fearsomely. In recent weeks one person was killed and 17 injured through three bomb explosions at Muridke, nine persons were injured by another explosion in Hyderabad, and nine persons were killed by an explosion in Karachi. More lives would have been lost if a few of the bombs were not defused as the two-kilogram bomb in Karachi was.

Earlier a powerful bomb explosion has killed 17 persons in Srinagar, including three Indian soldiers, and injured 20 others.

Several of the explosions in Pakistan are suspected to be of Indian origin, while following the explosion in Karachi some of the Muslim Leaguers were detained as suspects.

Earlier when Pakistan was receiving arms under military and it explained it needed the arms for defence, as it was not an arms manufacturing country. 'Defence against whom?' India demanded to know.

Now when India is talking of its nuclear deterrent and even more its ambitious nuclear doctrine - Pakistan can also ask defence against whom? The fact is that it is Pakistan which feels threatened by the increasing acquisition of arms by India. And it was Pakistan which was the victim of Indian aggression in 1965 and 1971, while the armed conflict with China on the non-populated Himalayas lasted for a few days in 1962.

Surely as Pakistan and India enter the 21st century this kind of climate of fear, hate and rising casualties is not what they need or can afford. While the two countries talk of poverty alleviation it is the poor who are the victims of such conflicts or bomb explosions. Leadership in both countries have to rise above such tragic situations and prevail for the lasting good of both.

Perkovich says: 'My fear is that at some point the Pakistanis will be tempted to up-the-ante. There will be another provocation. Somebody blows up something and India says: 'That's it' and takes out the targets. Then you are on your way. Who is going to back down?

Evidently brinkmanship has its limits. And India instead of arming itself to the teeth and relying on the US diplomatic support should de-escalate and strive for peace. If not the 1.4 billion people of South Asia will come to great grief.