The Disadvantage of Being Strategic Partner of The US
By Mustafa Khan
12 November, 2010
Countercurrents.org
As far as the bilateral relationship between India and the US is
concerned there is an élan as observed at occasions like the recent
Obama visit. The most important issue of the day is terrorism. But the
moment the “enormous” negihbour Pakistan enters in the equation there
is a chemical change. The tripartite relationship leaves much to be
desired.
On November 7th night and the morning next day President Obama and
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh might have personally discussed about
26/11 and the role of the American informant David Headley, the matter
is still nebulous. What do the Americans mean when they say they had
“various different kinds of information about David Headley” that
“weren’t specific to a particular plot in India”? This is what the top
Whitehouse official Ben Rhodes said to reporters aboard the plane that
brought the president to Mumbai.( Obama, Singh discuss missed warnings
on suspected terrorist, Ed Henry, CNN November 8, 2010)
On the contrary Headley did have specific information regarding even
the fake encounter of Ishrat Jahan whom he described as a member of
Lashkare Toiba, a Pakistan based terrorism organization. She was
kidnapped by Indian police from Mumbai and killed in Gujarat in a fake
encounter. The police said that she along with her three friends
wanted to kill the Chief Minister Narendra Modi. This fitted in the
pattern of accusation after 9/11 which generally blamed the Muslims
for bomb blasts in default. As of October 11, 2010 the National
Investigation Agency had found that she was not a terrorist and was
not a member of LeT. The NIA charge sheet does not even mention
Headley in the case of the fake encounter. (NIA document silent on
Ishrat Jahan being a LeT sucide bomber NDA October 11, 2010)It is
astoundingly difficult to understand that in July 2010 Indian
interrogators found Headley fully aware of terrorists organizations
involved in attacks on India. A newspaper even went further when it
reported what an Indian official described: “Headley is a trove of
information on Lashkar's plans against India.”(Ishrat Jehan was an LeT
fidayeen: Headley, The Times of India, July 5 2010)
How could this “trove of information on Lashkar’s plans against India”
could become the source of vague information within four months?
This kind of fabricated intelligence information has gone on for so
long that now it has become a tale of two democracies: the American
and the Indian. As Stephen Lendman says: “The story is disturbingly
familiar. FBI agents arrest a suspect on terrorism related charges,
nearly always a Muslim, photographed full bearded to look menacing.
Media reports highlight it, headlining government charges to incite
fear. Announced arrests are strategically timed, this one [arrest of
Farooque Ahmed, an American of Pakistani origin] days before mid-term
elections.” (Farooque Ahmed: Entrapped By An FBI Sting By Stephen
Lendman 01 November, 10Countercurrents.org.)
Replace FBI with IB and the modus operandi is the same, to the last detail.
Even to the fake encounter of Ishrat Jahan. It came so convenient that
even the Home Minister Mr Chidambrum accepted it that she was an
activist of LeT. Can the US be allowed an alibi that it shared
information about Headley but not about the most devastating terrorist
attack known as 26/11attack on Mumbai in which the American agent
played a crucial role? Why has the US been so queasy about letting
Indians have free access to Headley and thoroughly probe him while the
US has itself been involved in all kinds of extraordinary renditions
practiced for getting information about terrorists across the
continents? The Miranda provision of the US law has been turned into
the carpet under which the US can conveniently sweep what it chooses
from time to time. What is crucial to its own involvement goes under
the carpet. After all Headley too was inducted into intelligence
information gathering because of his first hand experience in
Pakistan. That happened when there were few informants available in
the aftermath of 9/11.
What more particular information regarding the plot of 26/11can be
there than the US informing RAW (top foreign intelligence gathering
agency of India) on November 18, 2008 that a hostile ship [al-
Husaaini]with specific latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates 30-34
details was sailing from Karachi in an attempt to enter Indian waters
off Mumbai? This information RAW duly sent to Intelligence Bureau (top
internal intelligence agency of India) on November 19, 2008. This was
actionable intelligence: seven days later the attack on Mumbai came!
The US cannot wash off its hands of the responsibility. The guilt
sticks and stinks. This despite the fact that they are two important
democracies of the world who have chosen to ignore the kidnapping of
the most important witness who saw the six terrorists landing near her
fishing colony, Anita Rajendra Uddaiya.
What kind of democracies are these that they do not know what their
intelligence agencies are doing? First the Indian officials say that
Gujarat police’s and the Central government intelligence agencies’
claims tally with Headley on Ishrat out to kill Modi at the instance
of their Pakistani handler Muzammil and yet the NIA simply ignores
Headley on Ishrat and Obama has the sang froid to assert that we have
missed intelligence reports?
http://commonalty.blogspot.com/
