MyIndiaBook

The recent terrorist attacks in Mumbai by Pakistan-based jihadi terrorists have shaken not only India but the world.  Unlike previous terrorist attacks involving hostages, this time the terrorists were not intent on entering into negotiations for their release. Rather, their single point agenda was to “kill to the last breath”.  In the aftermath of these gruesome terrorist attacks, the one question which many are still struggling to answer is …. why?

In another age, Arjuna asked Krishna why men are compelled to commit evil acts, as if by force?  Krishna answered that it was become of kama, the desire for material sense enjoyment. Other exponents of Vedanta philosophy have added that evil arises from ego. That is, some people crave superiority.  And if they can successfully convince others of their superiority they not only gain an ego boost but also power and economic benefits.      

This enlightened insight into human nature (Vedanta) is very relevant today.  It provides a philosophical context for understanding all evil actions including the Mumbai terrorist attacks.  Like all religions, Islam is open to interpretation.  While many Muslims consider Islam to be a religion of peace, the jihadi terrorists subscribe to a more expansionist view.  Proponents of this view consider Islam to be the only true religion.  They further believe that Islam will eventually encompass the world and that it is the religious duty of every true Muslim to expand the geographic scope of Islam, even if that requires killing unbelievers.  To be sure, this interpretation of Islam is not new.  Many well known figures in Islamic history from the first Caliphs in Baghdad to the Central Asian war lords that brought Islam to the Indian subcontinent also subscribed to the expansionist view of Islam.

The jihadi terrorists apparently look upon themselves as God’s warriors acting in like manner to previous Ghazis (i.e. slayer of infidels).  In fact, Hafiz Saeed, the leader of the Laskhar e Taiba, (Army of the Pure) which perpetrated the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, makes no secret of his intention to hoist the flag of Islam atop the Red Fort in Delhi.   Similarly, jihadi leaders in London have publicly espoused their intention to bring Europe and America into the Islamic fold.  Abu Hamza, a London-based Islamic cleric, was even captured on camera telling his followers that “Allah is happy when unbelievers are killed”.  

To be sure, Pakistan is not the only country that harbours extremist elements.  Other nations also have their KKKs and neo-nazi extremists.  But in most nations these extremist elements constitute a small fringe of the overall population while in Pakistan the mainstream appears to have bought into the world view propounded by the jihadis. Indeed, many Pakistanis liken Osama bin Laden to Saladin, the Arab Sultan that successfully engaged the Crusaders.

But this analogy is flawed in one key respect. Saladin went to great lengths to protect non-combatants from injury.  By contrast, today’s terrorists specifically target non-combatants. How can the specific targeting of unarmed civilians be justified, even by the jihadi extremists?  This question was put to a jihadi leader in London during a BBC interview.  He coldly stated that they do not consider unbelievers to be innocent because they have committed a crime against God. This appears to be the ideological rationale behind all jihadi terrorist attacks that target civilians.

The jihadi terrorists are no doubt further emboldened by the exploits of Babar, the founder of the Mughal dynasty in India. To be sure, Babar is widely lionized in Pakistan for his bravery and military prowess in defeating his enemies on the battlefield.  However there is another perspective which has gone unnoticed in Pakistan. That is, Babar along with several other Muslim invaders from Central Asia, were responsible for perpetrating one of the greatest genocides in human history. Consider the following passage from the Babarnama, “lakhs and lakhs of infidels were sent to hell”.   This statement implies that several hundred thousand non-combatants were murdered with impunity in the name of God.

The state of Pakistan has thus far enjoyed a symbiotic relationship with the jihadi terrorist organizations.  They were first used by Pakistan’s ISI to wage a proxy war with India and then to add “strategic depth” through the installation of a pro-Pakistan government in Afghanistan (i.e. the Taliban).  Subsequently, Pakistan used the jihadi terrorists to target U.S forces in Afghanistan.  Hamid Gul, the former chief of Pakistan’s ISI went on to declare that “the Muslim world must stand united to confront the U.S. in its so-called War on Terrorism which is in reality a war against Muslims. Let’s destroy America wherever its troops are trapped.”

Given its long history of patronage towards the jihadi terrorist organizations, why should the state of Pakistan now change course?  There are three reasons which are likely to compel Pakistan to do so.  First, the jihadis pose a grave danger to the state of Pakistan itself. Their ideology is in sharp contrast to that of the founders of Pakistan (i.e. Iqbal, Jinnah) and would be inimical to the interests of most Pakistanis, particularly women and minorities.  

The following excerpt from an interview with LeT chief Hafiz Saeed provides some insight into the jihadi ideology which awaits Pakistan if it does not dismantle its terrorist networks.  When asked to explain the reason for the earthquake which struck Pakistan in 2004, Saeed gave the following response:

“They wanted the women to abandon hijab; run with men nude in bikinis; and learn dance and music. They were not afraid of Allah but (US President George) Bush. At his (Bush‘s) behest, they wanted to purge our schoolbooks from verses on jihad; befriend India and recognise Israel.”

Second, the state of Pakistan is bankrupt and largely dependent upon international assistance for its survival.  It is highly unlikely that the international community would continue to render such assistance without any substantive action by Pakistan to root out terrorism.  

Third, the state of Pakistan risks endangering the safety of its people through its refusal to take action against terrorism. The international community, led by the United States and India, will inevitably have to respond with force against Pakistan in the event of further terrorist attacks.  Former U.S. Deputy of Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, reportedly told Pakistan’s President Musharraf that his country would be “bombed into the stone age”, if it continued to support the Taliban.  That scenario may reoccur if Pakistan does not dismantle the terrorist networks that operating from its soil.   

Essentially, if the government of Pakistan does not act against the terrorists then at best it will become an extremist Islamic state (i.e. Taliban controlled Afghanistan) and at worst it may be bombed back into the stone age.  

Assuming that the government of Pakistan chooses to act in its enlightened self interest the more critical question is whether the government has the power to put the genie back in the bottle. To be sure the government can take some important steps towards dismantling the terrorist networks.  It can close their training camps and arrest their leaders. These actions, while important, will not be sufficient, however, to deal a permanent blow to the jihadi terrorists.  

To that end, the government of Pakistan will have to erode the popular support base which the jihadi terrorists depend upon for sustenance.  Specifically, it will have to reform the madrasas (Islamic schools) which brainwash students into becoming jihadis.  In addition, the government of Pakistan will also have to illicit a declaration from the Ulema (body of Islamic scholars) against the killing of non-muslims.

But more importantly, Pakistan will have to come to terms with its own history.  The glorification of historical figures which slaughtered non-muslims with impunity in the name of religion must be discontinued.  Pakistan must reform its history textbooks to provide a more balanced perspective.  Greater emphasis needs to be placed on the atrocities perpetrated by Ghazni, Babar and other historical figures that brought Islam to the Indian subcontinent. In fact, there is no reason why Pakistani students should not see Babar through the same lens that German students look upon Hitler. 

Hopefully, Pakistani policy makers will act with sagacity. But, if they do not, the international community must be prepared to use all options, both hard and soft, to elicit substantive actions from the government of Pakistan in addressing the root cause of Pakistan.    

Raju Agarwal