Other Documents Documents

Fact Sheet on Jammu & Kashmir

May 20, 2002

The Accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India-1947

The accession of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir to India took place in terms of the India Independence Act. The Act provided that the rulers of the princely states had to take the final decision whether they wished to join India or Pakistan. There was no provision in the Act for any recourse to ascertaining the wishes of the people. These were the terms under which other princely states also acceded to India or Pakistan.

While the signatory to the offer of accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India was the ruler of the state, Maharaja Hari Singh, Sheikh Abdullah, a Muslim, and the acknowledged political leader of the State, endorsed the decision. His rationale for endorsing the accession was ".if we accede to India there is no danger of a revival of feudalism and autocracy. Moreover, during the last four years, the Government of India has never tried to interfere in our internal autonomy. This experience has strengthened our confidence in them as a democratic State. … The Indian Constitution has amply and finally repudiated the concept of a religious State, which is a throwback to medievalism, by guaranteeing the equality of rights of all citizens irrespective of their religion, colour, caste and class.

The national movement in our State naturally gravitates towards these principles of secular democracy. The people here will never accept a principle which seeks to favour the interests of one religion or social group against another. This affinity in political principles, as well as in past association, and our common path of suffering in the cause of freedom, must he weighed properly while deciding the future of the State...”

The accession was final and irrevocable. There was no question of a conditional acceptance by the Governor General for the simple reason that the legal framework defined for the future of the princely states under the Indian Independence Act did not have any provision for a conditional accession.

The Raids of 1947 and later.

Pakistan has always sought to use deniable violence to achieve its objective of wresting Jammu and Kashmri from India.

In order to force the Maharaja to accede to Pakistan , Pakistan engineered the so called tribal raids in 1947 and seized part of the territory of Jammu and Kashmir. It is a travesty of the truth to suggest that the raids were spontaneous. They were organized and coordinated by the Government of Pakistan as detailed by the Pakistan Army Officer Akbar Khan , who was in charge of the tribal lashkars and who gives full details of the operational plan in his book " Raiders in Kashmir” "..".... I wrote out a plan under the title " Armed Revolt inside Kashmir” . As open interference or aggression by Pakistan was obviously not desirable it was proposed that our efforts should be concentrated upon strengthening the Kashmiris internally -- and .. to prevent arrival of armed civilian or military assistance from India into Kashmir...”

The use of deniable violence by Pakistan continued in the decades after Partition. In 1965 Pakistan launched Operation Gibraltar which eventually led to the 1965 Indo Pakistan war. Lt. General Gul Hassan writes in ‘Memoirs’ "....In 1963 our government decided to extend some form of moral support to the people of Indian-held Kashmir. Consequently, the Army was ordered to train volunteers in carrying out sabotage activities across the Cease-fire Line...

...We were told that the President had ordered that GHQ was required to prepare two sets of plans - first, intensification of the firecracker type of activity that was already current, but the embargo on regular troops crossing the Cease-fire Line remained. The second task given to GHQ was to plan all-out support for any guerrillas who were inducted into the Indian-held part of Kashmir.....

..The decision to mount guerrilla operations in Indian-held Kashmir was taken shortly after the Kutch affair.....

Following the Soviet Unions withdrawal from Afghanistan, Pakistan decided to use the Mujahideen to foment trouble in Jammu and Kashmir. In ‘ Fateh’ the biography of the former Chief of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence, General Akhtar Abdul Rehman his biographer Brigadier Haroon Rashid states "...The plan which General Akhtar Abdul Rehman had made for Kashmiris movement for independence was to come into effect in 1991. It appears that this plan was made with the struggle for the liberation of Afghanistan in mind, which it was though would be achieved by spring 1989.... However the Kashmir plan was inaugurated in 1984.. The Kashmiris were provided with some arms which were not suitable for the Afghan Mujahideen …

In the Kargil incursion also Pakistan pretended that only the "mujahideen” were fighting the Indian forces when there is sufficient documentary evidence from Pakistani sources, including obituary notices, to indicate that the operation was planned and carried out by the Pakistan army with the mujahideen used as camouflage.

Pakistan has all along denied that any terrorist groups operate from its soil and had even been insisting that the Lashkar e Taiba , the Harkat ul Mujahideen and the Jaish e Mohammed were Kashmiri outfits with no presence in Pakistan. This was contrary to the evidence as has now been proved by the Pakistani crackdown on these groups and the reported arrests of hundreds of their members. These groups have over the years published advertisements in Pakistani newspapers and in their own publications giving their office addresses in Pakistan and their telephone numbers and bank accounts and soliciting money for the jehad against India. They have also published names of their cadres killed in Jammu and Kashmir. The majority of these cadres are Pakistanis.

The United Nations.

It is a fallacy to suggest that the United Nations was charged with the responsibility of deciding on the status of Jammu and Kashmir. India took the matter of Pakistan’s aggression against Jammu and Kashmir to the United Nations, after the State had become a part of India in terms of a perfectly legally executed accession in accordance with the terms of the Indian Independence Act.

Pakistan’s insistence that Indian must hold a plebiscite is also wrong. The resolutions of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan, which India endorsed, required that first Pakistan withdraw from the territories it had seized. Only after this and other conditions spelt out in the resolution had been completed was there any question of any plebiscite being considered. Pakistan has still not complied with the preliminary conditions of the resolutions and continues to occupy the territory of Jammu and Kashmir.

The UN Resolutions had, in the words of Gunnar Jarring and Dr. Frank Graham lost their relevance to the question as far back as 1957-58. In his report to the Council in 1957 Gunnar Jarring said "..The Council will, furthermore, be aware of the fact that the implementation of international agreements of an ad hoc character, which has not been achieved fairly speedily, may become progressively more difficult because the situation with which they were to cope has tended to change...”

Dr. Frank Graham , the UNCIP’s representative stated in March 1958 "...the execution of the provisions of the resolution of 1948 might create more serious difficulties than were foreseen at the time the parties agreed to that. Whether the UN representative would be able to reconstitute the status quo which it had obtained ten years ago would seem to be doubtful. ..”

Over fifty years after Partition the ground situation of the state to which the resolutions referred to has considerably changed. Pakistan has unilaterally ceded a part of the state to China. There has been a demographic change on the Pakistani side with generations of non - Kashmiris allowed to take up residence in the parts of J&K occupied by Pakistan. If the resolutions had begun to lose relevance even in 1957, they have far less relevance now.

The contention that the people of Jammu and Kashmir have not been able to express their wishes is also wrong. Since 1947 the people of Jammu and Kashmir ( Ladakh, Jammu and the Valley) have participated in elections and till 1987 there was no talk of their aspirations not having been met. The only change that has taken place is that a group of people from the Valley, unable to come to power over the decades through the ballot box have decided to use violence to impose their will. In this they have been aided by jehadi elements from Pakistan. If indeed they are confident that they represent the wishes of the people of the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir, they should be ready to participate in elections as other Muslim Kashmiris from the Valley and other parts of Jammu and Kashmir have done. Instead this group has been engaged in calling for a boycott of the democratic electoral process and countenanced the destruction of the social, cultural and economic fabric of Jammu and Kashmir.

If indeed there is any part of the state where the people have had no chance to articulate their aspirations in a democratic manner it is the Northern Areas of Gilgit and Baltistan, under Pakistan’s control where since 1947 there has been no adult franchise or any democratic election.

Violence in Jammu and Kashmir.

The enclosed annexure gives details of the number of people who have been killed, the property destroyed and the weapons seized since the violence began in the Kashmir Valley over a decade ago. The Valley has no hinterland except Pakistan, which has been the source of weaponry and training for the groups engaging in violence in Jammu and Kashmir. Mr. Ziauddin , Resident Editor of the Dawn in Islamabad has succinctly spelt out the position in comments to the BBC ""because all these groups have been getting their inspiration from the Pakistani army.

In the last 15- 20 years, the Pakistani establishment's policy in Afghanistan as well as in Kashmir has been rather favourable to the Jehadis. In one way, you can even say that they have been sponsored, they have been trained, they have been funded by the establishment.”.

ANNEXURE

MAGNITUDE OF TERRORISM IN J&K SINCE 1990

In recent years and especially since 1990, the main theater of Pak sponsored activity in India has been the State of Jammu and Kashmir, which has seen the loss of about 27,000 lives in the last 11 years. The number of weapons and other military hardware recovered in anti-terrorist operations could equip several battalions of a modern Army During the decade long Pak sponsored terrorism in J&K, in over 51,000 terrorist incidents around 27,000 persons including about 9,700 civilians and over 3000 Security personnel have been killed. The terrorist violence caused extensive damage to private and public property, with large number of people, particularly minority Hindus, being forced to migrate from the Valley. Even foreign tourists have not been spared. Terrorists posed a serious threat to Aviation Security as they resorted to hijacking to achieve their demands. With the decline in local militancy, pan-Islamic 'jehadi' outfits have come to dominate seeking to destroy the secular fabric of the State. The complexion of militancy has undergone a change with focused attacks on Security Forces (SF). Suicide attacks are on the rise. A systematic effort is being made to tarnish the image of security forces by whipping up allegations of violation of Human Rights even though terrorists have shown no concern for the human rights of their victims.

2. The terrorists showed total disregard even for the lives of civilians, which is reflected in very high casualties of civilians during the period. The latest weapon in the armory of terrorists namely the fidayeen attack has been used frequently during this period of ceasefire. Attacks on vital installations have continued unabated. Terrorist's attempts to target the State democratic apparatus was reflected in their poll boycott threats issued in the wake of announcement of Parliamentary, legislature and in the last few years and culminated in the October, 2001 attack on the State legislature building. The threat to Census enumerators and attempt to disrupt could also be seen in the same light. Grass roots political workers have continually been targeted by the terrorists.

MILITANTS ACTIVITIES IN J&K SINCE 1990 to 2001

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Since 1990 upto Dec.01
No. of Incidents 4158 3765 4817 5247 5829 5938 5014 3420 2932 3071 3074 4522 5178
Civilians Killed 461 382 634 747 820 1031 1336 948 857 821 762 919 9718
SFs Killed 155 173 189 198 200 237 184 193 236 355 400 536 3053
Terrorists Killed 550 844 819 1310 1596 1332 1209 1075 999 1082 1520 2020 14356
Foreign Militants Killed 14 12 14 90 122 85 139 197 319 305 436 622 2358

Militancy in J&K has taken a toll of 9718 innocent civilians since January 1, 1990. The militants, aided and abetted by Pak ISI have caused enormous damage to Kashmiri people and the economy of the State, even public and private properties have not been spared by the militants as indicated by the figures given below.

DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY BY MILITANTS

If you destroy schools, you destroy sanity. If you blow up bridges, you demolish the bridges of amity and fraternity. That is what militants have done in Jammu and Kashmir since 1990. The gun and grenade crazy militants set ablaze and blew up 633 school buildings and 333 bridges during the last years. They thought that by destroying the Govt. buildings they would secure an overthrow of the state administration and hence destroyed 1134 Govt. buildings. As compared to 1999 and 2000 when 18 and 21 Govt buildings including schools and bridge, were destroyed, the rate of destruction of such buildings increased to 48 in 2001.

DESTRUCTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY BY MILITANTS

The dance of arson and destruction was not confined to the Government property only. Those civilians who had toiled and spent there last penny in building houses were targeted. Militants destroyed houses and shops of the people belonging to both the majority and the minority communities. In 1990, 1992 and 1995 militants almost went on a rampage and destroyed 5368 houses, shops and other structures of civilians. There was a downward trend between 1998 and 2000. However, in 2001 the number went up to 419.

DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY BY MILITANTS
Year Total Incidents Govt. Buildings Eductional Buildings Bridges Hospital Private House Shops
1990 646 501 129 172 0 1242 202
1991 391 45 24 24 0 819 83
1992 564 65 57 28 0 2312 200
1993 662 98 46 34 0 1110 400
1994 606 172 119 46 4 666 162
1995 688 127 133 16 2 1814 402
1996 482 52 68 2 3 602 161
1997 259 13 11 5 1 437 63
1998 177 13 515 1 0 273 66
1999 136 7 9 2 0 284 6
2000 129 14 6 1 0 330 107
2001 274 30 16 2 1 419 77
Total 1983 1134 633 333 11 10263 1932

Deliberate attempts byterrorists and their mentors across the border have been made to step-upviolence in a desperate effort to try and thwart the restoration of thepolitical and democratic processes in the State. Though the number of terroristrelated incidents during 2001 was on a lower side than registered in 1995,( i.e5938 highest since the inception of terrorism in the state), it was higher than witnessed during the immediately preceding three years. In 2001, as many as 4522 incidents were recorded against 3074 in 2000 and 3071in 1999.

Despite the Government’s Ramzan Peace during which security forces refrained from initiating combat operations against terrorists the number of incidents during 2001 (4617) showed approximately 50% increase compared to that of 2000 (3074) and was higher than the year wise figures of any of other preceding calendar years since 1997. The figure of civilians killed also showed an increase to 932 in 2001 (compared to 762 in 2000), which is the highest since 1998. The number of terrorists killed in 2001 (2028) was the highest since inception of terrorism in the state. The security forces, due to specific targeting by the terrorists, suffered 554 casualties in 2001 compared to 400 persons killed in the preceding calendar year. The SF to terrorists killed ratio which had at one point gone down to 1:3.3 has now again risen to ratio 1:3.7 though the terrorists today are much better trained, equipped and experienced than before. As stated earlier, after the assembly election in the state in 1996, Pakistan has desperately tried to pump in foreign mercenaries to provide the cutting edge leadership to militant’s activities in J&K. Now about 1/3 of the total terrorists killed in J&K are foreign mercenaries as indicated by the details of militants and foreign militants killed in J&K given below:

In 2001 there were as many as 25 Fidayeen or suicide attacks on Government installations and security camps and pickets. The suicide attack on the Assembly Complex in Srinagar on October 1st was the biggest strike in which 11 Police and paramilitary men and 23 civilians were killed and over 65 wounded. In another attack on an Army convoy at Ramban on November 18 as many as 10 Army men were killed.

RECOVERY OF ARMS

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Cum total
AK Rifles & Pistols 1991 3169 4260 3130 3136 3020 3202 2749 2104 1629 1887 2016 32293
UMG's 77 130 164 142 127 67 84 64 71 28 21 10 985
Rocket Launcher(s) 108 29 62 36 31 36 43 81 140 42 59 39 706

Both AK-Rifles and pistols became a symbol of status and authority for terrorists who pushed poets, writers and intellectuals to the wall. During the last 12 years 32293 AK rifles & pistols were recovered from the militants and out of this 2016 were seized during 2001. This trend, definitely, does not go with the Kashmiri culture and ethos. The fanatic and fundamentalist forces are trying to convert the land of Sufis and Saints into a graveyard. The people's resolve is to thwart it.

PAKISTAN’S INVOLVEMENT IN TERRORISM DIRECTED AGAINST INDIA

(a) Hijacking of Indian Airlines Plane:

Following the arrest of four militants accomplices in Mumbai the Pakistan establishment stands fully exposed, as regards its complicity in the hijacking of the Indian Airlines Flight IC-814 on 22.12.1999, which took off from Kathmandu, All these, four activists are of the Harkat-ul-Ansar, the fundamentalism tanzeem based in Ralwapindi (Pakistan), which rechristened itself as Harkat-ul-Mujahideen after being declared a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTR) by the U.S. Out of these four activists, two activists were Pakistani and one Nepali and one Indian from Mumbai. Terrorist from India, was recruited by the ISI while he was in the Gulf Region. He later underwent intensive training in two camps – one in Pakistan and the other in Afghanistan.

2. Interrogation of these four terrorists has confirmed that the Indian Airlines Plane hijack was an ISI operation executed with the assistance of Harkat-ul-Ansar, and further, that all the five hijackers are Pakistanies.

3. Apart from the testimony given by the four Harkat operatives, Pakistan’s complicity in this diabolic episode is borne out by the events that occurred in the course of the hijack episode itself including the fact that a significant percentage of the 36 imprisoned terrorists hijackers asked to be released from Indian Jails were Pakistani.

(b) Chittisinghpora Incident – March 20-21, 2000

Militants have targeted both the majority and minority communities, one of the aims of the Pak sponsored terrorists has been to try to create a communal divide by indulging in group killings of minority community so as to provoke people on communal lines and also to create scare. In the past they have resorted to mass killing of minority community in District Doda and Udhampur.

2. During the night intervening March 20-21, at about 2200 hours, in a demonstrative action targeting the Sikh community in the Kashmir Valley, a combined group of terrorists suspected to be belonging to Lashkar-e-Toiba and Hizbul Mujahideen shot dead 35 Sikhs at Chittisinghpora village in Anantnag district. The militants wearing army camouflage uniform asked the residents of the village to. Assemble for an army operation and segregated the males from the rest before opening fire. It is a Sikh dominated village. While retreating, the militants had also set on fire the middle school building in the village.

3. This is one of the most gruesome and ghastly crime perpetrated by the terrorists on the innocent citizens, particularly of Sikh community, with a view to resort to ethnic cleansing of the valley, and try to provoke a communal backlash underlining the nefarious political designs of the terrorist groups operating in J&K and their mentors across. This was also perhaps an act intended to draw international media attention to the Kashmir imbroglio at a time when the US President was making a visit to this country. However, in the long run it may not serve the purpose of the terrorists as it had let to a strong backlash from the Sikh Community as also from the US President. This had forced Pakistan not only to denounce the incident but also to try and put the blame on the doorsteps of Indian intelligence agencies.

4. Subsequent to the Chitisingpora massacre two Pak nationals were arrested in J&K. Of the two Mohd. Suhail Malik @ Assad Suhail @ Amir @ Hafiz, code Abu Saharia R/o Sialkot Pakistan confessed of having been part of the group of LET militants that put on Army uniform and carried liquor bottles to falsely give the impression that the massacre had been carried out by the Indian Army.

5. The other Pak militant Zahid Hussain @Zahid @ Wasim @Abu Mohamad S/O Mohmad Hussain R/O Gujrnawalla, Pakistan was also part of the same militant group but did not take part in the massacre at Chitisinghpora.

(c) Incidents of attack on Amarnath Yatris in 2000:

A series of ghastly incidents perpetrated by militants taking a toll of as many 80 lives killed in J&K on the night of 1st-2nd August 2000.

2. On August 1, at about 1845 hours, two terrorist armed with AK rifles appeared near the foot bridge in Lidder Nallah in Pahalgam and started firing indiscriminately on Yatris (pilgrims or the annual Amarnath pilgrimage) and shopkeepers. In the firing by the terrorists resulting exchange of fire, 32 persons were killed, some on the spot (excluding 2 militants) of whom 20 were yatries (including 2 unidentified bodies), 10 were locals and 2 were police personnel. 42 persons sustained injuries (out of which 18 were locals).

3. In the second and third incidents, militants had attacked two brick kiln labour camps, one at Mir Bazar, Quazigund in Anantnag District the other at Mir Nowgam (Achhabal). 19 labourers were killed at Mir Bazar and 7 labourers at Mir Nowgam. During the same night in Pogal Paristan in Ramban area (Doda District) another group of militants killed 14 persons. In the same district in village Keyar eight members of a village defence committee were killed by terrorists. The sixth incident took place at Kalaroos (Kupwara district) where five members of a Muslim family were massacred.

(d)

Kothi Bagh Bomb blast in Srinagar on 10th Aug. 2000.

The Kothibagh bomb blast case opposite the State Bank of India in Srinagar on 10th Aug’2000 in which 15 persons including 12 police personnel and 1 photo journalist of the national daily, "The Hindustan Times” were killed and 23 were injured was also organized by Lashkar-e-Toiba on instructions received from Pakistan to indulge in something spectacular. A joint team of SOG Srinagar and local police arrested 6 accused affiliated to Lashkar-e-Toiba who were involved in this blast case. The car No.JK01 D 9009 of J&K bank had brought to the spot by Iqbal Khan @Abu Hurera, a foreign mercenary along with the Mir Hussain Cheechee @ Shabir @ Kaloo Khan and a female companion around 12 p.m. on and parked adjacent to SBI lane.

(e) Attack on Amarnath Yatris in 2001:

In an attempt to disrupt the Government’s endeavours at restoring peace and normalcy in J&K by perpetrating violence on innocent civilians, terrorist outfits struck in the wee hours of 21st July 2001 at Sheshnag Amarnath Yatri Camp, in Anantnag District. A grenade blast took place at 1.30 a.m. near Yatri Camp at Sheshnag. Police personnel headed by Dy. SP, Shri Praveen Kumar rushed to the spot and after half an hour another grenade blast took place followed by firing by a militant from a tent near the Yatra Camp. After the initial burst, the militant continued firing occasionally. The area was cordoned and segregated and at about 7 am one terrorist ran out of the tent firing indiscriminately. The intermittent firing by the terrorist resulted in the death of 6 pilgrims, 2 security personnel and 4 local civilians and injuries to 8 pilgrims, 5 security forces personnel and 2 local civilians. The security forces shot down the terrorist. The slain militant belongs to Lashkar-E-Toiba and 1 AK 56 rifle, 4 magazines and some ammunition were recovered from this person. He also had some incriminating document.

2. Further 12 innocent civilians were also massacred in Kishtwar area Doda District in two separate incidences on 22nd July 2001.

(f) Attack on State Assembly in Srinagar on 1.10.2001.

In a major assault on the symbols of democracy, terrorists launched a fidayeen attack on the State Assembly in Srinagar killing 39 persons and injuring 60 others, by blewing up a car bomb. This includes 4 Pakistani terrorists associated with Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) .

2. In the afternoon, after the day’s proceedings were over, one Tata Sumo, later on found hijacked one just half an hour before the incident, crashed into the bunker adjoining the main gate of the Assembly Complex.. Instantaneously an explosion was caused resulting in spot death of several persons including security personnel and civilians and injuries to many others. Later on, 3 terrorists holed up inside the Assembly premises were killed in a fierce encounter with the security forces. The terrorist outfits, JeM claimed the responsibility for the attack.

3. The identify of all the 4 terrorists killed has been identified as under:

i. Wajahat Hussain code Saifullah r/o Pakistan
ii. Mohd. Irfan Zaman code Omar r/o Karachi
iii. Abdul Raouf Ehsan r/o Shewal Punjab, Pakistan
iv. Tariq Ahmed code Ayobi r/o Sehwal Punjab, Pakistan.

4. The dastardly terrorist attack has sent shock waves throughout the State and people of all walk of life have condemned this cowardly act of terrorism in strongest words.

5. This emphasized the desperation of terrorist outfits and changing complexion of the terrorist violence by resorting to more and more such fidayeen attacks to ward off increasing pressure of Security Forces. Intense pressure on terrorist will continue to built up to frustrate their nefarious designs.

6. Government has not sought the intervention of any country in solving the problem of cross border terrorism in J&K. However, Government has used every opportunity to apprise the International Community including the United States, of Pakistan’s support to and sponsorship of cross border terrorism in India. Following the terrorist fidayeen attack on 1st October 2001 on J&K Assembly building in Srinagar, the Prime Minister had conveyed to the United States and other friendly countries, the sense of anguish felt by the people of India at this terrorist attack.

7. On 12th October 2001, the United States placed Jaish-e-Mohammed the group that had claimed responsibility for this incident, on the list of terrorist organizations of the US Department of Treasury under the Presidential Executive order of 23rd September 2001.

(g) Attack on Parliament on 13 December 2001:

The shocking and ghastly attack against the Parliament House on 13th December 2001 was an assault on the very bastion of Indian democracy and was clearly aimed at wiping out the country’s top political leadership. It is only the alertness and the supreme sacrifice of the security personnel on duty that averted what could have been a national catastrophe. The terrorist assault has shocked the entire nation. The terrorist act and its perpetrators deserve to be condemned in the strongest of terms.

2. The attack on the Parliament is undoubtedly the most audacious and the most alarming act of terrorism in the nearly two-decade long history of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in India. The Prime Minister in his Address to the Nation on 13th December declared that the fight against terrorism had reached a decisive phase. The Prime Minister also stated that the Indian people are united and determined to stamp out terrorism from the country.

3. Investigations at this stage indicate that the five terrorists entered the Parliament House complex at about 1140 AM on 13th December in an Ambassador car bearing registration number DL-3CJ-1527 and moved towards building gate number 12 when it encountered the carcade of Vice-President of India which was parked at Gate No. 11. A member of the Parliament House Watch and Ward Staff became suspicious about the identity of the car and immediately ran after it. The car was forced to turn backward and in the process it hit the Vice-President’s car. When challenged by the security personnel present on the spot, all the five terrorists jumped out of the car and started firing indiscriminately. The Delhi Police personnel attached with the Vice-President’s security as also other security personnel on duty immediately took positions and returned the fire. At this stage, an alarm was raised and all the gates in the building were closed. The terrorists ran towards Gate No. 12 and then to Gate No. 1 of the Parliament House building where one terrorist was shot dead by the security forces and in the process the explosives wrapped around his body exploded. The remaining four terrorists turned back and reached Gate No. 9 of the building. Three of them were gunned down there. The fifth terrorist ran towards Gate No. 5 where he too was gunned down.

4. Investigations led to the arrest of Syed Abdul Rehman Gilani, a lecturer in a local college whose interrogation led to the identification and subsequent arrest of two other accomplices, Afzal and Shaukat Hussain Guru.

5. Afzal, an important associate and support element in the conspiracy has confessed that all five militants were Pakistanis and has identified them. Significantly, nobody from India, including J&K, has claimed that the killed militants were related to them. Further, on the eve of this suicidal action, some of these militants spoke on telephone to their relatives in Pakistan, particularly Karachi. There is substantial proof in this regard.

6. Afzal has also disclosed that the suicide attack on Parliament was directed by Shahbaz Khan alias Ghazi Baba, who is a known Pakistani national and presently the Chief Commander of JeM operating in Kashmir. He was also the mastermind behind the attack on J&K Assembly on October 1, 2001. Afzal has also revealed that in the period before the attack, they maintained constant touch through e-mail with Ibrahim, located in Pakistan, who is a senior JeM functionary under Maulana Masood Azhar.

7. Afzal has disclosed that the five Pak militants had been advised by their Pak masters to communicate with them through third countries so that their Pak linkages remain unknown. There is substantial proof in this regard. Pak funding to the militants was similarly routed via third countries.

8. Particularly significant is the fact that detonators seized from one of the hideouts of Pak militants are of Pak origin and the carton containing these detonators bore the name of Nobel Detonators (Pvt) Ltd., known to be an explosives manufacturing unit located in Wah, District Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

9. Prof. A.R. Gilani arrested in connection with the conspiracy has revealed that LeT and JeM were responsible for the attack. Technical intelligence available with our agencies also spoke of the involvement of LeT, which was under directions of Pak ISI to remain totally silent in this regard and to not even discuss amongst themselves.

10. Afzal has revealed that slain militant, Mohammad is identical with Sunny Ahmed Kazi alias Burger (a Pakistani) who was one of the hijackers of IC-814 from Kathmandu in December 1999. There is indeed a striking resemblance in the photographs of the two. This would, however, require confirmation through biometric tests.

11. Investigations also indicated that the two groups, LeT and JeM, had also planned other attacks in Delhi and other parts of India. This incident has once again made it clear that the real epicenter of terrorism lies in Pakistan. Terrorist groups like the LeT, JeM and others continue to operate with impunity from Pakistani soil.

12. Even after the ghastly terrorist attacks of 11 September, the leaders of LeT and other Pak-based terrorist groups continued to publicly issue threats against India. For example, in a discussion organized by Pakistani Urdu newspaper, ‘Ausaf’ on 20th November 2001, the Amir of LeT and its Chief ideologue, Hafeez Mohammad Sayeed vowed to revive the so-called struggle in Kashmir by ‘launching six to seven Red Fort-type attacks in India’. Such threats were also been put up recently on its website. Further, in an interview with the ‘Gulf News’ on 21st November, he stated that LeT would device new strategies to overcome the pressure from the West. In mid-December, LeT also launched a fund raising campaign for their activities in J&K through appeals published in the Pakistani Urdu press. Pak press reports also indicate that groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammad, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen,

Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, Jamat-e-Islami and Sunni Tehrik openly raised funds before the Id prayers. As much as Rs. 100 million was reportedly collected in Karachi itself.

13. Foreign Secretary called in the Pak High Commissioner on 14th December 2001 and issued a verbal demarche informing him that we have reliable information based on technical intelligence that the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) were involved in the terrorist attack on our Parliament and called upon Pakistan to take immediate action to arrest those associated with these organizations, seal their offices, stop their activities and block all their financing sources. She added that actions against the LeT and JeM have already been taken in several countries, including US, UK and India.

14. In view of the complete lack of concern on the part of Pakistan and its continued promotion of cross-border terrorism, on 21st December 2001, Government announced its decision to recall the Indian High Commissioner from Islamabad, as also the decision to terminate the services of the Samjhauta Express and the bus service between Delhi and Lahore w.e.f. 1st January 2002.

15. Regrettably, Pakistan failed to appreciate India’s serious concerns about the ramifications of the 13th December attack on our Parliament. It is doubly regrettable that attempts to dupe the international community with cosmetic half measures, non-measures or even fictitious incidents have continued, which is unacceptable – terrorism needs to be eradicated fully, regardless of whatever name or ground is used to justify it.

16. Government of India, therefore, had no option but to take further steps including reduction of the staff of the respective High Commissions in the two countries by 50%, restriction on their movements within the municipal limits of Delhi, and cessation or suspension of over flight facilities available to Pakistan or Pakistan International Airlines to fly over Indian airspace.

17. It appears that Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf had joined the international coalition against terrorism not out of choice but out of compulsion. Even as Pakistan professed cooperation with the international coalition, reports continued to come in of men and material going across clandestinely to the Taliban. We were all witness to the efforts made by the Pakistani leaders to evacuate their nationals, including Army personnel from Kunduz.

18. Pakistan recently announced some cosmetic measurements such as seizure of assets of LeT and Ummah Tameer-e-Nau, both of which were recently cited by the US President as having links with the Al-Qaida terrorist network. Simultaneously, however, LeT announced that the title of its parent organisation had been changed from Markaz Dawa-wal-Irshad to ‘Jamaat ud Dawah’. It also announced the formation of a new general council headed by Maulana Abdul Wahid Kashmiri. Lashkar had already announced earlier that its office was being moved to POK. As for accounts of LeT being frozen byPakistan, specific details have not been made public. In any case sufficient time was available for the money to be diverted from these accounts. Similarly, action taken against JeM so far is clearly not enough. In any case, JeM has already renamed itself Tehriq ul Furqan and steps against JeM can thus not be anything more than a superficial action.

19. The above is an assessment that even Pakistani commentators themselves share. According to a well-known Pak columnist, in ‘The News’ dated 25th December 2001, "any determination of the military government to root out Jehadi outfits from Pakistan may only have superficial success as almost all groups which were likely to be targeted .. have already changed their names and have decentralised their operation into various secret underground cells”.

20. After the events of September 11, the focus of international attention in the struggle against terrorism had, for some time, concentrated on Afghanistan. Exigencies of action had made many ignore for a while that the problem itself could not really be an effective part of the solution.

21. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind about the support that terrorism receives in Pakistan. There is only some confusion about whether or not there is now a change of heart. We have seen no evidence of any such change of heart.



पेज की प्रतिक्रिया

Comments

Post A Comment

  • Name *
    E-mail *
  • Write Your Comment *
  • Verification Code * Verification Code
In Focus
See Also