Mumbai: Who did it and why

Indeed, the motivation for these strikes could be putting the kibosh on improving Indo-Pakistani relations under new Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari (the widower of the slain pol Benazir Bhutto).

He has been making peace overtures to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, hoping to improve economic and trade ties between the two South Asian giants to help Pakistan’s struggling economy. This led LeT’s founder to say Zardari was growing too “dovish” on India. Zardari may have also added fuel to the fire by referring to Kashmiri resistance groups as “terrorists” rather than freedom fighters.

Thus, the terrorists may have felt the need to halt any improvement in New Delhi-Islamabad ties, especially if it prevents Pakistan from giving up the Kashmir struggle. They’d likely find some terror groups, such as Indian Mujahedeen, willing to assist with such an effort.

Another attack on India with even a whiff of Pakistani government involvement would kill any chance of better relations — and maintain the terrorists’ leverage over Pakistani policies.

If there’s any glint of hopeful news, it’s that Islamabad may finally take tougher steps to rein in JeM and LeT. (We’ve already seen some improved efforts recently against the Taliban and al Qaeda in the tribal areas near Afghanistan.)

Zardari’s offer of full cooperation with India may help restabilize relations between the neighbors. The early challenge is a possible Indian military response against Pakistani interests, which could lead to escalation.

The tragedy also provides Washington an opportunity for greater counterterror cooperation with both Islamabad and New Delhi — an idea both may be open to now. That step would make us all safer.

Peter Brookes is the author of “A Devil’s Triangle: Terrorism, WMD and Rogue States.” He can be reached at peterbrookes@heritage.org

1|2

SharePrintEmail

Write a Comment

Terms

Enter your comments - 3000 characters max

Type in image code

Submit

 Receive China Post promos
 Respond to this email