Mumbai blasts and the Indian foreign policy

GLOBAL TERRORISM: It has been more than two weeks since serial blasts devastated seven metro trains in Mumbai killing more than 200 innocent passengers.

After 9/11 United States of America has set standards of how governments hurt by terror attack should respond to them: They should attack those countries, which in their reckoning "could" be backing or arming the terrorists. What about evidence of involvement in these attacks?

In this case, too, US has shown that proof of involvement of a country could be doctored, as they did in the case of Iraq, blaming it for possessing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) even when they did not have it.

A section within the Indian foreign establishment and media that announced that Pakistan was responsible for the gruesome incident in Mumbai has been demanding tough action against Pakistan President Pervez Mussharraf.

Some TV channels have become hysterical in demanding that the Indian government should attack Pakistan. They have been building a case for crossing the line of control and blowing up the terror camps in Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

They have tried to tell their viewers - upset by the happenings in Mumbai and elsewhere - that the only way terrorists can be tamed is by giving a black eye to Pakistan.

Israel's invasion of Lebanon to wallop the Hezbullah militants is given as an example of what global masculinity is all about.

"Look at how the Israelis defend themselves even when they are surrounded by hostile countries. Why can't we learn some thing from them", is the refrain we normally hear from some pompous TV anchors who project as if they determine national policies and country's destiny.

These TV channels have been replaying old footage of Mumbai underworld dons, Dawood Ibrahim, in Pakistan and Dubai and how he was involved in the Mumbai blast of 1993.

The Indian government has claimed that Pakistan's intelligence service has been using him to carry out their nefarious agenda. These channels, perhaps at the bidding of the hawks in the intelligence establishment, have been showing images of Ibrahim in Karachi.

Proffering this as evidence needed to bash up Pakistan, these channels have taken up the responsibility to tell the Indian decision makers of how to attack Pakistan.

In a bizarre talking heads programme, there were a few fuddy-duddy generals and security experts that were exploring all the options of how India could "take out" the terrorists. What was worrisome was the manner in which they went about their discussion.

Firstly, it appeared that the government had found reasons and proof to attack and secondly, they were just wondering from where Indian troops should attack.

It would be unfair to say that this TV channel does not have good contacts in the government and surely they must be running these programmes after getting some kind of endorsement from a section within the ruling establishment.

Would the Indian government try to follow the example of US and Israel even if they did not have the proof to nail Pakistan to the Mumbai train blasts?

New Delhi sounded out the US government about Pakistan's involvement, but they were surprised when they were asked whether they had proof of Islamabad's complicity in the Mumbai carnage.

US treated Mussharraf as a good friend and did not want to hear anything against him. The Indian government claimed that they would present the evidence soon.

The track record of Indian intelligence agencies in putting the dots together of these conspiracies has been rather unimpressive. The government agencies have blamed Lashkar-e-taiba militants and their Indian harbourers for these attacks.

Many of them have been killed in "encounters" in Delhi and more recently in Nagpur. Lashkar militants want to establish an Islamic state in India and Pakistan and they are also opposed to General Mussharraf.

Islamic militants were behind the assassination attempts against the Pakistan President. Both the Indian and Pakistani leadership had premised the peace process on the assumption that terrorism was autonomous and constituted a threat to modern nation states.

President Mussharraf had promised to India that it would not allow acts of terror against India from its soil. The Indian government had not believed him, but were forced by the US and other western powers to do so.

Mumbai blasts has the potential to upset the delicate balance and reverse the peace initiative of the last few years, if the Indian government believes in what a section of the national media has been saying: "Mussharraf cannot be trusted and needs to be dealt with a heavy hand."

If Mussharraf and Pakistan is involved in Mumbai atrocities and other terror acts in the country then surely the Indian government should do whatever is necessary to safeguard its borders and cities, but it should not try doing a US or Israel in this case.

The Indian foreign policy has always prided itself on being very moral and scoffed at pragmatism displayed by western powers. It has given precedence to rule of law and sense of justice and fair play rather than following the bullying tactics of superpowers.

Closer relations with US should not allow anyone, least of all the media and retired generals, to think that they can behave like law-unto-themselves - Uncle Sam.
