India supporting insurgency in Sri Lanka
Mamoona Ali Kazmi

IN THE midst of the seemingly unending violence in Sri Lanka the LTTE’s newly acquired air prowess has added a perilous dimension to the ethnic strife plaguing Sri Lanka. In a recent incident two micro-light aircraft of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) dropped three bombs at Sri Lanka defence lines in Welioya. This is not the first time that such an event occurred. In the past on 25 March 2007 the Tamil Tigers targeted the main military base of Sri Lanka Air Force on the outskirts of the capital Colombo, killing three Air Force personnel and injuring 16 others. The attack was also executed by a micro-light aircraft carrying two bombs. The Tamil Tigers have threatened more such aerial attacks.
The credit for formation of air wing of LTTE is the handi work of Shankar alias Vythialingam Sornalignam. An aeronautical engineer by profession, he holds an engineering degree in aeronautics from Hindustan Engineering College in Tamil Nadu. According to the technique developed by the Indian agent, the micro-light aircraft can be turned into lethal flying bomb, carrying up to 20 kg of explosives and can easily cover a distance of 500 km. Once a micro-light aircraft takes off, its engine can be switched off to save fuel. It becomes like a glider and floats in the air using favorable wind currents and its fiberglass body enables it to cover longer distance. The Indian supplied Indra radars to the Sri Lankan Air Force for the detection of low level air crafts failed to detect the two micro-light aircraft of the LTTE.
India’s neighbours, through experience, have learnt to live in the shadow of India’s hegemonic designs. Her favoured inclination has been to seek instability through promotion of insurgencies by supporting the destabilizing forces. Nowhere is it evident than in Sri Lanka where feared LTTE are engaged in a bloody insurgency that has brought the Sri Lankan Government to its knees. For their war effort they need resources for which India is more than willing to oblige. At the same time India is not willing to provide offensive weaponry to Sri Lanka. Ever since the Sri Lankan Government proposed and accepted the 13th amendment to Sri Lanka’s constitution as a means to devolve power within a unitary state, India’s interference in the affairs of its southern neighbour is becoming increasingly clear. India has a role in the ethnic crisis of Sri Lanka. It was India which in 1980s trained, armed and financed several Tamil militant groups to fight the Sri Lankan Government. Again it was India which came to the rescue of the LTTE and other militant groups when the Sri Lankan security forces were about to capture the Tamil Tiger stronghold of Vadamarachchi in 1987. India imposed on the 13th amendment to the Sri Lanka constitution following a 1987 treaty. Even after Rajiv Gandhi, the former Indian Prime Minister, who browbeat Sri Lanka into accepting the 13th amendment was killed in a Tamil Tiger suicide attack, India continued to play its role of running with the hare and hunting with the hounds and maintained covert links with the LTTE.
LTTE movement enjoys tremendous support and sympathy in Tamil Nadu. There are a lot of cultural and ethnic similarities between the Tamils in Sri Lanka and Tamil Nadu. These similarities create a strong bond between people in both countries. In the early 80s when LTTE started its operations and was establishing itself as the sole Tamil voice, the then Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu M.G.Ramachandran provided the LTTE with logistical support, and this continued till Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination. After his assassination the political parties in Tamil Nadu have not actively supported the LTTE but they even then allowed LTTE to use Tamil Nadu as a logistical base. Similarly, the LTTE issue is linked to the issue of Tamil nationalism. Tamilians in Eelam are fighting to assert their independence from the Sinhalese majority, similar to Tamilians in India, who also demand their independence from the Hindi majority, establishing a common cause with the LTTE and demanding an independent Tamil homeland. Tamil Nadu is a major source from which LTTE procure arms and ammunition. Since the collapse of the Norwegian sponsored ceasefire in January 2006, the Sri Lankan Navy had destroyed nine trawlers and some smaller fiber boats, carrying explosives all coming from Tamil Nadu coast in the Gulf of Mannar region. So it is clear that LTTE is now buying raw materials for its explosives factory from the Indian market. A Sri Lankan government spokesman said, “ We now have credible evidence that (fishing) trawlers registered in India are being used by the Tigers and that the government has formally asked India to take steps to stop arms smuggling”.
Materials for making explosives are taken to Sri Lanka from Tamil Nadu. These explosives are taken to the Tamil Nadu by boats from several landing points along the Ramanathapuram coast. These goods came from Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra to Tamil Nadu. Tamil Tigers have acquired high speed boats from India so that they could easily reach Tamil Nadu coast in short time to get arms. Smuggling assignments are undertaken with boats from Indian side in exchange for cash and liquor from Sri Lankan Tamil operators. Thousands of Indian boats still enter the sea unchecked and cross the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) freely across the Palk Strait and Gulf of Mannar. Most of the smuggling is either for the LTTE or with its transshipment to Western countries. They smuggle every thing that can aid a war effort such as medicines, fuel, arms, ammunition and components for making explosives, electric detonators, gelatins, ball bearings and metal bars. As the LTTE is under pressure with depleting financial resources and increasing war expenditure, so India offers the only easy access to essential supplies. Indian smugglers employed the Tamil refugees in the Ramanathapuram district of Tamil Nadu as couriers for transporting certain goods for easy money.
India’s predominantly Tamil state, Tamil Nadu, provided bases and supplies for the Sri Lankan Tamil guerrillas. But the Indian side despite checking the illegal arms trade from Tamil Nadu to Sri Lanka accused Thailand as the main source of weapons to Tamil Tigers. So far no seizures had been made to prove that LTTE was procuring arms from Thailand. India, in its well known way is double crossing Sri Lanka. In this context it has become the major arms supplier to the LTTE. Tamil Nadu has turned into a conduit for illegal arms and ammunition. The LTTE had long been procuring arms and ammunition with the help of smugglers by sea from Tamil Nadu and the Indian Government is keeping its eyes wide shut. At the other hand, India is supplying arms to Sri Lankan Security Forces to be used against LTTE. It is interesting that India is supplying more sophisticated weapons to LTTE than to Sri Lankan government and rebuked Sri Lanka for expressing a desire to procure sophisticated equipment from Pakistan and China. M.K. Narayanan, India’s National Security Advisor said, “We will not give such strong deterrents and arms to Sri Lanka that will ensure superiority of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces over the Tamil guerrillas”. It means India wants to continue Sri Lanka’s war with the Tamils so that it can sell arms to both parties.

 

The vexed Kashmir issue
Ummara Shafqat

IT WAS surprising to read what Mr. Parthasarathy had to say in his column published in the “The Pioneer”. The stance he gave over Kashmir issue and Indo-Pakistan relation was not only lopsided but far from truth as well. It is not difficult to discern that the on-going composite dialogues between both the countries is just about crawling without yielding any tangible progress on the issue, and critics like Mr. Parthasarathy are only making the situation shoddier. Interestingly, the Indian critic is making great emphasis on the “contradictory statements voiced in Islamabad” on complex issues like Jammu and Kashmir. It is beyond understanding why the statement given by Mr. Asif Zardari been made into an issue? Did the foreign office state anything in support of his statement? It was a just a personal view and not the nation’s consent regarding the Kashmir issue. From the very first day Pakistan has a single and solemn view concerning the Kashmir issue, so can people just stop beating around the bush. The Kashmir issue has to be resolved if they want the region to get adorned with peace. The Simla Agreement clearly states that “both Governments agree that their respective heads will meet again… to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalization of relations, including a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumptions of diplomatic relations.” Pakistan adheres to the Simla Agreement even today and these are bindings on India too. If there is any negativity concerning the matter, it is all because of the lack of proactive response by India to match Pakistan’s solutions regarding the Kashmir issue.
Despite that Pakistan has voiced optimism that the upcoming composite dialogue meeting with India would lead to the resolution of vexed Kashmir issue, India apparently is not showing readiness to solve the problem. Kashmir is said to be an important issue in the eight-point agenda of the composite dialogue meeting scheduled in Islamabad in May 2008. In fact there has been a very little progress in the process and apparently it is all because of India’s impassive behavior. They stress upon increased people to people contacts and promoting trade and commercial links. We as a nation regard their perspective but it is not possible to discuss trade and other subjects unless they coincide with substantive progress on the core issue of Kashmir. Today, the Kashmir controversy is the issue which is not letting the region get adorned with peace. The stakes are getting higher as both the countries have developed nuclear arsenal. India is facing an internal as well regional peace dilemma at present. Being the largest democracy she has to be pursuing peace in her own neighborhood, especially with her nuclear neighbor Pakistan. However, she does not seem to be prepared to move qualitatively in the direction of resolution of all the outstanding political difference; especially Kashmir. It appears as if she wants to sustain the process till the time when the status quo can be accepted as a solution. In addition to this dismal situation, the Indian think tanks are adding to the disappointment by giving negative statements. To them this peace process is just an illusion.
India can hardly gain credibility in the international community unless she shows that she is moving to establish peace in her own region, since the cause of main conflict in the region involves India herself. At some stage in time, India will have to shift away from her traditional posturing on Kashmir if she wants to establish peace in the region in a true manner. For unless she does this, her own credibility as a global player will not be sustainable. Distressfully, India has restricted the activities of the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) in her territory. It was established by the Security Council in 1949 to observe the Kashmir conflict. Interestingly, she denies to the resolutions of UN but her fondness of a permanent seat in the Security Council is never declining. Yet now, how India resolves her peace dilemma will determine her future role in the international system.





Selective data, wrong lessons
Ramzy Baroud

THE various data provided in the US State Department’s annual terrorism report for 2007 point towards some interesting, if not puzzling conclusions. The document, made available on April 30 through the State Department’s website, makes no secret of the fact that Al Qaeda is back, strong as ever. It also suggests that violence worldwide is nowhere near subsiding, despite President Bush’s repeated assurances regarding the success of his ‘war on terror’. But will the report inspire a serious reflection of the country’s detrimental foreign policy, and its role in the current situation? Let’s look at some of the data. To start with, take Pakistan. Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda inspired attacks in the country more than doubled (from 375 to 877) between 2006 and 2007. These attacks have claimed the lives of 1,335 people, compared to 335 in a previous report. That is a jump of almost 300 per cent.
Then there’s Afghanistan, which was supposedly ‘liberated’ shortly after September 11, 2001. The number of attacks reported in this country experienced a sharp increase by 16 per cent in 2007. 1,127 violent incidents killing 1,966 people also represents a significant surge of violence in comparison to 2006’s 1,257 deaths. There have also been many other violent incidents around the world, including but not limited to North Africa, and the terrorist bombings in Algeria in particular. But this is barely half the story — or 40 per cent of it, if we want to be as specific as the terrorism report. Iraq accounted for 60 per cent of worldwide terrorism fatalities. Considering the fact that the horrifying violence currently witnessed in Iraq was unheard of prior to the US invasion of 2003, will the Bush Administration take a moment to connect the dots? Even a third grader could figure this one out: the US occupation was a major, if not sole factor in Iraq’s relentless bloodbath. In order to right the wrong in Iraq, the US military should clearly just withdraw, and Bush — or whoever next claims the White House - should stop fabricating pretexts to justify the prolonged mission. On May 1, 2003, President Bush declared the end of major combat operations in Iraq. As he stood on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln a huge banner behind him bore the words “Mission Accomplished”. The New York Times then wrote, “The Bush administration is planning to withdraw most United States combat forces from Iraq over the next several months and wants to shrink the American military presence to less than two divisions by the fall.”
Instead, more than five years after Bush’s speech, the administration seems determined to maintain a military surge, having added 20,000 soldiers. Making no apologies for the war’s contribution to an increase in terrorist activities, Bush’s officials continue to rationalise it as a commonsense response to ongoing violence, conveniently omitting the US’s own part in this violence; the report doesn’t classify any of the thousands of innocent victims killed by US or coalition forces as victims of terrorism.
Russ Travers, Deputy Director of the Counterterrorism Centre stated on the day the report was published, “It’s a fair statement that around the globe, people are getting increasingly efficient at killing other people.” While Travers’ assertion is undoubtedly true, there seems to be no intention of providing any context, no connection drawn to the US’ direct invasions, or indirect but equally devastating role in campaigns of violence, whether in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan. But what the State Department’s terrorism report didn’t fail to do was once again identify Iran as the world’s “most active” state sponsor of terrorism. As reported in the Associated Press on May 1, Iran was responsible for “supporting Palestinian extremists and insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq, where...elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps continued to give militants weapons, training and funding.”

—Khaleej Times