[iwar] [fc:'USS.Clueless'.sailing.to.nowhere]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-10-22 06:42:14
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Sleeper.Agents'.Not.Just.Arabs,.But.Also.Europeans]"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Eavesdropping,.U.S..Allies.See.New.Terror.Attack]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Message-Id: <200110221342.f9MDgEY03456@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 06:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:'USS.Clueless'.sailing.to.nowhere]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

'USS Clueless' sailing to nowhere
K.P.S. Gill

The war against terrorism, it is now increasingly acknowledged, is going
to be a long haul.  This is, in part, because of the very nature of
terrorism, the complex patterns of sponsorship, the dependencies of
various state and political entities on their links with subversive
groups, the elaborate global networks of terrorist organisations and
cells that have already been established, and the degree to which
legitimate systems of government, finance, non-governmental groups and
organisations and various other structures in democratic societies have
been penetrated and are exploited by the extremists.  The problem has
been allowed to fester and grow for decades in the benign shadow of much
of the world's tolerant gaze, and often active encouragement, as many of
the nations that believed themselves immune to the disease adopted
attitudes of moral ambivalence, sometimes of cold cynicism, that
strengthened terrorist movements in geographically distant locations. 

While there is now a greater understanding and moral consensus on many
aspects of this modern scourge, and unfortunately for its hapless
victims, the war against terrorism will be protracted even further by
the confusion that continues to characterise the responses of the
political leadership in much of the free world.  This was underlined
rather strongly by a number of events in recent weeks, including some
unseemly controversies surrounding US Secretary of State Colin Powell's
visit to the sub-continent. 

For some of these, at least, Powell was himself responsible, and a few
of his remarks suggested that 'USS Clueless' had embarked on another
voyage into an unfamiliar world, and as has been the case with so many
American interventions in the past, this would also have disastrous
consequences on its ports of call.  Indeed, and amazingly, his
observations - and others emanating from various leaders in the US -
reflected a curious identity of perspectives on some major issues with
those of Osama bin Landen.  Both the US and bin Laden now seem to claim
that the 'central issues' of terrorism are connected with the resolution
of the conflicts over Kashmir and Palestine, and once these are resolved
- evidently to the satisfaction of the sponsors of terrorism -, the
'root causes' of terrorism would substantially have been addressed.  The
only surviving disagreement here is in the position over the US military
presence in the 'Holy Land' of Saudi Arabia.  It is evident that
September 11 has still not convinced many that the terrorists and their
sponsors cannot be allowed to set the world's agenda. 

The US position on Kashmir is dictated as much by abiding, obstinate and
self-serving ignorance, as by its current and uneasy alliance with one
of the chief sponsors of terrorism - Pakistan - who the Americans are
presently trying to seduce and bribe back into the fold of the
righteous.  Given the circumstances of the war against Afghanistan it is
certainly expedient to take Pakistan along for the time being, and the
US has been fairly firm in its pronouncements that terrorism in all
theatres will eventually be addressed with the same severity. 
Significant problems, however, are created by the gratuitous, poorly
informed and ambiguous pronouncements on the nature of the Kashmir
conflict, especially within a context of the heightened tensions in the
entire regions.  I would, of course, not read any Machiavellian
calculations into these postures.  They are, by and large, the
unfortunate consequence of American insularity, insensitivity and
inability to comprehend the nuances of cultures and contexts other than
their own. 

The absurdity of the American position is reflected in its eagerness to
push India and Pakistan into a "peace process" - given the record of US
sponsored "peace processes" the phrase itself sends shivers of
apprehension down the spine - and to force an immediate resumption of an
Indo-Pak dialogue.  This is interesting.  The American president has,
since September 11, repeatedly articulated an uncompromising policy that
makes "no distinction between terrorists and those who harbour them";
bin Laden, the Al Qaeda and the Taliban are wanted "dead or alive"; they
are to be "smoked out" and "brought to justice, or justice will be
brought to them." At the same time, India is told that it must initiate
a dialogue with the chief sponsor of terrorism in the region; it must
"negotiate a solution" to the problem of Kashmir with terrorist groups
and with Musharraf, who controls, harbours, trains, arms and funds them. 
It is high time someone in the Indian leadership told the Americans that
India will seek a negotiated solution on Kashmir with Pakistan and with
Pak-sponsored terrorists the day the US President begins negotiations
with bin Laden and with Mullah Omar to "resolve" the many supposed
"issues" they have raised, and at least some of which find echoes of
sympathy among certain sections of Muslims. 

Regrettably, India has not covered itself with glory at this time.  The
sheer desperation of expectations, the desire to secure an endorsement
of its position on Kashmir from the US, has led, not only to some
unfortunate and ill-timed adventurism along the LoC, but also to a
rather comprehensive loss of dignity that stems largely from the
persistent illusion that America is somehow going to come and "solve"
our problems for us in Kashmir.  This is not only - to borrow a
charmingly blunt expression used by Powell in another context -
"nonsense", it is dangerous nonsense.  Given the disastrous record of US
interventions across the world, the last thing that India could wish
upon itself, and upon the region at large, is any kind of US initiative
to help "resolve" our problems. 

The difficulty is that the Indian leadership still does not appear to
have come to terms with the fact that we have to fight out own battles. 
The best we can expect from the rest of the world is that it should not
extend its indulgences and protection to the sponsors of terrorism;
co-operating nations can help destroy the support structures, on their
soil, of terrorist organisations active in India; and they can help
streamline matters relating to the extradition of terrorists.  Beyond
that, the problem is our own, and will have to be sorted out on the
ground. 

Within this dismal scenario, there are at least some positive
indications.  The first and most obvious of these is the proclamation of
the much delayed and obstructed counter-terrorism Ordinance.  This is a
substantially revised and diluted version of the draft bill that was
circulated by the Law Commission towards the end of 1999, but it is
certainly a step in the right direction. 

Far more significant and far-reaching in its impact, however, has been
the sobriety of the responses of Indian Muslims at large, to the
provocation, not only of Osama bin Laden's calls to jehad, but equally
to the ugly and suddenly escalating campaign launched by the Vishwa
Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal to revive tensions over the Babri
Masjid - Ram Janmbhoomi controversy.  Apart from a handful of lunatic
voices - the Shahi Imam of Delhi's Jama Masjid the most prominent among
these - the Muslim leadership's reactions have been most responsible,
have recognised the gravity of the present situation, and have spoken
out unambiguously against those who claim Islam as a justification for
their acts and campaigns of terror.  Indeed, intimidated and terrorised
from more than one direction, never before has the moderate Muslim
spoken out as firmly against terrorism in the name of Islam has he as
now.  It is saddening, indeed tragic, that the Indian state has failed
so completely to internalise the values of secularism, and despite their
long services and great sacrifices in past wars and present and
continuing conflicts - including those against Pakistan - India's
Muslims are asked, again and again, to stand up and be counted whenever
Pakistan provokes or initiates violence against India. 

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Pinpoint the right security solution for your company- Learn how to add 128- bit encryption and to authenticate your web site with VeriSign's FREE guide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/yQix2C/33_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Sleeper.Agents'.Not.Just.Arabs,.But.Also.Europeans]"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Eavesdropping,.U.S..Allies.See.New.Terror.Attack]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:56 PST