Bonding over terror

Post-26/11, amid India’s dossier diplomacy and Pakistan’s steadfast non-cooperation, the singular high point has been the growing US response to India’s terror concerns.
US pressure in the first few months after the Mumbai attacks got Pakistan to acknowledge, albeit reluctantly, Ajmal Kasab’s nationality and the involvement of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) top gun Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi.

Again, the US helped India track down the VoIP (voice over internet protocol) numbers that allowed the LeT men in Pakistan to keep in touch with the terrorists in Mumbai. The conversations were traced back to the Pakistani handlers, thanks to superior US technology. Now, with the arrest of David Coleman Headley and Tahawwur Hussain Rana by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the scope and expanse of the investigation has widened. Much more crucial information is likely to come out in the coming days.

“The FBI is providing Indian intelligence agencies with information about the LeT by intercepting their conversation almost daily. The monitoring of the LeT has been a great help to India,” a senior official concedes. India does not have sophisticated listening devices to track the LeT, he adds.

“Pakistan now knows that it has been exposed and is under much closer watch by the US and the rest of the international community. It is aware that it is no longer easy to camouflage the activities of anti-India terror groups operating from within its territory,” says analyst K Subrahmanyam. “The fact that there has not been another major attack since Mumbai is probably also because of US pressure,” he adds.

Why is US helping India?
For decades before 9/11, the US had turned a deaf ear to India’s complaints about Islamabad’s role in terror attacks in Kashmir and the rest of the country. Initially, it was the Cold War divide. The US backed Pakistan as India was firmly entrenched in the Russian camp.

But even after the Cold War years, Washington stayed aloof from India’s concerns. Things changed dramatically after 9/11 after the US had first-hand experience of terror. The attack on the Indian parliament had it perturbed. Since then, both the US and the EU have been conscious of India’s problems. George Bush as president gave US foreign policy a decisive pro-India tilt.

The fact that six American citizens and at least three Israelis were killed during the Mumbai attacks was probably the last straw. It combined with the global realisation that the fight against terror could not be confined to just the Taliban and al Qaeda and had to include groups working against India.

Officials in the Obama administration are keen to carry the Bush legacy forward. They are trying to make Islamabad rein in terrorists of all hues. But since US interests veer round getting the Pakistan army to take action against al Qaeda and the Taliban more than against the Lashkar and others, India feels neglected.

But with the Headley-Rana arrest, the conclusion is that terror groups from Pakistan or influenced by jehadi ideology are equally against India, the US, Israel and western interests. All this is making Washington much more proactive in getting Islamabad to rein in terror outfits. But it will be foolish of India to depend solely on the US, because “Washington’s main interest is to get Pakistan to act against al Qaeda and the Taliban and stabilise Afghanistan. So long as Pakistan can fulfill this main objective, the US will be satisfied,’’ says former foreign secretary Salman Haider.