All Around the World
Of course, when you see a spectacular terrorist attack in India, it’s natural for some eyes to start looking across the border to Pakistan, and then one starts to worry that the subcontinent’s cold war might turn hot:
Counterterrorism officials and experts said the scale, sophistication and targets involved in the Mumbai attacks were markedly different from previous terrorist plots in India and suggested the gunmen had received training from outside the country. But they cautioned it was too soon to tell who may have masterminded the operation, despite an assertion from a previously unknown Islamist radical group.
Officials in India, Europe and the United States said likely culprits included Islamist networks based in Pakistan that have received support in the past from Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. [...]
“This is a new, horrific milestone in the global jihad,” said Bruce Riedel, a former South Asia analyst for the CIA and National Security Council and author of the book, “The Search for Al Qaeda.” “No indigenous Indian group has this level of capability. The goal is to damage the symbol of India’s economic renaissance, undermine investor confidence and provoke an India-Pakistani crisis.”
A lot of basically sensible people, including folks like these and these who may well find themselves with positions in the Obama administration, have suggested that maybe we don’t want to throw the alleged baby of preventive war out with the bathwater of Bushism. I always think people thinking along these lines need to keep in mind that the United States isn’t the only country on the planet. I don’t think we want a world in which India claims to have a U.S.-endorsed right to launch preventive military strikes on Pakistan, or a world in which Pakistani policymaking is dominated by fear of a potentially imminent preventive Indian military attack.
36 Responses to “All Around the World”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 28th, 2008 at 12:40 am
For a look at what bad Indian-Pakistani relations look like, see Operation Parakram, the events following a Pakistan-sponsored attack against the Indian parliament. Millions of troops massed on the border in a nuclear-armed standoff. Scary stuff.
It’s tough to imagine, though, a world in which India claims a US-endorsed right to launch preventative strikes, regardless of how America behaves. India is a classic status-quo power, while Pakistan has launched several aggressive strikes in the past under the thinking (much like Israel) that a preventative strike is the only way to deal with substantial conventional inferiority. This logic would hold regardless of what the US did in Iraq; the real president-setting US move has been to extend the nuclear deal to India, which is spurring China to do the same to Pakistan. Other than that, the US has a pretty limited reach in brokering a deal between the two countries, much less than with the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
November 28th, 2008 at 12:48 am
A number of eyewitness reports from Mumbai described the shooters as looking ‘foreign’, for what it’s worth. Now, in that context, it can mean from the Pak-Afghan badlands, or something else.
In short, we don’t know shit right now. And that’s possibly more alarming.
November 28th, 2008 at 1:09 am
looks like Matt pussied out and removed his post on Tibet vs. Kashmir.
November 28th, 2008 at 1:59 am
No sympathizer here. But I can’t help but notice that the publications seem to make no effort as to disclose what these terrorists are asking for. What are they pissed off about? Shouldn’t the public be informed as to why there is an attack? Thoughts?
November 28th, 2008 at 2:29 am
One of the factoids that’s come out of this story is that apparently there are more Muslims in India (133,295,077) than in Pakistan (125,397,390), according to the (1998?) numbers on this site:
http://www.islamicweb.com/begin/population.htm
Whatever the current populations are, were India to launch an attack on Pakistan, there could be extreme blowback within India’s borders.
November 28th, 2008 at 2:38 am
India does not need US endorsements to attack Pakistan if it has to. You are clearly delusional about the extent of US influence over India or the region. In all previous occasions when India has had to take military action, it has been
in the face of the US endorsing the opposite. If the public and polity in India believe that it has to take military action (I don’t think it will for the same reasons as the first comment by Thorfinn) it will do so regardless of American opinions.
5,
India has had military action against Pakistan in the past, most recently in 1998, without blowback from its muslim population. You are assuming a questionable loyalty among Indian muslims towards their nation, and this assumption is unfounded.
November 28th, 2008 at 3:06 am
So far, those terrorists aren’t doing too much better than a couple kills per soldier. That can’t be good for recruitment.
November 28th, 2008 at 4:10 am
Matt…ur mistakes in Iraq War has almost made u an apologist of islamic terrorism. I mean its alright to be contrarian..but this naive outlook including ur earlier deleted post …makes me symphateic to people at “the corner “holding u in contempt…simply put..if you don’t know stuff…especially at such sensitive times…please refrain
November 28th, 2008 at 5:32 am
Finished posts have disappeared and come back before, so I doubt Matt chickening out has anything to do with it.
November 28th, 2008 at 5:34 am
“Whatever the current populations are, were India to launch an attack on Pakistan, there could be extreme blowback within India’s borders.”
There wasn’t in 02, or any of the wars.
Anyway, even “extreme” blowback would be a pretty minor concern when they both have nukes.
November 28th, 2008 at 7:01 am
people need to stop making the mistake of assuming that the policy-making process in Pakistan is somehow similar to the process in India. In Pakistan, where the ISI and the Army are semi-autonomous agencies, it would be ludicrous to maintain that Zardari is the impetus for all black ops as well as more above-the-board operations. Zardari is not worried about massive Indian retaliation, he is worried about solidifying support among ISI and Army muckety-mucks so that he can do what he pleases.
November 28th, 2008 at 7:08 am
We’re all going to end up killing each other before the sun sets for good anyway. Who has permission to do it, in what order and at what cost or risk of escalation is immaterial in the long term. The planet will resemble Mars in a few billion years so fuck it all.
November 28th, 2008 at 7:14 am
Time for the blogs resident Bolshevik, Mr. Don Williams, to step up to the plate (he’s probably felling his oats today after his Eagles convincing win last night) and place the blame for the Indian attacks on Israel and the lack of a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. After all, if such a settlement had been reached, the Muslim terrorists wouldn’t have even considered attacking Indian targets. Perish the thought.
November 28th, 2008 at 8:33 am
Allbetsareoff,
No, that’s not true. Pakistan has closer to 155 million Muslims, and India as, I think, between 130 and 140 million, accordin to the CIA factbook.
Arguably India has more Muslims than Bangladesh which would make it the 3rd largest Muslim population in the world.
Im not sure in what way Tibet is analogous to Kashmir, as India’s legal case for owning Kashmir is impeccable. The situation can’t be solved until Pakistan utterly gives up any claims to the Indian occupied portions of Kashmir.
November 28th, 2008 at 9:33 am
“Whatever the current populations are, were India to launch an attack on Pakistan, there could be extreme blowback within India’s borders.”
I’m not so sure about that. Wars are not always fought on religious grounds. If they were, the US and England would have joined Germany in a war against Japan and Russia in WWII. Instead, Buddhists and Christians fought a war against Christians and Atheists. And in India, most Muslims don’t really like Pakistan. In might be because Indian Muslims are sometimes victims of Pakistani sponsored terrorism in India. Think about it, if you’re a Christian, would you be happy about a fellow Christian trying to kill you? The British weren’t too keen about the Irish trying to kill them. We need to stop framing every conflict as Muslims against everyone else. Our second oldest ally is Turkey, a Muslim country. And they are our only ally against which we’ve never gone to war. We’ve fought against the English, French, and even the Israelis. But even during the first world war, we never fought the Turks. We even maintained trade with them during the war.
“as India’s legal case for owning Kashmir is impeccable.”
Spoken like a true Indian. Strangely, Pakistanis have a different opinion on that. And the Kasmiris have an even different opinion. If I had my way, Kasmir would be its own country, and Sikkim and the portions of West Bengal from Darjeeling and north would be part of Nepal. I’d draw that border just north of the military base near Siliguri. And Goa and Mysore would still be independent. Goa is cool, but it would be much cooler if it weren’t part of India. And while I’m dreaming, Tibet would be its own country too. But that’s all a pipe dream. But at the very least, India should grant citizenship to Tibetan refugees born in India. India deserves a lot of credit for offering the Tibetans refuge. But they deserve scorn for treating them like crap. Then again, India treats its own citizens like crap, too. But at least the Indians can get a passport and leave. The Tibetans can only do that with massive bribes that only a few can afford.
November 28th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Fostert,
What the hell are you talking abot? Mysore was never independent. You may be thinking about Hyderabad, which tried for about a year to claim independence from both India and Pakistan.
Sikkim was never a part of Nepal, and its native culture (Buddhist and Tibetan seaking) is completely different from the Nepalese. The Buddhist Sikkimese are today outnumbered by Nepali immigrants, but those are exactly the same people who voted to join India in 1975.
November 28th, 2008 at 9:51 am
fostert,
If you want to indulge in some attention-seeking contrarianism, at least add some blogwhoring to the mix.
November 28th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Receive $130 Paid to You Immediately
The LWS Freedom program makes it possible!
Click here to discover how
http://www.lwsfreedom.com/id/greentitan
November 28th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
@Foster- what are you talking about re:Mysore? My family has lived in Mysore for generations and I’ve never heard anyone long for the day that Mysore was an independent state (and I have some crazy right wing relatives, so if anyone was longing for it, they would be).
November 29th, 2008 at 2:45 am
fostert is a moron. When has the US fought Israel??? And what about WWI, when we fought the Ottomans, ie Turkey? And how is Turkey our “second oldest ally”? What about Australia, Canada, New Zealand, or even most of the Central and South American countries?
November 29th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Canada is our oldest enemy. One day we’ll remove their stain from the pristine North American continent and outlaw hockey. Never forget 1812!
November 29th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
I think it is probably a bit of propoganda to say that India’s case for owning Kashmir is impeccable. My understanding is that there was a U.N. requirement to hold a plebiscite and that requirement has been refused for various reasons. Now Kashmir is occupied about 1/3 by Pakistan and 2/3 by India and a little bit by China. From the polling, it appears that if they held the plebiscite, K&J would opt for independence against the will of Pakistan, India and China.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:21 am
levitraIncredible site!
March 12th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 17th, 2009 at 2:29 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:20 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:25 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:16 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 6:31 am
Great site, Good info viagra