Mainstream Weekly

Home > Archives (2006 on) > 2012 > Bounty on Hafiz Saeed : What is the United States of America up (...)

Mainstream, VOL L, No 22, May 19, 2012

Bounty on Hafiz Saeed : What is the United States of America up to?

Tuesday 22 May 2012

#socialtags

by M.M. KHAJOORIA

The US Hafiz Saeed bounty bomb has turned to be a dud. At least for India and for the present. The $ 10 million bounty announced by the Obama Administration was “aimed primarily at shutting down Saeed’s terrorism operation even as Washington attempts to bring him to justice for the Mumbai carnage”. A bare reading of the Rewards for Justice notification issued by the US Justice Department, which announced “up-to-$-10-million” bounty for “information leading to the arrest or conviction of Hafiz Saeed”, makes that amply clear. All lingering doubts were set at rest by the official clarification that “an informant could be eligible for a Re-wards for Justice reward payment if his or her information were to lead to Saeed’s conviction in any US or foreign court of law for his terrorist acts”. Thus this notification trashed the evidence provided by the Government of India to Pakistan (with which the United States is fully conversant), the disclosures made by their own citizen Headly in the US court, and the mountain of evidence procured by the American intelligence agencies. In effect the US position regarding the value of evidence provided by India against Hafiz Saeed in the 26/II Mumbai terror attack is perilously close to that of Pakistan. The “I-love-US” brigade will therefore be well advised to do same home-work before getting into “balley balley” mode.

The US double-speak becomes apparent from the State Department’s categorical statement that Hafiz Saeed “participated in the planning of the four-day-long terrorist attack”. A media note circulated by the State Department affirmed that “Saeed and his organisation continue to spread the ideology advocating terrorism as well as virulent rhetoric condemning the United States, India, Israel, and other perceived enemies”. So why is the US Administration taking contradictory positions? And what exactly is the game-plan?

Does the US expect that the notification of the bounty will compel Hafiz Saeed to shelve any future mischief even if it does not result in his conviction for the Mumbai carnage? Too naïve to merit any serious consideration. As it is, Saeed seldom goes beyond his “safe houses” in Lahore and Islamabad/Rawalpindi and that ensures he is beyond the reach of American drones. The security cover during his public appearances is textbook perfect.

WHY was the Lashkar supremo and master terrorist spared a death warrant? No official explanation is coming forth. The scuttlebutt, however, is that for reasons not far to seek. Washington does not want to aggravate the situation with the Pakistani security establishment, which was known to be the father, mother and vet nurse combined of the Lashkar-e-Taiba/Jamaat-ul-Dawa and diligently protected its supremo. It is also interesting to note that amidst all this high-voltage drama Deputy Secretary of State Tom Nides landed in Pakistan to hold talks with the government to restore normalcy in the overwrought ties between the two sides. This, incidentally, was the first high level initiative by the US Government to engage Pakistan’s badly fractured and military-driven government since the Salala check-post shootout which cost the Pak Army the lives of her 24 soldiers. In retaliation Pakistan closed down the supply routes critical for the NATO forces battling the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Regarding the US bounty, Pakistan’s public opinion was broadly veering round to the inter-pretation given by Haliz Saeed. In an interview to the Associated Press news agency he said that “the US only announced the reward because of his demonstrations against reopening supply lines through Pakistan to NATO troops in Afgha-nistan”. He also told the Associated Press, “We are organising massive public meetings to inform the nation about all the threats which Pakistan will face after the restoration of the supplies.” But this is only part of the story. The US dimension is that by notifying the bounty on Hafiz Saeed but stopping short of issuing a death warrant, notice has been served on Pakis-tan to keep Hafiz and his goons at bay and open the supply routes to the Afghan front. Failure to comply will invite notification of death warrants for Hafiz and Makki and maybe a couple of more Lashkar commanders and their execu-tion. These steps may also be reinforced by financial, armament and economic squeeze, which the tottering Pakistan Government—already on the verge of bankruptcy—cannot even dare to visualise.
At any rate, we in India must remember that moves like the Hafiz bounty, reference to 26/11 (emphasis on the killing of six American citizens) and intermittent laudatory references to India and critical comments against Pakistan were essentially tentative in nature. These in no way reflect a decisive shift in the US-Pak equation. Till the stage of final US-Pak disconnect is reached and America decides to dump Pakistan as the frontline strategic ally, India has to intimately watch out for her own national vested interests in the region and indeed the countries on its periphery. Our military strategy, diplomatic manoeuvres and economic/commercial and security initiatives should be designed and executed with our own resources, for our own objectives and for the good of our own country. If any international initiative happened to sup-port or reinforce our actions, it may be welcomed as a bonus.

M.M. Khajooria, IPS, is a former Director General of Police (now retired). He is also the Chairman of the J&K Ex-Policemen’s League.

ISSN (Mainstream Online) : 2582-7316 | Privacy Policy|
Notice: Mainstream Weekly appears online only.