UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Intelligence

March 16, 1995

INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM: THE KARACHI ASSASSINATIONS

 A week after the killing of two U.S. consulate employees in Karachi,
 Pakistan, foreign commentators continued to deplore the violence, but
 also looked at the incident's impact on U.S.-Pakistani relations and
 international efforts to combat terrorism.  In Pakistan, editorialists
 promised that the attack would be treated with the "utmost" diligence by
 authorities but saw Islamabad walking a fine line "between international
 cooperation and foreign dictation" in prosecuting the case.  Karachi's
 centrist Dawn rejected U.S. Ambassador John Monjo's contention that
 since the murder of Americans overseas is a crime under American law,
 the perpetrators should stand trial in the United States.  The
 extradition of suspects would mean "a...great deal of embarrassment for
 Pakistan," the paper said.  Islamabad's radical Muslim was skittish
 about the offer of U.S. assistance in prosecuting the case, saying that
 "the parameters of such a cooperation should be clearly spelled out so
 that our sovereignty is neither compromised nor targeted."  Elsewhere,
 there was solid support for dealing with the case through established
 criminal justice procedures instead of through harsh undemocratic
 measures.  Dhaka's independent Daily Star said that the fact that "the
 United States has offered FBI assistance to track down the assailants is
 encouraging."  Hong Kong's independent Standard judged that a crackdown
 on Islamic radicals is "likely to radicalize already aggrieved
 populations" and actually promote more extremism.  An Indian paper said
 that the imposition of new sanctions on Pakistan would be useless and
  counterproductive.
Observers also tried to assess the extent to which the killings had
 damaged U.S.-Pakistani relations.  Some noted the belief held by the
 Benazir Bhutto government that the attack was part of a sinister design
 by extremists to bring an end to her government's initiative to improve
 ties with the United States.  Most analysts concluded that in fact, the
 incident will seriously hamper Prime Minister Bhutto's efforts to get
 the U.S. Congress to lift the ban on aid to Pakistan imposed in 1990
 because of the country's refusal to halt its nuclear arms program.  But
 writers also concluded that while Mrs. Bhutto "may be given the cold
 shoulder" by American investors during her upcoming trip to the United
 States, the fact that First Lady Hillary Clinton's trip to Pakistan has
 not been cancelled indicates that bilateral relations have not been
  seriously "impaired."
Journalists in Pakistan, Bangladesh and France expounded on the dangers
 of the spread of extremist violence.  But these writers also blamed the
 United States, in part, for this situation, saying that the Karachi
 attack is the legacy of huge amounts of money and arms distributed by
 the U.S. to anti-Communist guerrillas during the Afghan war.  In Paris,
 economic Les Echos hoped that the incident would open the eyes of U.S.
 officials to the existence of an international Islamic terrorist
 network, and, in an oblique reference to Algeria, make the U.S. "more
 circumspect about the radical Islamic movements which they sometimes
  treat with kindness."
 This survey is based on 34 reports from 10 countries, March 9-15.
 EDITOR:  Gail Hamer Burke 
                                    SOUTH ASIA
 PAKISTAN:  "A Judicious View"
According to Karachi's centrist Dawn (3/15), "The opinion expressed by
 Justice (retired) Dorab Patel, a former Judge of Pakistan's Supreme
 Court, that any move to try outside Pakistan the persons suspected of
 the murder of two American nationals in Karachi the other day would be
 inconsistent with the laws and constitution of this country merits
  strong endorsement....
"U.S. Ambassador John Monjo's contention that since the murder of
 Americans overseas is a crime under American law, the U.S. government
 would have the powers to pursue the perpetrators of the crime for the
 purpose of a trial in an American court appears to be based on a
 misunderstanding....  The other part of Ambassador Monjo's reported
 statement that the suspect persons could be brought to justice in the
 United States in addition to whatever measures the Pakistan government
 may take for their trial appears to be even more problematic.  If such a
 thing happened, it would in effect amount to a second trial of the
 suspects, something that is specifically barred under the fundamental
 rights provided in the Constitution....  Ambassador Monjo should feel
 reassured by the fact that the murder of the two American nationals in
 Karachi has been universally condemned in Pakistan.  There is no
 question of the crime being viewed except with the utmost sense of
 compunction. There should be no reason for the ambassador, or any other
 American dignitary, to believe that the demands of justice would not be
 fully met if the trial of the suspects in the case is held in a
 Pakistani court of law.  On the other hand, it would be a matter of a
 great deal of embarrassment for Pakistan if the American authorities
 were to insist upon the suspects being sent outside the country to face
 a trial in the United States as in the similar case of the trial of a
  Mexican national cited by Justice Patel in his statement."
 "Karachi:  Cause And Effect"
Karachi's centrist News opined (3/15), "Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto
 has blamed the West for its role in creating the present conditions in
 Pakistan.  The Afghan war brought the Western nations in droves to
 Pakistan to assist in the 'holy war' against the Soviet Union.  But when
 the war ended, the West withdrew, leaving Pakistan to reap a rich
  harvest of problems."
 "U.S. Contribution To Extremism"
Peshawar's pro-opposition Frontier Post editorialized (3/15), "Quite
 apart from the U.S. policies toward Pakistan, extremism here is also
 fueled by the perception that the West is actively engaged in targeting
 Muslims be they in Bosnia, Kashmir, Chechnya or Palestine.  Given that
 perception, any government that seeks to maintain friendly or even
 normal relations with the West and particularly the United States--still
 seen to be running the show in a political and military context--
 confronts an uphill task in combating extremism....  If the issue of
 extremism is to be tackled effectively, not just in Pakistan but in the
 broader context, the United States and the West generally will have to
  credibly demonstrate a different, much more even-handed approach." 
 "Targeting Diplomats"
According to the Frontier Post (3/12), "Although the United States has
 reacted to the killing of the Americans in Karachi with restraint and a
 sense of realism, the tragedy may well have adverse implications for the
 prime minister's forthcoming tour of that country.  In a crucial sense,
 Wednesday's violence will almost certainly reinforce the current
 international perception about Pakistan being a society at war with
  itself."
 "Who Should Tackle This Problem?"
Islamabad's radical Muslim held (3/12), "Terrorism at all levels and in
 every region deserves to be eliminated and condemned but the situation
 in Karachi is our problem and while we can seek help in better
 methodology and skill from those who have effectively overcome this
 problem, we will have to be very careful in handling the affairs of
 Karachi especially when there is evidence that foreign hands are
 involved in creating the law and order situation.  The parameters of
 such a cooperation should be clearly spelled out so that our sovereignty
 is neither compromised nor targeted.  We have already become a laughing
 stock for the rest of the world in not understanding the delicate
  difference between international cooperation and foreign dictation."
 "Fighting Out Terrorism"
Lahore's opposition, right-of-center Nation remarked (3/12), "While the
 killing of two U.S. Consulate employees in Karachi has evoked widespread
 indignation from Washington to Islamabad, and it seems as if the entire
 state apparatus in Pakistan has been jolted into action, the track
 record of our intelligence agencies in tracing culprits involved in acts
 of terrorism has been so outrageously poor that even vows of decisive
 action by the President and the Prime Minister do not inspire much
 confidence. And it would be a matter of shame if 'experts' were to be
 flown from Washington to investigate the crime....  Whether it is sheer
 incompetence or lack of political will to confront the prophets of
 terror, the government's credibility to meet the challenge of violence
 has slumped to an all-time low, raising serious doubts about its ability
  to salvage a modicum of law and order in the country."
 "Pakistan Nation Insulted"
The sensationalist, right-of-center Pakistan Observer asserted (3/12),
 "There seems to be no end to the humiliation handed out to our nation
 from Washington.  The latest in the series is the fast dispatch of a
 large contingent of detectives, forensic experts and ID kit makers
 subsequent to the murder of two Americans in Karachi....  By this heavy-
 handed and high-pressure approach, the United States has condemned this
 nation, its institutions, and its integrity in one go.  Washington
 appears to believe that we are a lesser breed, with no competence to
 probe crime, no knowledge of the due process of law and no idea what the
  concept of justice means."
 INDIA:  "Pakistan's Woes No cause For India To Gloat"
An analysis in the independent Times Of India (3/13) by contributing
 editor of the Economic Times Swaminathan Aiyar stated, "If Islamic
 terror spreads in Pakistan, it will spread to India too....  India can
 do little to curb the rise of Muslim militancy in Pakistan.  That
 country claims that Indian intelligence agencies have caused the
 sectarian mayhem in Karachi, a claim the international community does
  not take seriously.... 
"Many Indians want the United States to declare Pakistan a terrorist
 state and impose sanctions on it.  There is a small chance this could
 help us, a bigger chance that it will be counterproductive.  We must
 distinguish between terrorism sponsored by the state (as in Kashmir) and
 terrorism that undermines the state (as in the Shia-Sunni shootings and
 the murder of U.S. diplomats).  It would be extremely gratifying if U.S.
 pressure could end Pakistani state support to Kashmiri militants....
 Declaring Pakistan a terrorist state will not harm or deter killer
 groups, and will weaken those elements in the administration (admittedly
 not all) who want to control extremism....  Instead of depending on U.S.
 pressure, we need to focus on winning over the alienated people of the
 Kashmir valley.  This will take time, a decade or more, but there is no
  obvious alternative.... 
"Instead of gloating over Pakistan's travails, we need to see it as a
 bell that tolls for us too.  When the state is unprincipled, it created
 major problems for itself....  We cannot be saved from the consequences
 of such folly by asking for U.S. sanctions:  We must put our own house
  in order."
 "Price Of Riding Tiger Of Terrorism"
The United States, declared an editorial in the independent Times of
 India (3/10), "has had to pay with American blood for its policy of
  selectively riding the tiger of terrorism."
 "U.S. Should Reassess Ties With Pakistan"
An editorial in the independent Indian Express (3/10) judged that the
 incident "should serve as an eye-opener to the United States, which has
 been showing Pakistan considerable indulgence over the years."  Noting
 that despite hard evidence of Pakistani support to terrorists in the
 Kashmir valley, Washington "has been fighting shy of declaring Pakistan
 a terrorist state," the editorial found it "surprising that there is a
 body of opinion-makers in the United States who continue to view
 Pakistan as a trusted ally....  The killings should make Washington
 reassess the emerging scenario in Pakistan and its relations with
  Islamabad."
 "U.S. And The Subcontinent"
An editorial in the pro-Congress Daily (3/10) opined, "Now, when
 American lives have been lost in Pakistan, the U.S. secretary of
 state...has realized the 'dangers (the Americans) confront in the
 worldwide struggle against terrorism.'  The U.S. administration needs to
 be reminded that what is happening in Karachi is exactly what happened
 in Punjab some years ago and continues to occur sporadically in
  Kashmir."
 BANGLADESH:  "We Condemn"
The independent Daily Star opined (3/10), "Whether the aim of the attack
 on the Americans in Pakistan is to hamper the process of improvement in
 the U.S.-Pakistan relations is not yet clear.  But the government of
 Benazir Bhutto would like to believe that it was part of a sinister
 design to bring an end to her government's initiative to improve the
 bilateral ties.  The fact that the U.S. First Lady's visit to Pakistan
 later this month will go ahead as planned shows that America has
 confidence in the host country.  However, Benazir's visit to the U.S.
 next month with the aim of inviting American investors to her country
  may be given the cold shoulder. 
"To know that the United States has offered FBI assistance to track down
 the assailants is encouraging.  The involvement of the U.S. intelligence
 might add sophistication to the process of investigation hopefully
 leading to an apprehension of the assailants.  We sympathize with the
 bereaved families of the victims and express our outright condemnation
  of such an act of terrorism."
 "Killing Of U.S. Diplomats Strongly Condemned"
Independent Banglabazar Patrika (3/9) commented, "Armed attacks are not
 usually made on diplomats even during wars....  Yet we had to watch the
 brutal killing of two diplomats....  The incident is a violation of all
 international conventions and practices.  We strongly condemn the
 incident and hope that violence and barbarism will decrease in Pakistan.
 We also hope that Pakistan will be able to uphold its position as a
  civilized nation, not a militant one."
                                      EUROPE
 BRITAIN:  "Alarm"
The conservative Times (3/9) editorialized, "The murder of two American
 diplomats in Karachi yesterday has sown alarm in the government of
 Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan's increasingly unconvincing prime minister. 
 Ms. Bhutto is due to visit America next month and the killings, coming
 in the wake of the widely-publicized trial for blasphemy of a teenage
 Christian boy, are bound to ensure that her welcome in Washington will
  be much less effusive than she would like.
"The murders are accounted to be in reprisal for the extradition from
 Pakistan to America of Ramzi Ahmed Yusuf....  Ms. Bhutto has condemned
 the killings as part of a 'well-planned campaign of terrorism,' designed
 to 'create fear and harassment' in Karachi.  What she has not done,
 however, is to explain how she proposed to check the descent into
 anarchy of her country's commercial capital.  Karachi is now an urban
 battleground whose resemblance to Beirut increases with each passing
 month....  Cynics have suggested that the government in Islamabad would
 do well to redeploy in Karachi those Pakistani UN peacekeepers who were
 recently withdrawn from Somalia....  The collapse of Karachi would be an
 economic catastrophe for Pakistan....  Karachi--like the rest of
  Pakistan--needs more democracy, not less."
 "Deplorable"
The liberal Guardian (3/9) opined, "In April, Benazir Bhutto makes an
 official visit to the United States....  She wants the U.S. Congress to
 lift the ban on aid to Pakistan imposed in 1990 because of the country's
 refusal to halt its nuclear arms program.  The administration supports
 Ms. Bhutto's plea on the grounds that U.S. business in Pakistan is being
 hampered by the congressional ban.  Their analysis is only partially
 right.  U.S. investment, and above all the welfare of Pakistanis, is
 being undermined by extremism and violence, which the elected government
 is failing to curb.  The international community should be putting much
 greater pressure on Benazir Bhutto to confront the insidious enemy
  within before the country explodes."  
 FRANCE:  "Boomerang"
Renaud Girard concluded in an editorial in conservative Le Figaro
 (3/10), "The United States should do well not to forget the role it
 played in the Afghan war against the Soviets.  Pouring billions of
 dollars, the CIA blindly gave its support to the mujahideen and to the
 most fundamentalist Pakistani factions.  This money is boomeranging
 against the Americans today.  The West, too, bears responsibility for
  the evolution of the Islamist cancer."
 "A Reprisal Operation?"
Economic Les Echos (3/9) said in an editorial, "The assassination of two
 U.S. diplomats in Karachi yesterday seems to be a reprisal operation....
 The deaths of the two diplomats should incite U.S. leaders to open their
 eyes to the existence of an international Islamic terrorist network, and
 make them become more circumspect about the radical Islamic movements
 which they sometimes treat with kindness.  The fact that this happened
 precisely in Pakistan makes us wonder about the danger of manipulating
  such groups.
"One thinks that the United States is reaping, although unjustly, what
 it had sowed during the Afghan war against Soviet occupation.  In the
 '80s, Washington supported...the most reactionary Islamic resistance
 movements.  Today, these 'Afghans' are back in their homeland...and they
 often show violent opposition to those regimes who get along well with
  the West and America in particular."
 ITALY:  "Fundamentalist Spoilers"
Economic Il Sole-24 Ore (3/9) contended, "The death of the two American
 consular employees in Karachi is a triumph for those who want to restore
 isolationism and obscurantism in the 'country of the pure.'  No symbol
 could have been more immediate and effective or have an equally
 resounding echo in the world.  The reason for the terrorist attack is
 probably a reprisal for the arrest and the handing over...by Pakistani
 authorities of Ranzi Ahmen Yousef, the alleged organizer of the '93
 World Trade Center terrorist attack....  Pakistani leader Benazir Bhutto
 is scheduled to visit the United States in less than a month.  The
 fundamentalists have spoiled what was to be the most important trip
 abroad by Bhutto, the time to reassure the United States about the
  nuclear issue and to firm up contracts with American firms."
 RUSSIA:  "One Of The Assassinated Diplomats Was A Spy"
Under the headline above, Maria Smirnova and Andrei Smirnov observed in
 reformist, business Kommersant-Daily (3/10), "Following the American
 diplomats' slaying, the strife between the Sunni and Shiite communities
 has gone beyond the framework of an internal conflict, assuming an
 international character.  Even so, the assassination of the Americans
 will hardly impair the relationships between the United States and
 Pakistan any further.  In any case, Hillary Clinton is not going to
  cancel her visit to Pakistan this month." 
                                    EAST ASIA
 JAPAN:  "Potential Damage To Pakistan"
Liberal Mainichi's New Delhi correspondent Kojima wrote (3/10), "The
 killing of two U.S. consulate officials in Karachi...is casting a dark,
 long shadow over the Bhutto government's ability to maintain law and
 order in Pakistan.  The attack is also adding a new twist to violence
 sapping Prime Minister Bhutto's bid to portray Pakistan as a moderate,
 Islamic nation open to Western investment.  If terrorist attacks against
 Westerners continue, U.S. and European investment will decline sharply,
 throwing the female prime minister's economic growth program into
  jeopardy....
"The ambush occurred at a sensitive moment for Bhutto, who is visiting
 Washington in April to promote efforts by the United States and Pakistan
 to put their nuclear dispute aside and build a new relationship based on
 economic ties.  Using her status as a female prime minister of an
 Islamic republic, Mrs. Bhutto is also trying to foster the image of
  Pakistan in the Western world as an outward-looking, stable democracy."
 HONG KONG:  "Shockwaves"
The independent Hong Kong Standard opined (3/10), "The shockwaves from
 this affair will reverberate far beyond the borders of Pakistan.
 Fundamentalism is a threat to more secular Islamic regimes in, for
 example, Egypt and Algeria, which are cracking down on fundamentalists
 for self-preservation.  But drastic repression is not only an affront to
 democracy, it is, ironically, likely to radicalize already aggrieved
 populations and promote the very Islamic extremism that rattled regimes'
  military backers seek to contain.
"There is irony, too, in the fact that Washington reacted to the World
 Trade Center bombing by showing Americans that it protects them and puts
 their anxieties above foreign criticism.  By doing so, however, it may
  have put other U.S. citizens around the world at risk."
 THAILAND:  "Pakistan Deserves Support"
The lead editorial of the top-circulation, moderately conservative
 Bangkok Post held (3/13),  "Pakistan and its terrible killings in
 Karachi are at the center of the world's eyes at the moment.  But the
 threat of terror is not restricted to any nation or area.  It can strike
 from anywhere at any time.  Pakistan deserves full support from our
  country and others, not least because terrorism worries us all."
 "Bhutto Government Has To Bear Repercussions Of Zia Regime"
Noting that the current situation could create hurdles for further U.S.
 commitments to invest in Pakistan, the independent Nation told its
 readers (3/11), "The dictatorship of Zia ul-Haq was blindly supported by
 the West during the Cold War because it was fervently anti-Communist.
 Sadly, the repercussions in the post-Cold War are being borne by a
  democracy in Pakistan trying to instil law and order in the country."
                                        ##
 
 
 



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list