The Largest Security-Cleared Career Network for Defense and Intelligence Jobs - JOIN NOW

Homeland Security


PAKISTAN'S LINKS WITH FUNDAMENTALISM AND INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM
                                 ------------
                              HON. PETER DEUTSCH
                                  OF FLORIDA
                       IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                           Friday, October 7, 1994
    Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I am shocked to see reports detailing the
extensive involvement of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in supporting
Islamic fundamentalist terror groups in Afghanistan and India. I have seen
Peter Arnett's excellent documentary "Terror Nation? U.S. Creation?" 
shown on CNN last month. The film provides a graphic account of the links 
between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the fundamentalist regime of 
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. I was disturbed to note that some Afghan groups that 
have had close affiliation with Pakistani Intelligence are believed to have 
been involved in the New York World Trade Center bombings. 
   Following an investigation, Peter Arnett reports about the New York
bombing, "It happened at this apartment complex. Police at the well-patroled
community say the Skeikh's Driver, Mahmud Aboubalima was Shalabi's most
frequent visitor. Police consider Aboubalima their prime suspect. He is the
second person from the Afghan Refuge Center implicated in a U.S. crime. But
he has not been charged. Shalabi's family blames Sheikh Rahman for the
killing, a charge a cleric denies. With Shalabi gone, Aboubalima takes
control of the Afghan Refugee Center. Aboubalima, Sheikh Rahman and Hampton
El were bound together not only by the Brooklyn-based Afghan Center, but also
by the holy war headquarters in Peshawar, Pakistan, the bustling base of
operations for the Afghan resistance. It is in Peshawar that the New York
terror campaign takes shape. Peshawar was the headquarters of Sheikh Rahman's
international network. Peshawar was also the headquarters of Gulbuddin
Hekmatyar's party, which trained four of the key New York suspects.
Hekmatyar's links to the New York suspects came as no surprise to pro-Western
afghan officials. They officially warned the U.S. government about Hekmatyar
no fewer than four times. The last warning delivered just days before the
Trade Center attack." 
   Speaking to former CIA Director Robert Gates, about Gulbuddin Hekmatyar,
Peter Arnett reports, "The Pakistanis showered Gulbuddin Hekmatyar with U.S.
provided weapons and sang his praises to the CIA. They had close ties with
Hakmatyar going back to the mid-1970's. Hekmatyar's Islamic fervor played
well with the fundamentalist powers of Pakistan."
   Mr. Speaker, I have now come across a report in the Washington Post of
September 12th from Karachi, Pakistan, which states that: "Pakistan's army
chief and head of its intelligence agency proposed a detailed `blueprint' for
selling heroin to pay for the country's covert military operations in early
1991, according to former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif." The report provides
considerable detail on the degree to which Pakistan's military leaders have
been involved in their pursuit of an Islamic nuclear bomb and export of
fundamentalism into India. It says, "It has been rumored for years that
Pakistan's military has been involved in the drug trade. Pakistan's army, and
particularly its intelligence agency (the equivalent of the CIA) is immensely
powerful and is known for pursuing its own agenda. Over the years, civilian
political leaders have accused the military (which has run Pakistan for more
than half of its 47 years of independence) of developing the country's
nuclear technology and arming insurgents in India and other countries without
civilian knowledge or approval and sometimes in direct violation of civilian
orders. Historically, the army's chief of staff has been the most powerful
person in the country." 
   The significance of these reports at a time when India's investigative
agencies are discovering growing evidence of Pakistani involvement in the
heinous bombings in Bombay last March can not be under estimated. A prime
suspect in the bombings has recently been arrested with documents 
including a passport, driving license and birth certificate provided to him by
the same intelligence organization. The use of drug money by the intelligence 
services of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for bringing the destabalizing 
effects of fundamentalism into Afghanistan and India can not be condoned. The
Administration should investigate these reports with full vigor and share its
findings with the Members of the House. 
                  PAKISTAN'S INVOLVEMENT IN NARCO-TERRORISM
  (Mr. FINGERHUT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
   Mr. FINGERHUT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring to the attention of my
colleagues a report carried by the Washington Post of September 12, 1994,
reminding us once again of the real and present danger posed by the nexus
between narcotics and terrorism. The Karachi datelined report
headlined "Heroin Plan by Top Pakistanis Alleged" quoting Pakistan's former
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif saying that "drug deals were to pay for covert
operations" brings to mind other reports not so long ago of Pakistani
involvement in using the Bank of Credit and Commerce Internationale [BCCI] to
launder drug money that was eventually believed to have been used in
financing terrorist groups involved in the New York World Trade Center
bombing.
  It is shocking that the report cites Pakistan's army chief and head of
intelligence agency proposing to then Prime Minister Sharif "a detailed
blueprint for selling heroin to pay for the country's covert military
operations in early 1991". The role played by Pakistan's Inter Services
Intelligence Agency in exporting terror to Kashmir and Punjab in neighboring
India was sufficiently well-documented for the previous administration to
place the country on the watch list of states sponsoring terrorism. Its
removal from that list is justified neither by its past track record nor by
its present performance. The State Department's most recent report on Global
Patterns of Terrorism talks of credible reports in 1993 of official Pakistani
support to Kashmiri militants who undertook attacks of terrorism in
Indian-controlled Kashmir.
  The administration cannot afford to ignore the Washington Post report. Mr.
Speaker, a country that produces 70 tons of heroin annually and accounts for
a significant part of the heroin consumed in the U.S. market is a matter of
concern under any circumstances. That a part of the same country's
intelligence establishment can conceive blueprints to use profits from
smuggling these drugs for supporting insurgency in Kashmir and export of
terror elsewhere is a fact that we ignore at our own peril.
========================================================================
                       PAKISTAN'S UNACCEPTABLE POLICY
                                 ------------
                             HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ
                                OF NEW JERSEY
                       IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                           Friday, October 7, 1994
    Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Department of Commerce has
identified India as one of the most important emerging markets in the world.
India is currently opening its economy in ways that were unthinkable only 5
years ago. 
   United States-India bilateral trade is increasing rapidly. Among other
items, the United States is selling billion-dollar power plants and
telecommunications equipment to India and in return India is selling the
United States such products as clothing and computer software. 
   It is in America's national interests to support peace, prosperity, and
democracy in India to insure that the economic liberalization which we have
encouraged for years stays on track. But the rapid improvements of the Indian
economy must be accompanied by political stability. As a member of the House
Foreign Affairs Committee, I am concerned that our friend and ally, India,
the world's largest democracy faces a wave of regional political
instability. 
   Recently, troubling reports have surfaced which allege that India's
neighbor, Pakistan, is covertly promoting instability in the Jammu, Kashmir,
and Himachal regions of India. Specifically, the allegations assert that
Pakistan is supporting anti-India Kashmiri insurgents as well as radical
veterans of the Afghan war who engage in terrorist violence in the
above-mentioned regions. In fact, according to the U.S. State
Department's "Global Report on Terrorism for 1994," there were credible
reports of official Pakistani support to Kashmiri militants. 
   These terrorist gangs have forced some 250,000 Kashmiri Hindu Pandits
and approximately 50,000 Kashmiri Moslems who openly support India into
becoming refugees in their own land. Moreover, in recent comments, former
Prime Minister of Pakistan and current opposition leader in Parliament, Nawaz
Sharif, threatened India with the use of nuclear weapons should India more
directly respond to the terrorism in Kashmir and the other provinces. 
   Such tactics can only lead to greater insecurity in both India and
Pakistan. Should the situation deteriorate, the consequences could be
horrible. It is important that our government immediately impress upon the
government of Pakistan that the subversion of other states through
state-sponsored terrorism, as recent reports suggest, is unacceptable
policy. 
   India needs to focus on domestic issues such as the environment,
literacy, health care, and continuing its progress in economic
liberalization. In each field much work remains to be done. Countering
subversion and terrorism takes the attention of India off these vital issues.
America must help India focus its attention on domestic issues. It is my hope
that all parties in the region would attempt to arrive at constructive
solutions to these difficult problems. 
                                                                   [pE2223]



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list


One Billion Americans: The Case for Thinking Bigger - by Matthew Yglesias