Comments on: And who said terrorists don’t attack cricketers?

By: Rishi

Rishi — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:28:30 +0000

I agree with what Asia Times’ Pakistan Bureue Chief says:

Syed Saleem Shahzad in Atimes

Tuesday’s attack in the Pakistani city of Lahore on a convoy carrying Sri Lankan cricketers was carried out by disgruntled Punjabi militants seeking to extract concessions from the government, Asia Times Online has learned.

And the 12 highly trained gunmen who fled the scene after killing six police officers and wounding six of the cricketers had planned to take the sportsmen hostage, not kill them, high-level sources maintain.

The militants, working directly under the command of a joint Punjabi and Kashmiri leadership based in the North Waziristan tribal area and allied with al-Qaeda, planned the Lahore operation. The object was to hold the cricketers ransom in exchange for jailed militants and the safe passage of their colleagues to North Waziristan.

….

The government accepted all of the demands, but it refused to release those prisoners who were not from Swat. At the top of this list was Maulana Abdul Aziz, a radical cleric from the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) in Islamabad who was arrested in July 2007 while fleeing from the mosque after security forces stormed it. The government also refused to release several other militants, including a very important person, who were recently arrested in Islamabad.

The Punjabi militants were clearly upset at having their demands rejected, while the Pashtuns got what they wanted. The attack in Lahore was meant to redress the “injustice”.

…

Their attack in Lahore on Tuesday is testimony to this; they are now prepared to take the war theater to urban centers to get their comrades released, and anybody is fair game – from cricketers to high-profile personalities including ministers, diplomats, politicians and other influential people.

By: Ranjith

Ranjith — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 21:31:29 +0000

Sri Lankan Cricketer Kumar Sangakkara gives some first hand details: Our team bus left with three to four police cars in a convoy with around 12 policeman and security officers, including motorbike outriders. Along the route road junctions were cleared and side roads closed to ensure we passed through the traffic easily And according to Nirupama Subramanian CCTV footage showed gunmen walking away calmly: A third group of three [attackers] could be seen walking on the street without fear of being pursued or stopped

By: Ranjith

Ranjith — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 21:03:21 +0000

New footage aired by Pakistani television channels showed the Lahore gunmen calmly walking away from the scene of their ambush on the Sri Lankan cricket team

By: Subbaraman Iyer

Subbaraman Iyer — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:04:15 +0000

Analyzing the mechanics of the operation, it seems that there was clear complicity between the gunmen and the police at least. How else can one explain that in a busy thoroughfare where the VIP security is supposed to be high, can a car laden with heavy bags that includes rocket launchers intercept a VIP motorcade?
The gunmen were there for 20 minutes and coolly got into autorickshaws and left. Looking at the video they walked nonchalantly after the event. It almost gives the impression that they must have known that there would be no police around the area.
Recently the top officials of Lahore were changed. There could have been other reasons, but the confluence of factors can’t be ignored. Further, the fact that nothing has been done only goes to prove that it is just not the Army-jihadi combo, but the police must have provided tacit support.

By: AG

AG — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 14:36:54 +0000

There could be three reasons the gunmen got away after the shooting:

After they committed their act, the terrorists hid behind a tree and
a) changed into their ISI civvvies
b) changed into their pakistan army uniforms
c) changed into their pakistan police uniforms

presto, chango, voila!

By: Conrad Barwa

Conrad Barwa — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:10:27 +0000

This attack is very disturbing, I am also surprised that the Sri Lankan cricketing authorities allowed this tour to go ahead. If I was a Sri Lankan cricketer I would be most unhappy with them.

It is unclear if the Pakistani army wants to sever these connections, and unclear if it can sever them even if it wants to. Transforming the Pakistani military establishment therefore is the first step in stabilising Pakistan.

This is the heart of the problem really and several Pakistani commentators have made the same point. By involving itself with these external agents the Pakistan military is actually priveleging uncertain and nebulous external objectives over that of domestic security and undermining the viability of the state itself. Unfortunately, the Pakistani army has shown itself singularly unwilling to do this. Adherence to this strategy will cause an implosion of the Pakistani state.

The Macarthur option may be superficially attractive but it not applicable in this case for several reasons. Japan was a defeated power in 1945, exhausted after years of total war, Pakistan isn’t quite there yet and possesses nuclear weapons something Japan did not. Japanese society was also more centralised than PAkistan, once the Emperor decided to surrender, the resistance collapsed, no single figure can do this for PAkistan. Japan also had the advantage of being a developed, industrial society with some experience of democracy. Pakistan is still mainly a rural, peasant society which had not fully modernised yet. Finally, the difficulty is that the Macarthur solution will need an external state to act as a security gurantor and effectively occupy Pakistan for several decades at least; as is still the case with Japan. This will be an expensive and costly exercise for whichever state chooses to do this.

By: Ajay

Ajay — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 08:05:03 +0000

My take is that LTTE wanted SL players to be taken as hostages and used as bargaining chips to negotiate a ceasefire with SL govt.

But LTTE has a clear policy not to harm cricket players, which is why I guess the attackers where trying to not kill the players themselves.

It is possible that attackers underestimated the resistance they would face, and withdrew when it was clear they may not be able to take hostages.

It would have bought some credibility to Jihadi organisations who would have shown themselves off as willing to stand up for the oppressed, wether its Kashmir, Palestine or Jaffna. What more, they would have potrayed Sl govt. as being a stooge of India.

By: Neelakantan

Neelakantan — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:42:52 +0000

The rogue theory is a nice fiction.

There are no rogues – the rogue is the establishment. All this rogue theory is so that the left hand (establishment) gets the money for the right (fictitious rogue). And the US has responded, with money, as usual…

By: photonman

photonman — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 03:34:40 +0000

Nitin,

Complete insulation is impossible. Not in the 21st century. Even practical containment is impossible. The only solution is to do a MacArthur.

Not sure how doing a MacArthur would work. Surely MacArthur didn’t have to deal with a Japanese “pan-Asianist” “al-Qaeda” or an upsurge of widely dispersed “Asianist” ideologues who were hell bent on ‘liberating’ – by suicide if necessary – a fellow Asian country. Nor did 1940s Imperial Japan have powerful benefactors left by the end of WWII, like militarized Pakistan has today.

Finally there’s the question of who gives the money to bankroll a MacArthur plan given the current recession.

By: Keshav

Keshav — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 22:59:38 +0000

I never thought strategists to be black comedians, but Prem Panicker takes the cake on this one:

“Manohar must be a very relieved man just now. Without suggesting that Sri Lankan players being injured in a terrorist strike in Lahore [Images] today is insignificant, consider the what-if: A headline reading ‘Sachin Tendulkar injured in terrorist attack in Lahore’ would have had cataclysmic consequences: nationwide rioting, and on overwhelming political consensus in favour of war.”

By: Aam Insaan

Aam Insaan — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:11:28 +0000

Guys
—It’s Zardari!

By: Venkat

Venkat — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 17:26:53 +0000

Why did they attack SL players??

SL is a budding friend of Pak state and so Pak agents must have warned the terrorists not to touch their guests.

So, I can only conclude the rogues are going overboard and not ready to listen to their masters in Pak establishment??

By: Trilok

Trilok — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:39:08 +0000

i wish mccain had won the election.

By: Ashutosh

Ashutosh — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:37:32 +0000

A Pakistani minister insinuated that the attackers may have been across the border from India seeking revenge for the Mumbai attacks. He also said that this could be construed as an “open declaration of war by India on Pakistan”.

In other news, Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini has converted to Christianity in order to appease US President Barack Obama.

By: rsw

rsw — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:13:30 +0000

“Would the next Pakistani military dictator care whether he is the president of the Pakistani republic or the Amir-ul-momineen of an Islamic emirate?”

Thank you for recognizing the issue for what it is. The way I see it, the writing on the wall is 100% clear to every part of the Pakistani right wing — we are headed towards an Islamic state. Given that, there seems to be a power struggle going on within the right wing for who will control the actual details of the next regime.