back to top
    OpinionsWhy is Pakistan hell-bent on saving Uri attack 'mastermind' Masood Azhar?

    Why is Pakistan hell-bent on saving Uri attack ‘mastermind’ Masood Azhar?

    Date:

    Why is Pakistan hell-bent on saving Uri attack ‘mastermind' Masood Azhar?

    Praveen Shekhar

    It is in Islamabad's interest to arrest the JeM chief.

    Masood Azhar-led Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) is suspected to be behind the Uri attack in which 18 Indian soldiers have been killed. After the attack, director general of military operations, Lt Gen Ranbir Singh, had called up his counterpart in Pakistan expressing “serious concerns” over Pakistani markings found on the equipment used by four “foreign” terrorists suspected to be belonging to Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed.

    Investigation Agency (NIA) suspects that Jaish-e-Mohammad's (JeM) Kashif Jaan, Rauf Asgar and Masood Azhar may have masterminded the brazen attack. It is believed that Kashif Jaan, who escorted the Pathankot terrorists till the border, could be the handler who helped the Uri attackers.

    In March 2016, had informed a visiting joint investigation team from Pakistan that JeM chief Maulana Masood Azhar plotted the Pathankot attack and guided the entire operation from Pakistan. As proof, the NIA also shared the voice samples of Azhar and his brother Rauf Asghar.

    As per the Indian intelligence agency, the chains of command during the attack lead up to Azhar. NIA had also informed the JIT that it was at Azhar's behest that terrorists were escorted to the point of infiltration on the Pakistani side.

    Few pertinent questions arise post the NIA revelation. Firstly, is Pakistan providing a safe haven to Masood Azhar? Secondly, is Masood Azhar untouchable in Pakistan? Thirdly, and most importantly, did India compromise its national security owing to Azhar?

    The answer to the first question is an open secret. But when a Pakistan minister makes the admission, then it becomes startlingly obvious. In one such revelation in May this year, a Pakistan provincial minister said legal action against militant groups like Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) was not possible as the “state itself is involved”.

    In an interview to BBC Urdu, Punjab law minister Rana Sanaullah, when asked why action has never been taken against pro-establishment and anti-Indian militant groups in the province, said, “By pro-establishment groups if you mean JuD and JeM, then let me tell you that they have been declared proscribed organisations and they can no longer carry out any activity in the province.” The Punjab law minister further said, “How can you prosecute a group with whom the state itself has been involved?”

    Considering the second question, let us not lose sight of the fact that Pakistan already has a strong legal regime in place against the likes of Masood Azhar – this gives the government enough powers against those designated by its own law as terrorists, or members of groups designated as terrorists.

    Masood Azhar has already been placed under UN Security Resolution 1267. Such a designation puts an obligation on the government to proscribe such groups in the country where they exist or operate, place an arms embargo, freeze their funds, as well as impose a travel ban, and ensure such individuals are put behind bars.

    Pakistan has already done the first: in 2002, it banned the JeM as a terrorist group under the country's 1997 Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). But under the provisions of this act, Azhar can be arrested for being a member of the group, and if convicted, sentenced to up to five years in prison.

    So long as Pakistan claimed it did not know where Azhar was, it could duck acting against him under the ATA. But no less a person than the country's de-facto foreign minister, Sartaj Aziz, has now acknowledged that Azhar is in the protective custody of the Pakistan government.

    There is a feeling that getting the JeM designated as an terrorist group, and Azhar as an international terrorist under 1267 would be a diplomatic victory for India, but going by what Pakistan did – or did not do – after the Jamat-ud-Dawa (JuD) and Hafiz Saeed were designated as terrorists in 2008, it's not going to yield results on the ground.

    To recap what happened after Hafiz Saeed was designated in 2008 under 1267: Pakistan placed him under house arrest under its Maintenance of Public Order Act, and when he contested the arrest, the government pleaded in court that there was a UN ban on him. When the court found there was no arrest clause in the UN designation, it swiftly ended his detention.

    Evidence of the JeM's involvement in Pathankot is not necessary for Pakistan to arrest Azhar. Nor is there any need for an Indian investigation team to visit Pakistan. Under the ATA, a person is guilty of an offence if he is a member of a banned group, addresses a meeting of the banned group, promotes the group, encourages support for it or raises funds for it. The JeM is a banned outfit in Pakistan. The JeM and its known proxies and “trusts” of the group are in a list of 72 organisations submitted to the Senate, Pakistan's Upper House of Parliament, in December 2015. The list included the JeM as a group banned by Pakistan. Those “enlisted” under UNSC 1267, like the JuD, were listed separately.

    The moot question is, will Pakistan act against someone as high up in the terrorist hierarchy as Azhar on its territory just because India says he is behind a terrorist attack on the Indian soil, even if it gets the 's backing?

    Pakistan has, time and again, pleaded that it cannot act against Saeed because it has to act according to the country's laws. It takes much pride in projecting itself as a country bound by the “rule of law” and gloats over the independence of its courts.

    Pakistan has stated many times, especially when accused by India of sheltering terrorists, that it has been one of the worst victims of terrorism, and therefore has no incentive in harbouring terrorists. Why does Pakistan forget that terrorism has claimed thousands of Pakistani lives and so it must arrest Azhar in its own interest?

    For years, after India released Azhar in exchange for the passengers on the hijacked IC 814, Pakistan pretended it did not know where he was. He was briefly arrested after the JeM was banned in 2002, and then let off. Pakistan always assured India that it did not know where Azhar was. The JeM chief, too, kept a low profile, although it was widely believed that he lived in Bahawalpur in Pakistan's Punjab province.

    Therefore, the only conclusion that can be reached is that Masood Azhar remains untouchable in Pakistan.

    Thirdly and lastly, did India compromise its national security by releasing Masood Azhar? On Decemer 24, 1999, IC 814, en route Delhi from Nepal with 176 passengers onboard, was hijacked. Three terrorists, including Masood Azhar, were released by the Indian government in exchange for the safe release of passengers and the crew.

    The NDA government has a lot of explaining to do on whether releasing Masood Azhar was a big mistake. It is also turning out to be a political issue, as the opposition has put the NDA in the dock over Azhar's release. Congress leader Digvijaya Singh slammed the earlier NDA regime for “compromising” with national security by releasing the terrorist following the 1999 Indian Airlines hijack. “We compromised to let Masood Azhar go after Indian Airlines hijack. Lesson? Never compromise with national security,” the Congress general secretary said.

    Northlines
    Northlines
    The Northlines is an independent source on the Web for news, facts and figures relating to Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh and its neighbourhood.

    Share post:

    Popular

    More like this
    Related

    India Needs A National Security Strategy

    VENUGOPAL MENON (Retd) The National Security Strategy document should flag...

    Double-edged sword of social media: Impact on relationships

    While it offers the promise of community and instant...

    SAFEGUARDING SANCTITY

    How TTD Can Preserve the Purity of Tirupati Prasadam by...

    How global powers exploit democratic ideals

    V K bahuguna One of the remarkable characteristics of the...