THE JIHADI UPPER CUT IN PAKISTAN
THE ASIAN AGE NEW DLEHI
SEPTEMBER 12, 2011
The famous Pakistani bridge player, Zia Mahmood, in his engagingly written book “Bridge My Way” describes the perils of playing this card game in his native Pakistan in 1975. He wrote that a bridge club was opened in Lahore, but it lasted a week because that was how long it took for the religious groups of the area to have it closed. He adds that ‘simply visiting the club was nerve-racking with the constant worry that at any time violent neighbours might turn up with their own brand of eviction notice.’ And this was before General Zia ul Haq turned on the Islamic screws on the people.
35 years and more later, we hear of stories about Lahore’s growing Talibanisation when the woman curator of the city’s famous Nairang Gallery was harassed and assaulted by a senior police official for wearing improper clothes and describing the work of the Gallery as fahashi (vulgarity) during the rehearsal of a Bharatnatyam dance recital; the same moral brigade representative had earlier objected to a couple because they were sitting together. Those who tried to rescue the curator were beaten and when gallery owner’s son enquired about the incident, he was dragged away to the thana for being ‘hung upside down’. This cultural policing is a sign of what is clearly becoming the new ideology of Pakistan.
The assassination of Punjab Governor, Salman Taseer in January this year, by his own body guard because he opposed the Blasphemy Law is one part of the problem. All societies have such intolerant elements but what is worrying has been the reaction of the mullahs, the lawyers and even the state. There was reluctance to blame Mumtaz Qadri, the assassin, instead there was praise for his action. The state clearly indicated that it was not going to revise the Blasphemy Law. Perhaps it was not going to be able to revise or did not want to revise; one will never know.
Pakistan’s well-known political analyst and commentator, Dr Eqbal Ahmed had prophesied as far back as in 1998 in the Dawn newspaper (August 23,) that the costs of Islamabad’s Afghan policy— already unbearable in proliferation of guns, heroin and armed fanatics — would multiply in myriad ways. He had added that closeness with the Taliban would make these costs potentially catastrophic. Today, in this pursuit of strategic depth and seeking to avenge India for all the various imagined wrong doings, Pakistan’s rulers have become impervious to the logic of peace; only the logic of force is understood, inside Pakistan or in its neighbourood. Neither the Islam of the Taliban or the Lashkar e Tayyaba favours democracy; nor does the Pakistan Army.
Although Zia had been credited with the drive towards enforcing austere Islam, political leaders in Pakistan have also succumbed to pressure from religious forces or used religion for political ends. It might even be argued that had Zia or his successors been wiser they could have offered to wind down the jihad and its mujahideen, in return for largesse of all kinds from the Americans and the west, used it well and Pakistan today could have been a prosperous, strong and modernised state in the region, ahead of India perhaps. Instead the rulers retained the jihadi option and clichés of ‘a thousand year war’ and ‘we shall eat grass’ endured through successive governments that came after Zia.
There was an inevitability of this process that the Pakistani rulers either did not see or refused to see; or worse, even encouraged this after sometime especially in India during the 1990s. . After years of close association with Islamic militancy either in Afghanistan or in India, Pak Army personnel were directly exposed to Islamic militancy and propaganda for an orthodox Islamic order for Pakistan.
The important question today is how much and to what extent has the Pakistan Army been Islamicised and how has this affected the society or the elite which has always sided with the Army. In Pakistan the dilemma is that the society will have to see whether in the long term, the larger political battle is won by those who seek an Islamic theocratic state or by those who want a modern Islamic republic. True there are many brave and liberal thinkers and writers in Pakistan who see the dangers. Their writings appear in the English press frequently. But they also know that once a thinker crosses the rubicon, a fate similar to that of Daniel Pearl or Syed Saleem Shahzad is a strong possibility.
A society that teaches its young hatred for other religions and cultures, only suffocates and blinds them. This is the nature of the Pakistani state today. Those who wish to deal with Pakistan or need to deal with that country would do well to remember this. We cannot change this; only Pakistanis can, if they wish to. Indians just have to learn to deal with the reality.
The world does not stress on the Christianity of western countries while dealing with them. Similarly, one need not stress on Pakistan’s Islamic/Muslim character which is part of its two-nation theory and not India’s. Just deal with Pakistan as another country which would relieve us of having to constantly tailor our policies with our Muslims in mind. Our Muslims are as Indian as the rest of us with the same problems and aspirations and can no longer be treated as vote banks at election time.
Vikram Sood
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Setting Their House in Order
When the topic of terrorism-related threats is discussed, most of us think of Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The scene of activity is the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) and the borderlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan. There are visions of Predators stalking the region to search and kill. When this is not the scene, then it is the threat to the US from the likes of Times Square wannabe-bomber Faisal Shahzad, their mindsets and their mentors.
When an angered and frightened US speaks of retaliation to this, it speaks of the wrath of America the next time around. Pakistan’s rulers pretend anger and insult, and they let loose their leg men on the streets shouting ‘Death to America!’. The Americans are in a dilemma. They cannot attack their favourite ally and justify to Congress that they need to give more arms and financial assistance to it. Pakistan’s rulers feel they have a winning game — of threatening to lose the match and country if they are not given steroids. Pakistan’s battle is not only on its western frontiers; it is now in the Punjabi heartland.
Since the Lal Masjid episode in Islamabad in 2007, the murderous terrorist attacks on the Marriot Hotel, the General Headquarters in Rawalpindi, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Special Service Group establishments as well as the police show the reach of the terrorists. The twin attacks on the Garhi Shahu and Model Town Ahmadiya masjids in Lahore on Friday, May 28, the attack on Jinnah Hospital on the night of May 31 and the June 9 attack on the Nato convoy outside Islamabad are manifestations of a virus that is radicalising Pakistani society faster and deeper than we realise — or Pakistan’s rulers care to admit. The recent ban on social websites YouTube and Facebook by the Pakistani government indicates its nervousness in dealing with radicals.
True, there is a section of Pakistani society that finds events like violence in the name of religion, or medieval practices foisted upon it by self-styled guardians of the faith, abhorrent. The other truth is that these hordes have muscle power, are financially well-endowed and — what has become increasingly evident — there is either benign neglect by the State or active connivance most of the time. One does not have to go too far back to the Zia years to see what has been happening to Punjabi society even in the post-Zia years.
President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq had left in place not only the madrasa system of obscurantist education, but he had also mainstreamed this. So while the ISI diverted its experience and jihadi hordes from the Afghan front to the Kashmir one, Pakistan’s military rulers also created new terrorist outfits in the 1990s for specific action in Jammu and Kashmir. These were all Punjabi in origin and base. Recruitment has continued for the ‘jihad’ from various parts of Pakistan, notably from southern Punjab.
All these terrorist organisations have become interlinked and inter-dependent and an estimated 3,000-8,000 Punjab-based jihadis do service jointly alongside the Punjabi Taliban in Fata and Punjab. The Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Sipah-e-Sahaba (SSP) are also suspected to be linked with al-Qaeda. Politicians being politicians, the Nawaz and Shahbaz Sharif brothers have been flirting outrageously with the SSP in Punjab to queer the pitch for the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). Sheikh Akram, an opposition MP from Jhang, fears that there could be ten Swats in Punjab if the extremists are not checked.
So, today, we have a situation in which powerful terrorist organisations like the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba (LeT), the JeM and others, along with Sunni sectarian outfits like the SSP and the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ), have recruits from the same village, district or area. Recruits for the mostly Punjabi Pakistani army also come from the same region and possibly from the same madrasas. Punjab is also the province that has many of Pakistan’s formidable troop concentrations against India — and it is here that all of Pakistan’s vital nuclear facilities are located.
Should Punjab get destabilised by Islamic radicals, this will have devastating consequences for Pakistan. Many wonder how the young and educated are getting affected by jihadi philosophy. Even today the curriculum established during the Zia years for the mainstream schools has not changed. In the Punjab University campus too, there is greater stress on Islamic tenets. The Daily Times, in its column ‘Campus Window’ (April 11, 2007), noted that while the world “heads towards modernisation and scientific knowledge, Punjab University, which is one of the oldest educational institutions in South Asia, is rapidly turning into a hub of Islamism”.
There are innumerable examples of attempts to introduce extreme religious ideologies in the discourse and in outward symbolism. These range from some very regressive and muscular moral policing on the campus to the downright ridiculous — like seeking to ban Alexander Pope’s poem ‘The Rape of the Lock’, as the title was considered vulgar.
Leading the campaign so far has been the students’ wing of Jamaat-e-Islami, the Islami Jamaat Tulaba, a rabid Sunni organisation. Its monopoly is now being challenged by an equally rabid students’ organisation, the new Tulaba Jamaat-ud-Dawa, the students’ wing of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa, the mentor of the LeT. When two extreme organisations compete, the result can only be increased radicalisation, as each is competing against the other to establish its Islamic credentials.
What has been apparent for long to many of us here — but is clearly emerging now — is that Afghanistan will have a chance at peace only if the virus in Pakistan is eradicated. The next few months are going to be a major challenge for Pakistani Army Chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, if the declared intention is to take military action against the SSP, the JeM and the LeJ. Pakistan must fight its own demons urgently and not selectively. This will depend upon how long Pakistan’s rulers remain in denial about the home-grown existential threat to them and their country.
When an angered and frightened US speaks of retaliation to this, it speaks of the wrath of America the next time around. Pakistan’s rulers pretend anger and insult, and they let loose their leg men on the streets shouting ‘Death to America!’. The Americans are in a dilemma. They cannot attack their favourite ally and justify to Congress that they need to give more arms and financial assistance to it. Pakistan’s rulers feel they have a winning game — of threatening to lose the match and country if they are not given steroids. Pakistan’s battle is not only on its western frontiers; it is now in the Punjabi heartland.
Since the Lal Masjid episode in Islamabad in 2007, the murderous terrorist attacks on the Marriot Hotel, the General Headquarters in Rawalpindi, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Special Service Group establishments as well as the police show the reach of the terrorists. The twin attacks on the Garhi Shahu and Model Town Ahmadiya masjids in Lahore on Friday, May 28, the attack on Jinnah Hospital on the night of May 31 and the June 9 attack on the Nato convoy outside Islamabad are manifestations of a virus that is radicalising Pakistani society faster and deeper than we realise — or Pakistan’s rulers care to admit. The recent ban on social websites YouTube and Facebook by the Pakistani government indicates its nervousness in dealing with radicals.
True, there is a section of Pakistani society that finds events like violence in the name of religion, or medieval practices foisted upon it by self-styled guardians of the faith, abhorrent. The other truth is that these hordes have muscle power, are financially well-endowed and — what has become increasingly evident — there is either benign neglect by the State or active connivance most of the time. One does not have to go too far back to the Zia years to see what has been happening to Punjabi society even in the post-Zia years.
President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq had left in place not only the madrasa system of obscurantist education, but he had also mainstreamed this. So while the ISI diverted its experience and jihadi hordes from the Afghan front to the Kashmir one, Pakistan’s military rulers also created new terrorist outfits in the 1990s for specific action in Jammu and Kashmir. These were all Punjabi in origin and base. Recruitment has continued for the ‘jihad’ from various parts of Pakistan, notably from southern Punjab.
All these terrorist organisations have become interlinked and inter-dependent and an estimated 3,000-8,000 Punjab-based jihadis do service jointly alongside the Punjabi Taliban in Fata and Punjab. The Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Sipah-e-Sahaba (SSP) are also suspected to be linked with al-Qaeda. Politicians being politicians, the Nawaz and Shahbaz Sharif brothers have been flirting outrageously with the SSP in Punjab to queer the pitch for the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). Sheikh Akram, an opposition MP from Jhang, fears that there could be ten Swats in Punjab if the extremists are not checked.
So, today, we have a situation in which powerful terrorist organisations like the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba (LeT), the JeM and others, along with Sunni sectarian outfits like the SSP and the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ), have recruits from the same village, district or area. Recruits for the mostly Punjabi Pakistani army also come from the same region and possibly from the same madrasas. Punjab is also the province that has many of Pakistan’s formidable troop concentrations against India — and it is here that all of Pakistan’s vital nuclear facilities are located.
Should Punjab get destabilised by Islamic radicals, this will have devastating consequences for Pakistan. Many wonder how the young and educated are getting affected by jihadi philosophy. Even today the curriculum established during the Zia years for the mainstream schools has not changed. In the Punjab University campus too, there is greater stress on Islamic tenets. The Daily Times, in its column ‘Campus Window’ (April 11, 2007), noted that while the world “heads towards modernisation and scientific knowledge, Punjab University, which is one of the oldest educational institutions in South Asia, is rapidly turning into a hub of Islamism”.
There are innumerable examples of attempts to introduce extreme religious ideologies in the discourse and in outward symbolism. These range from some very regressive and muscular moral policing on the campus to the downright ridiculous — like seeking to ban Alexander Pope’s poem ‘The Rape of the Lock’, as the title was considered vulgar.
Leading the campaign so far has been the students’ wing of Jamaat-e-Islami, the Islami Jamaat Tulaba, a rabid Sunni organisation. Its monopoly is now being challenged by an equally rabid students’ organisation, the new Tulaba Jamaat-ud-Dawa, the students’ wing of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa, the mentor of the LeT. When two extreme organisations compete, the result can only be increased radicalisation, as each is competing against the other to establish its Islamic credentials.
What has been apparent for long to many of us here — but is clearly emerging now — is that Afghanistan will have a chance at peace only if the virus in Pakistan is eradicated. The next few months are going to be a major challenge for Pakistani Army Chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, if the declared intention is to take military action against the SSP, the JeM and the LeJ. Pakistan must fight its own demons urgently and not selectively. This will depend upon how long Pakistan’s rulers remain in denial about the home-grown existential threat to them and their country.
Source : Hindustan Times , 16th June 2010
Monday, December 25, 2006
Intelligence co-operation as a 'powerful tool'
Vikram Sood25 October 2006
Intelligence cooperation or liaison, as it is called, is not a game for the novice or the uninitiated. Only a select few in an intelligence organisation are normally allowed to handle the arrangements, that too, after having worked in the system for years. Intelligence cooperation goes beyond mere exchange of information. It can include help to upgrade abilities and facilities in each other's countries. It is a vital and safe channel of communication, even in the absence of diplomatic relations or near rupture in the same. In today's world, intelligence liaison has become fair game for all. Spying on friends is not taboo in this game and the best time to make inroads is when relations are warm and comfortable. Heads of government have quite often used their intelligence chiefs to convey sensitive messages to their counterparts or maintain contact with each other, especially when, in the absence of formal relations, there was need for political deniability. Effective intelligence is also a by-product of sound relationship and trust between the intelligence chief and the chief executive of a country. Intelligence cooperation need not only be a bilateral arrangement. Immediately after the end of World War II, the English-speaking victors of the war - the US, Canada, Britain, Australia and Canada - got together to exchange information about the common threat, which was the Soviet Union at that time. Communications intelligence was exchanged by these countries. At times, this intelligence was extended to uncomfortable political opponents who could not be covered by agencies because of domestic laws that prohibited such espionage. In the Eighties, the exchange evolved into Project Echelon, which graduated from exchanging processed intelligence to 'raw' intercepts. Echelon monitors about 120 satellites all over the world and includes non-military communications of governments, business houses, private establishments and individuals. When stories about the Echelon leaked - that one section of the allies was snooping on the other - the French and Germans were livid. There was uproar in the European Parliament and the US and British were accused of "State-sponsored information piracy". There were suspicions, even accusations, that the US used this system to advise its negotiators in trade talks with Japan. On other occasions, it was apparently used to help Boeing beat Airbus in the deal with Saudi Arabia and to clinch the Enron deal with India, beating the British bid this time. The volume of traffic intercepts is indeed huge; the volume of international telephone traffic, including that from cellphones, is now estimated to be approximately 200 billion seconds a year. Any communication sent into space is susceptible to monitoring. Thus, there exists the need for massive downstream activity to process this. Reliance on key words and voice recognition has its problems; the former can cause communications traffic jams and the latter is not completely reliable. In addition, reconnaissance satellites - 'vacuum cleaners' that sweep in everything and take high resolution photographs - are used to keep the globe under watch. These can detect nuclear blasts, warn of missile launches and record the telemetry of missile flights. Bases located at varied points all over the world help download this data. It could, perhaps, be comforting that one lives in such a stratospheric cocoon. On the other hand, it could be highly disconcerting to realise that we live in Orwell's world. The CIA and KGB maintained contacts with each other even when the Cold War temperatures were near freezing. At about the same time in the Eighties, the US had two listening posts in Qitai and Korla in the Xinjiang province to listen into Soviet Russia. The Germans also had an intelligence relationship with the Chinese service at least as far back as in the Eighties. French intelligence chief, Alexandre de Meranches, founder of the secretive Safari Club that included other friendly and trusted intelligence agencies, had foreseen Soviet intrusion into Afghanistan and had advised the newly-elected Ronald Reagan to prepare for a counter-offensive in Afghanistan. Apart from the obvious influence mechanisms, the Western power elite functions in many secretive ways. In one of his earlier novels, Robert Ludlum had four powerful international individuals as the secret controllers of the world. It did not seem real then, as Ludlum's multitalented, covert cold warriors fought ruthless wars against enemies of the free world. But Ludlum obviously based some of his novels on the realities of the day and his fantasies were more real than those of General Musharraf. There are other influential secret societies in the West, like the Bilderberg Group formed in 1954 by a small group of rich and powerful trans-Atlantic individuals to help keep Europe allied to the US and communism at bay. This group (named after the hotel in Arnhem, in the Netherlands, where they first met) remains an exclusive and secretive group that includes politicians, financiers, media moguls and the corporate world. The group allows no reporters, there is only an answering machine and no minutes are issued. This leads to various interpretations about its role. For instance, the Serbs blamed Bilderberg for the war that led to the ouster of Slobodan Milosevic. Another secret society with a number of former intelligence officers as members is Pinay Circle (earlier known as the Cercle Violet). It is believed to be a secret Right-wing transnational intelligence and direct action group used to fight communism. The Circle is said to be mainly in the business of regime change in the West to keep the US and Europe close to each other. The group continues to exist although communism is no longer the threat it was. Its members have included Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, (all three associated with the Bilderberg Group), George Soros, Paul Volcker, Turki Al-Faisal, former CIA chief William Colby, among other US, British and German intelligence officers. Nadhmi Auchi, a onetime Saddam Hussein confidante, was also a member of this secret group. British luminaries have included Lord Julian Amery and James Goldsmith. The Circle is also linked to other influential groups like the Heritage Foundation and Opus Dei, often through its members. There were allegations that in the Seventies, the group helped in the downfall of British premiers Harold Wilson and Ted Heath, Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam and France's President, Francois Mitterrand. Beneficiaries included Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Like any other system, intelligence functions best in a certain milieu. Many world powers have treated their intelligence services as an important sword-arm to provide internal security and to secure foreign policy objectives. When the Mossad was hunting for the Black September terrorists in the Seventies, one of the agents had to masquerade as a woman. This agent was Ehud Barak, who later became the Israeli Prime Minister. Many others who headed their countries' intelligence services switched to overt governance with ease and distinction. Bush Sr in the US was one; Andropov, Primakov and Putin in Russia; Kang Sheng and Chiao Shi in China were members of the Politburo; Hosni Mubarak looked after the Egyptian Intelligence during Sadat's presidency. In a world of globalised terror, economics and competition, the traditional threats to the developed world have changed. Democracy and its preservation is serious business, extending beyond the tinsel and glamour of the screen and the rhetoric at election rallies. The system of global surveillance with and against friends will remain, with all levers of control lying with the rich and powerful. The author is Advisor to Chairman, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), New Delhi. Earlier, he was Secretary, Research & Analysis Wing. Source: Hindustan Times, New Delhi, October 25, 2006
Intelligence cooperation or liaison, as it is called, is not a game for the novice or the uninitiated. Only a select few in an intelligence organisation are normally allowed to handle the arrangements, that too, after having worked in the system for years. Intelligence cooperation goes beyond mere exchange of information. It can include help to upgrade abilities and facilities in each other's countries. It is a vital and safe channel of communication, even in the absence of diplomatic relations or near rupture in the same. In today's world, intelligence liaison has become fair game for all. Spying on friends is not taboo in this game and the best time to make inroads is when relations are warm and comfortable. Heads of government have quite often used their intelligence chiefs to convey sensitive messages to their counterparts or maintain contact with each other, especially when, in the absence of formal relations, there was need for political deniability. Effective intelligence is also a by-product of sound relationship and trust between the intelligence chief and the chief executive of a country. Intelligence cooperation need not only be a bilateral arrangement. Immediately after the end of World War II, the English-speaking victors of the war - the US, Canada, Britain, Australia and Canada - got together to exchange information about the common threat, which was the Soviet Union at that time. Communications intelligence was exchanged by these countries. At times, this intelligence was extended to uncomfortable political opponents who could not be covered by agencies because of domestic laws that prohibited such espionage. In the Eighties, the exchange evolved into Project Echelon, which graduated from exchanging processed intelligence to 'raw' intercepts. Echelon monitors about 120 satellites all over the world and includes non-military communications of governments, business houses, private establishments and individuals. When stories about the Echelon leaked - that one section of the allies was snooping on the other - the French and Germans were livid. There was uproar in the European Parliament and the US and British were accused of "State-sponsored information piracy". There were suspicions, even accusations, that the US used this system to advise its negotiators in trade talks with Japan. On other occasions, it was apparently used to help Boeing beat Airbus in the deal with Saudi Arabia and to clinch the Enron deal with India, beating the British bid this time. The volume of traffic intercepts is indeed huge; the volume of international telephone traffic, including that from cellphones, is now estimated to be approximately 200 billion seconds a year. Any communication sent into space is susceptible to monitoring. Thus, there exists the need for massive downstream activity to process this. Reliance on key words and voice recognition has its problems; the former can cause communications traffic jams and the latter is not completely reliable. In addition, reconnaissance satellites - 'vacuum cleaners' that sweep in everything and take high resolution photographs - are used to keep the globe under watch. These can detect nuclear blasts, warn of missile launches and record the telemetry of missile flights. Bases located at varied points all over the world help download this data. It could, perhaps, be comforting that one lives in such a stratospheric cocoon. On the other hand, it could be highly disconcerting to realise that we live in Orwell's world. The CIA and KGB maintained contacts with each other even when the Cold War temperatures were near freezing. At about the same time in the Eighties, the US had two listening posts in Qitai and Korla in the Xinjiang province to listen into Soviet Russia. The Germans also had an intelligence relationship with the Chinese service at least as far back as in the Eighties. French intelligence chief, Alexandre de Meranches, founder of the secretive Safari Club that included other friendly and trusted intelligence agencies, had foreseen Soviet intrusion into Afghanistan and had advised the newly-elected Ronald Reagan to prepare for a counter-offensive in Afghanistan. Apart from the obvious influence mechanisms, the Western power elite functions in many secretive ways. In one of his earlier novels, Robert Ludlum had four powerful international individuals as the secret controllers of the world. It did not seem real then, as Ludlum's multitalented, covert cold warriors fought ruthless wars against enemies of the free world. But Ludlum obviously based some of his novels on the realities of the day and his fantasies were more real than those of General Musharraf. There are other influential secret societies in the West, like the Bilderberg Group formed in 1954 by a small group of rich and powerful trans-Atlantic individuals to help keep Europe allied to the US and communism at bay. This group (named after the hotel in Arnhem, in the Netherlands, where they first met) remains an exclusive and secretive group that includes politicians, financiers, media moguls and the corporate world. The group allows no reporters, there is only an answering machine and no minutes are issued. This leads to various interpretations about its role. For instance, the Serbs blamed Bilderberg for the war that led to the ouster of Slobodan Milosevic. Another secret society with a number of former intelligence officers as members is Pinay Circle (earlier known as the Cercle Violet). It is believed to be a secret Right-wing transnational intelligence and direct action group used to fight communism. The Circle is said to be mainly in the business of regime change in the West to keep the US and Europe close to each other. The group continues to exist although communism is no longer the threat it was. Its members have included Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, (all three associated with the Bilderberg Group), George Soros, Paul Volcker, Turki Al-Faisal, former CIA chief William Colby, among other US, British and German intelligence officers. Nadhmi Auchi, a onetime Saddam Hussein confidante, was also a member of this secret group. British luminaries have included Lord Julian Amery and James Goldsmith. The Circle is also linked to other influential groups like the Heritage Foundation and Opus Dei, often through its members. There were allegations that in the Seventies, the group helped in the downfall of British premiers Harold Wilson and Ted Heath, Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam and France's President, Francois Mitterrand. Beneficiaries included Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Like any other system, intelligence functions best in a certain milieu. Many world powers have treated their intelligence services as an important sword-arm to provide internal security and to secure foreign policy objectives. When the Mossad was hunting for the Black September terrorists in the Seventies, one of the agents had to masquerade as a woman. This agent was Ehud Barak, who later became the Israeli Prime Minister. Many others who headed their countries' intelligence services switched to overt governance with ease and distinction. Bush Sr in the US was one; Andropov, Primakov and Putin in Russia; Kang Sheng and Chiao Shi in China were members of the Politburo; Hosni Mubarak looked after the Egyptian Intelligence during Sadat's presidency. In a world of globalised terror, economics and competition, the traditional threats to the developed world have changed. Democracy and its preservation is serious business, extending beyond the tinsel and glamour of the screen and the rhetoric at election rallies. The system of global surveillance with and against friends will remain, with all levers of control lying with the rich and powerful. The author is Advisor to Chairman, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), New Delhi. Earlier, he was Secretary, Research & Analysis Wing. Source: Hindustan Times, New Delhi, October 25, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)