Making Sense Of The Latest India-Afghanistan-Pakistan Drama

President Hamid Karzai’s provocative two-day trip to India this week continues to resonate across the subcontinent. His announcement of an unprecedented strategic partnership with India has put Pakistan on edge, with potentially significant consequences for the region.

 

Why was President Karzai in India, and what were his objectives for the trip?

India has been a longstanding partner, not only of President Karzai, but of Afghanistan. India has certainly been the biggest regional donor to Afghanistan, and it’s been one of the Afghanistan’s most important global donors.

There’s a lot of antagonism towards Pakistan in Afghanistan, whereas India is held in high regard. So I think [the visit was motivated by Afghan] interest in understanding where India is vis-à-vis Pakistan in Afghanistan. What will be its long-term goals as the U.S. security umbrella continues retreating?

India is having a big debate about how important it is for India to remain in Afghanistan, with what objectives and at what cost.

During his trip, President Karzai signed a strategic partnership agreement with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh under which India will provide assistance to Afghanistan, including stepping up trade and training Afghan forces after U.S. forces leave in 2014. What’s the significance of this accord and why has it set off such fears in Pakistan?

Pakistan’s concerns with this partnership stem from their conviction that India will use its position in Afghanistan to the detriment of Pakistan.

The basic problem is that, according to my sources, who are not Pakistani – British diplomats, UN diplomats and increasingly Americans as well – India has been supporting the Baloch insurgents from Pakistan, [who are waging an ethnic nationalist rebellion in Pakistan’s southwestern province of Balochistan].

This is not the first time that India has done this. Balochistan has been a historical place of intervention for the Indians, so this is very disconcerting to the Pakistanis.

The Indians have also historically – although they haven’t made the official proclamations to this effect in recent history – supported Afghanistan in its irredentist claims on Pashtun parts of Pakistani territory. Pakistan is concerned about India using Afghanistan to deny Pakistan strategic depth.

Finally the Northern Alliance – and of course [assassinated former president Burhannurdin] Rabbani was a key figure in that – was aided and facilitated by the Indians, and they were the only rival to Pakistan’s proxy, the Taliban.

For all of these reasons, Pakistan sees this strategic partnership between India and Afghanistan as completely detrimental to its interests.

Are Pakistan’s fears well-founded?

The Americans would dismiss Pakistan’s fears, and so would Indians. They would basically say the Indians have no interest in destabilizing Pakistan, but that’s not entirely true. If that were true India would not be manipulating affairs in Balochistan to the varying levels that it is, and it’s certainly not at the levels that Pakistan claims.

So Pakistan does have concerns. Pakistan fears India and its partnership with the Americans: the American commitment to build it up as a global power; the Indian-American nuclear deal. … So the Pakistanis want to have the opportunity to deny India’s rise as a regional hegemon, much less a global power.

President Karzai has tried to do some damage control. He clarified the agreement wasn’t directed at Pakistan and said, ”Pakistan is a twin brother, India is a great friend. … The agreement that we signed yesterday with our friend will not affect our brother.” Will his words placate any concern in Pakistan, or are they merely lip service?

Pakistan will not be reassured by this. Karzai can say whatever he wants to say; it’s not going to reassure Pakistan.

Pres. Karzai also announced that Afghanistan would be calling off peace talks with the Taliban, saying, “We have decided not to talk to the Taliban because we do not know their address … therefore we have decided to talk to our brothers in Pakistan.” Has Karzai given up on negotiations with the Taliban?

I think he’s realized that rather than talking to the floor manager, he has to talk to the CEOs, and the CEOs are Pakistani intelligence and military officials in Rawalpindi and Islamabad.

What does that mean for the peace process, and for the American military’s role in Afghanistan?

The American’s military role in Afghanistan is going to end no matter what, in terms of this high-intensity counterinsurgency initiative. There’s just a growing realization that there are limits to what the Americans can do given Pakistan’s intransigence on supporting the Afghan Taliban.

I think the best that the Americans can hope for is to put some modicum of stability and to try to put some pressure on Pakistan, but I think there is a growing realization that without some massive scaling down of the conditions for security transfer to the Afghans, the Americans won’t get out when they want to get out.

By get out, I don’t mean pull out and then go home. I mean scale down counterinsurgency activities in preference to a more normal relationship with Afghanistan, with the ability to conduct robust counterterror operations when needed.

Tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan have reached new heights since Rabbani’s assassination. Afghan officials say Pakistan’s intelligence agency was involved in the murder, a charge Pakistan denies. Is this an unusually low point in Afghan-Pakistan relations, and how long will these tensions likely last?

They’re going to last forever. They’ve never had good relations.

Afghanistan hasn’t handled this in a terribly sophisticated way either. Afghanistan has been really happy to use the Indian card to beat up on the Pakistanis, and this will not be in Afghanistan’s advantage, because no matter what India does, it’s not going to be able to insulate Afghanistan from what the Pakistanis are doing.

Beijing’s Afghan Gamble!

By ROBERT D. KAPLAN

Published: October 6, 2009

IN Afghanistan’s Logar Province, just south of Kabul, the geopolitical future of Asia is becoming apparent: American troops are providing security for a Chinese state-owned company to exploit the Aynak copper reserves, which are worth tens of billions of dollars. While some of America’s NATO allies want to do as little as possible in the effort to stabilize Afghanistan, China has its eyes on some of world’s last untapped deposits of copper, iron, gold, uranium and precious gems, and is willing to take big risks in one of the most violent countries to secure them.

In Afghanistan, American and Chinese interests converge. By exploiting Afghanistan’s metal and mineral reserves, China can provide thousands of Afghans with jobs, thus generating tax revenues to help stabilize a tottering Kabul government. Just as America has a vision of a modestly stable Afghanistan that will no longer be a haven for extremists, China has a vision of Afghanistan as a secure conduit for roads and energy pipelines that will bring natural resources from the Indian Ocean and elsewhere. So if America defeats Al Qaeda and the irreconcilable elements of the Taliban, China’s geopolitical position will be enhanced.

This is not a paradox, since China need not be our future adversary. Indeed, combining forces with China in Afghanistan might even improve the relationship between Washington and Beijing. The problem is that while America is sacrificing its blood and treasure, the Chinese will reap the benefits. The whole direction of America’s military and diplomatic effort is toward an exit strategy, whereas the Chinese hope to stay and profit.

But what if America decides to leave, or to drastically reduce its footprint to a counterterrorism strategy focused mainly on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border? Then another scenario might play out. Kandahar and other areas will most likely fall to the Taliban, creating a truly lawless realm that wrecks China’s plans for an energy and commodities passageway through South Asia. It would also, of course, be a momentous moral victory achieved by radical Muslims who, having first defeated the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, will then have triumphed over another superpower.

And the calculations get more complicated still: a withdrawal of any kind from Afghanistan before a stable government is in place would also hurt India, a critical if undeclared American ally, and increasingly a rival of China. Were the Taliban to retake Afghanistan, India would face a radical Islamistan stretching from its border with Pakistan deep into Central Asia. With the Taliban triumphant on Pakistan’s western border, jihadists there could direct their energies to the eastern border with India.

India would defeat Pakistan in a war, conventional or nuclear. But having to do so, or simply needing to face down a significantly greater jihadist threat next door, would divert India’s national energies away from further developing its economy and its navy, a development China would quietly welcome.

Bottom line: China will find a way to benefit no matter what the United States does in Afghanistan. But it probably benefits more if we stay and add troops to the fight. The same goes for Russia. Because of continuing unrest in the Islamic southern tier of the former Soviet Union, Moscow has an interest in America stabilizing Afghanistan (though it would take a certain psychological pleasure from a humiliating American withdrawal).

In nuts-and-bolts terms, if we stay in Afghanistan and eventually succeed, other countries will benefit more than we will. China, India and Russia are all Asian powers, geographically proximate to Afghanistan and better able, therefore, to garner practical advantages from any stability our armed forces would make possible.

Everyone keeps saying that America is not an empire, but our military finds itself in the sort of situation that was mighty familiar to empires like that of ancient Rome and 19th-century Britain: struggling in a far-off corner of the world to exact revenge, to put down the fires of rebellion, and to restore civilized order. Meanwhile, other rising and resurgent powers wait patiently in the wings, free-riding on the public good we offer. This is exactly how an empire declines, by allowing others to take advantage of its own exertions.

Of course, one could make an excellent case that an ignominious withdrawal from Afghanistan is precisely what would lead to our decline, by demoralizing our military, signaling to our friends worldwide that we cannot be counted on and demonstrating that our enemies have greater resolve than we do. That is why we have no choice in Afghanistan but to add troops and continue to fight.

But as much as we hone our counterinsurgency skills and develop assets for the “long war,” history would suggest that over time we can more easily preserve our standing in the world by using naval and air power from a distance when intervening abroad. Afghanistan should be the very last place where we are a land-based meddler, caught up in internal Islamic conflict, helping the strategic ambitions of the Chinese and others.

Robert D. Kaplan is a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and a correspondent for The Atlantic.

Courtesy: New York Times

US forces leave east Afghanistan area after deadly attack

US forces have withdrawn from a remote outpost in eastern Afghanistan following last week’s major battle there with the Taliban, NATO-led forces said today in Kabul.

The pullout was announced before the October 3 attack, but the assault has drawn fresh attention to a new US strategy to move troops out of remote areas and focus more on populated districts.

“It is the intent of the ISAF (NATO-led force) commander, US Army General Stanley McChrystal, to place an emphasis on protecting the people of Afghanistan by focusing on more populated areas,” the NATO-led force said in a statement.

It said troops and equipment had been moved from the outpost in the Kamdesh district of northeastern Nuristan Province to other locations in eastern Afghanistan.

In the deadliest attack for US forces since a July 2008 battle in nearby Kunar, eight US soldiers were killed when Taliban fighters stormed remote outposts near the Pakistan border last week. At least two Afghan troops died in the firefight.

NATO forces said 100 insurgents were killed.

In the past, when US troops have left areas in dispute, the Taliban have launched attacks to display strength and lay claim to them.

This year has become by far the deadliest for Western forces in the eight-year war that followed the removal of the Taliban from power. More than 400 Western troops have died so far, more than in the entire period from 2001-05.

There are now more than 100,000 Western forces serving in Afghanistan, two-thirds of them American. McChrystal has submitted a request for tens of thousands more, arguing that without them he cannot implement his new strategy and the war will probably be lost

Kabul blast kills 7 civilians, wounds 45 – police

SEVEN Afghan civilians were killed and 45 more were wounded in a blast outside the Indian embassy in the Afghan capital today, police sources said.

The blast came from a bomb placed inside a car at the scene, police said, but it was not immediately clear if it was a suicide attack.

Courtesy: Shanghai Daily

India to station all MiG 29s along Pak border

By: Pakistan Ka Khuda Hafiz

Still think India Not A Threat To Pakistan?

To beef up air attack capabilities in quickest possible time along the international border with Pakistan, the Indian Air Force has decided to station all its MIG-29 squardons at Adampur, the second largest Air Force base in the country.

The Adampur Air Force station, which is also known as home of MiG-29, already has two frontline fighter squardons and will see another squardon moving from Jamnagar in Gujrat soon. ” We consider ourselves to be a strategic air power establishment of the IAF in the western sector, ever ready for operations. We are fully geared up to operate in any given time frame like any other Air Force stations of the country,” said Air Commodore HS Arora, Air Officer Commanding of the Adampur air base.

To extend  that the service life of MiG 29 by 25 to 40 years, the RAC MiG aircraft coporation signed a contract with the ministry of defence to upgrade over 60 fighters in service with the IAF since 1980s.

The Adampur Air Force station, which is also known as home of MiG 29s, already has two frontline fighter squadrons and will see another squadron moving from Jamnagar in Gujarat soon.

‘We consider ourselves to be a strategic air power establishment of the IAF in the western sector, ever ready for operations. We are fully geared up to operate in any given time frame like any other Air Force stations of the country,’ said Air Commodore HS Arora, Air Officer Commanding of the Adampur air base.

To extend the service life of MiG 29 by 25 to 40 years, the RAC MiG aircraft corporation signed a contract with the Ministry of Defence to upgrade over 60 fighters in service with the IAF since the 1980s.

‘We are looking forward to induct upgraded Mig 29s which will happen sometime next year. The Ministry of Defence and Air headquarters is monitoring it,’ Air Commodore Arora said.

He said six MiG-29 fighters are being upgraded and flight-tested in Russia and the remaining aircraft will be overhauled in India with the aid of Russian experts, and added that IAF pilots and technicians are already undergoing training there.

‘The upgraded MiG 29 fighters will have better radar systems and avionics to help fighters, a new weapon control system, modernised RD-33 engines, which would increase the aircraft hitting capability from long ranges will also be extremely helpful on any future attack on Pakistan,’ Air Commodore Arora added.

The first batch of upgraded fighters will arrive in the second half of 2010 and Russia will complete the upgradation of 60 MiG-29 fighters by 2013.

The Indian Air Force, which turns 77 this year, in order to become a strategic force in the world, has been going under modernisation in a big way.

The IAF this year inducted one Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft, and two more will come on line in 2010 to strengthen the Air Force’s capability to see beyond enemy lines.

In addition, the IAF is acquiring three midair refuelers, six C-130 transport aircraft, 80 medium-lift helicopters, Spyder air defense systems, medium power radars and low-level transportable radar.

The IAF is also upgrading six airstrips in Arunachal Pradesh to rapidly deploy troops and jointly developing with Russia fifth generation fighter aircrafts.

China snubs India’s position on Kashmir

ISLAMABAD, Oct 2 (APP): A large number of students in occupied Kashmir are losing their admissions and traders money after the Indian immigration authorities have bared Kashmiris from travelling to China on the stapled visas provided by the Chinese embassy. According to Kashmir Media Service, the row started when Chinese embassy in New Delhi started issuing stamped visas to Kashmiris on a separate sheet of paper stappled with their passports.  The Indian government barred the Kashmiris from traveling to China on the stapled visas.

Shuja Altaf Mir and his friend Bilal who were denied permission by the Indian imigration oficials at Indra Gandhi International Airport New Delhi to travel to China, talking to the newsmen, said that the special stapled visas issued to Kashmiris by Chinese embassy were not acceptable to the immigration authorities. “Both of us missed the flights to China, where we had to participate in a business meeting in Guangzhou state,” he said. He said that the issuance of visas to Kashmiris with special status gave the impression that China had reservations on the status of occupied Kashmir. Another Kashmiri youth, Asgar said that he had missed his admission in Shanghai University, where he was to be admitted in Public Policy Programme. “I was supposed to take admission in Shanghai University before September 23 but was denied travel to China by the Indian Immigration officials at IGI Airport,” he said, talking to the media men. It may be mentioned here that the issuance of stapled visas to Kashmiris by Chienese Embassy is a major diplomatic snub to India’s position on the occupied territory. China has been issuing visas to Kashmiris on a separate piece of paper because it considers Kashmir a disputed land. Courtesy: APP

China key to Asia: IMF

THE International Monetary Fund forecast yesterday that China will lead Asia out of economic recession with growth of 8.5 percent this year and 9 percent in 2010.

In its World Economic Outlook report, the IMF cited the Chinese government’s massive stimulus program as a linchpin for growth in the region.

“The policy stimulus in China could support recoveries in other parts of Asia,” the report said.

For the world as a whole, the IMF raised its 2010 growth forecast to 3.1 percent from 2.5 percent, saying the global recession “is ending.”

The big momentum is expected to come from Asia, forming the basis for a generally moderate regional recovery in 2010, it said.

Emerging economies in Asia will grow by 5 percent this year and 6.8 percent in 2010, according to the IMF estimates.

China’s economy grew at an annual rate of 7.1 percent in the first six months of this year, and industrial production, investment, lending and other data for August were generally stronger than expected.

The performance of manufacturing-based economies such as South Korea and Singapore haven’t fared as well.

Only China, Indonesia and India have escaped recession, the report said.

India sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan: Pakistan Interior Minister Malik

Federal Interior Minister Rehman Malik said that without concrete evidence allegations cannot be leveled against India. -AP File Photo

ISLAMABAD: Federal Interior Minister Rehman Malik said that Pakistan has evidence with regard to Indian involvement for promoting terrorism in Pakistan but without concrete evidences allegations cannot be leveled against India.

‘Yes it is true the terrorists arrested from Swat and tribal areas of the country have confirmed Indian involvement in terrorist activities in Pakistan’, he said in an exclusive interview with a private TV channel.

‘Pakistan has retaliated with full force whenever India started a blame game against us,’ he said, adding that, ‘Pakistan had offered unconditional support to India after last years Mumbai attack but our sincere efforts to bring the culprits of this incident to justice are not being replied constructively.’

The interior minister went on to say the international community after listing to the stance of India and Pakistan in the Mumbai attack has backed Pakistan. He also held India responsible for the delay in investigations of the attack.

Replying to a question, he said, ‘leveling allegations against each others  would further harm relations between Pakistan and India. Here we are asking India to come to the table for talks to resolve all outstanding issues. If India has any reservation in investigating the Mumbai attack then it should come forward and hold talks with us,’ he said. -Online

Source: Dawn

McChrystal and India

Increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India, Gen McChrystal stated in his report. –Photo by Reuters

‘Indian political and economic influence is increasing in Afghanistan, including significant development efforts and financial investment. In addition, the current Afghan government is perceived by Islamabad to be pro-Indian.’

These words of Gen Stanley McChrystal, which are a part of his assessment of the war in Afghanistan, are perhaps as significant as any other in the report for two reasons. One, it is clear that peace in Afghanistan cannot prevail unless the interests of the Pakistani state are taken into account. And from that perspective, enhanced Indian interests in Afghanistan are inimical to peace in the region. Lest there be any doubt about this, Gen McChrystal has himself stated this in his report: ‘Increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India.’

Two, several factors have combined to force the Obama administration to revisit the very purpose of its mission in Afghanistan. Most apparent is the catastrophe that is the recent presidential election in Afghanistan. The US is now faced with a very difficult choice: either let Hamid Karzai be declared the victor in the first round, notwithstanding the serious allegations of fraud, or push for a run-off, with the attendant uncertainties and risks in a place as volatile as Afghanistan.

Domestically, President Obama is facing pressure from within his own party and from the public generally as Americans grapple with the necessity of the Afghan war.
What this adds up to, now more than ever, is the Obama administration needing to at the very least convince the skeptics that the war is winnable. But that means gaining Pakistan’s full cooperation, which in turn means alleviating the national security establishment’s concerns vis-à-vis India.

The Americans appear to have finally understood this and, more importantly from a Pakistani perspective, have become increasingly vocal about it. This should hopefully have a salutary effect on relations between the US and Pakistan, relations which have in part been hostage to Pakistan’s long-standing suspicions of the US being a fair-weather friend.

But welcome as it may be that the US appears to finally be coming around to understanding Pakistan’s security outlook, there are problems. Identifying the problem doesn’t mean the US is necessarily in a position to do something about it.

There are serious questions about whether India is in the mood to listen to advice suggesting it tamp down its interest in Afghanistan and about what leverage the Americans have to try and convince India. Be that as it may, it should not be lost on Pakistani policymakers that the US is at least willing to echo their view.

Source: Reuters

India, America: Looking Beyond the Nuclear Deal

The US seeks a counterweight to China on the Subcontinent

The visit earlier this month by India’s Home Minister P Chidambaram to Washington, DC is the latest manifestation of how much the geostrategic picture is changing in South Asia as the India-US partnership deepens, causing consternation in Islamabad as Pakistan’s traditional ally cosies up to New Delhi. It is an arrangement that is causing concern in Beijing as well.

The four-day official visit to America focused on Indo-US anti-terror cooperation, technological assistance, an assessment of the security situation in South Asia and a study of counter-terrorism institutions and structures. Chidambaram met as well with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a strong indication that America under President Barack Obama is continuing one legacy of the Bush administration, and that is defense. Doubts that the Obama administration might re-look the strategic depth of Indo-US relations have been removed.

China and India have been engaging in a growing rivalry for primacy across Asia and in South Asia in particular. Beijing’s growing concern at the US’s deepening relationships with India was manifested last September, when China attempted to scuttle an agreement at the Nuclear Suppliers Group to allow India access to US nuclear technology. China in turn has continued to strengthen its ties with Pakistan and is developing port facilities in Bangladesh and Burma as well as Pakistan to protect its sea lanes.

India has been building on improved strategic ties with America with the civilian Indo-US nuclear deal signed last October as one significant signpost of achievement. Defense and tackling terror are two more areas of growing cooperation. India’s defense efforts in the short term look to build an effective arsenal against Pakistan, while in the longer term aim at deterrence against China, which remains far ahead of India in military capability. The two Asian giants have been squabbling for decades over thousands of square kilometers of disputed territory in India’s northeast adjacent to Kashmir.

Apart from the business generated by defense contracts (India’s defense modernization exercise is estimated at over US$50 billion in the period 2007-12), Washington’s strategic interests in the region extend to bolstering India as a counterweight to the influence of China in the Asian continent.

The September 13 revelations of former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf in an interview with a Pakistani television station that he had ordered the diversion of US aid money intended to deal with Taliban and Al Qaeda to strengthen the country’s defense against India has only validated India’s resolve to buttress its military. On terror, Washington has been receptive to India’s concerns since the Mumbai terror strikes on two luxury hotels in November 2008. Reportedly the Indian military is being given access to classified information by Washington about terror activities in Pakistan as a key to pre-empting strikes.

Meanwhile, some momentum has already been gained in nuclear energy following the removal of international impediments, with India looking to generate 40,000 MW of atomic power by 2020.

Indo-US Defense Picks Up

Earlier this month, America cleared the high-technology, futuristic shipboard Hawkeye E-2D aircraft for Airborne Early Warning (AEW) and battle management, manufactured by Northrop Grumman. After the UAE, India is the second country to be cleared by the US State and Defense Departments for sale of this sophisticated system. India can now get the aircraft within three years of a contract being signed.

It was during Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to India in July that the End User Monitoring Agreement of military equipment supplied or sold by the US to India was signed.

Earlier this year, the Obama administration also approved a US$2.1 billion sale to India of eight Boeing Co P-8I maritime patrol aircraft, the biggest US arms sale to India to date. The long-range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) aircraft for the Indian navy will replace India’s eight aging and fuel-guzzling Russian-origin Tupolev-142Ms. The P-8I has been derived from the commercial Boeing 737 airframe. For the P-8I, Boeing beat several rivals, including EADS Airbus in the race to win the contract.

It was in 2005 that India and America signed the Defense Framework Agreement under the aegis of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Bush that blueprints progress in the next 10 years. Ever since, the US impact on Indian defense has grown, posing a tough challenge to traditional European partners such as France, Britain, Sweden and Israel and Russia in particular.

India’s additional defense modernization plans include a mega-fighter jet deal valued over US$11 billion, for which US firms Boeing and Lockheed are also bidding alongside several others.

In January 2008, Washington and New Delhi signed India’s previous largest US arms purchase: six Lockheed Martin Corp C-130J Super Hercules military transport planes at a price of US$1 billion. Last year, India also purchased an amphibious transport vessel, the USS Trenton (re-christened the Jalashwa), for nearly $50 million with six-UH-3H helicopters to operate alongside, costing another $49 million. The Jalashwa is the first-ever warship acquired by the Indian navy from the US and the second-biggest that India now possesses after the aircraft carrier INS Viraat.

The US’s only substantial (and comparatively less in value) arms deal with India in recent years has been the US$190 million contract of 2002 to supply 12 AN/TPQ-37 fire finder weapon-locating radars.

India has also been looking at joint efforts with the US to build a ballistic missile defense (BMD) system, especially in the wake of the Mumbai attacks and the threat of non-state players and other loose cannons increasingly gaining ground in Pakistan.

Officials say that Indian intelligence agencies perceive a potent terror threat from the skies. A missile shield would also provide cover against inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBM). The BMD system features radar and anti-missile missiles, or interceptors, which are able to destroy incoming and possibly nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles, both of which Pakistan and China possess. In March this year India successfully conducted the third missile intercept test in Orissa, as part of plans to build BMD system by 2010. India is now looking at a more advanced version of its Star Wars ambitions that seeks to shoot down ICBMs in the 5,000 km range.

Tackling Terror

During Chidambaran’s visit, the home ministry furnished a list of 70 Pakistani terrorists to US officials, along with their addresses in Pakistan. New Delhi has been frustrated by what it regards as Pakistan’s intransigence’ in carrying forward investigations in the Mumbai 26/11 attacks and particularly is upset about letting off Jamaat-ud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed, whom India sees as an alleged conspirator.

Chidambaram and the accompanying officials looked at anti-terror attack measures that could be deployed in India, the functioning of the New York Police Department, met FBI Director Robert Mueller, Director of National Intelligence Dennis C Blair, National Security Adviser James Jones and visited the National Counter-terrorism Centre in Virginia.

The visit will lead to follow up visits by Indian civilian and police officials and military commanders to America to study security systems, a process that has already begun.

It maybe recalled that following 26/11 India has been implementing an internal security revamp that includes a national investigation agency, new counter-insurgency and anti-terrorism schools, additional deployment of the crack anti-terror National Security Guards and a unified coastal command.

American involvement in Indian security has deepened in the last few months. The two countries have been associating in sharing of intelligence and investigations on the Mumbai strikes and other aspects.

In August this year, a six-member Anti Terror Assistance Team from America visited two main stations in Mumbai that have witnessed terror strikes.

US anti-terror teams are now in the process of devising training modules for Indian forces involved in the protection of the Railways. Again in August, US Ambassador to India Timothy J Roemer and federal home minister P Chidambaram discussed joint anti-terror measures.

US teams are known to be interacting closely with intelligence agencies to map out ways to develop intelligence networks as well as protect soft terror targets such as crowded markets, malls, airports, rail stations and places of worship. In Delhi the South Block, President’s House and Parliament, located in close vicinity and under grave threat from militants are being revamped with the help of American security experts. The aim is to replicate security systems installed at the Pentagon

South Block houses the Prime Ministers office, defense, foreign and home ministries and the headquarters of the armed forces. Heavily armed Fidayeen terrorists unsuccessfully tried to storm the Parliament House in December 2001 after entering the inner precincts using a vehicle with fake identification. It was fortuitous that Indian lawmakers inside survived.

Like in the Pentagon, South Block is being fitted for the first time with a new Surveillance and Access Control System for time bound and constant monitoring of vehicles, visitors, officials and other staff. The security systems in Parliament upgraded following 2001 are in for another round of advancement with the installation of 300 new and advanced closed-circuit vision cameras (CCTVs) to replace the existing ones.

Courtesy:Asia Sentinel