Rana to appear before Chicago court on May 11

Pakistani-Canadian terror suspect Tahawwur Rana under investigation for his role in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, has stuck to his ‘not guilty’ plea to terror charges and is headed for trial, will appear before a U.S. court here on May 11 for a status hearing in the case.

Patrick Blegen, lawyer for the 48 year-old city businessman, told PTI that “during the status hearing, the judge is going to rule on some pre-trial motions”.

Mr. Blegen reiterated that there will not be any change in Rana’s not guilty plea, which he had entered in the U.S. District court in January.

He however did not comment on when he expects the trial in the case to start.

Rana’s May 11 status hearing is scheduled before U.S. Judge Harry Leinenweber.

Days after co-accused LeT operative David Coleman Headley had pleaded guilty in March to plotting the Mumbai terror attacks, Mr. Blegen had said his client would not be changing his not guilty plea and go ahead for a trial, which he hoped would start “sooner rather than later”.

Mr. Blegen had said he feels he still has a “strong case”.

Rana’s trial process is expected to start only after September, till when federal prosecutors would work on what evidence gathered against him can be used at trial.

Chicago’s top federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who is personally handling the case, had told the court he hopes to declassify evidence gathered in the terror investigation in the next few months.

Mr. Blegen and prosecutors agreed on a six-month schedule — April 5, June 1, July 1, August 2, September 13 — for carrying out provisions of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA), which allows prosecutors to take extraordinary measures to prevent classified information from leaking to the public.

According to the calendar in the case, the government will provide classified discovery by June 1 and Judge Leinenweber has set a date of September 20 for a hearing to determine what classified information can be admitted as evidence at trial.

Rana has filed several pre-trial motions asking the government to provide him “specific” details of the kind of “material support” he is charged with providing to terror acts in Mumbai and Denmark, citing the need to be better prepared for trial.

Mr. Blegen said given the “complexity of the case”, his client should be entitled to know “with specificity what material support he is alleged to have provided” to terrorism since the “superseding indictment is not a clear appraisal of the allegations” against Rana.

The lawyer said the indictment keeps the allegations “vague” and prevents him from properly preparing a defence.

The government has objected to Rana’s demand for “specific” details, saying the superseding indictment provides more details than required and that the prosecution too continues to provide extensive discovery.

Federal prosecutors added the government has already provided “more than sufficient” information in the form of over 20,000 documents for him to prepare his defence for his trial.

LeT terrorists may hit city, warns Centre

The Centre has warned the state government that terrorists may strike in the city. According to an intelligence alert put out by the Centre, Lashkar-e-Tayyaba terrorists trained in Pakistan have entered the city and could set off bombs in busy market areas.

Sources said the Intelligence Bureau issued the alert based on intercepts of communication from across the border with terrorists in India.

The city police has gone on high alert. Personnel from Octopus, the anti-terror commando force, 18 teams of the City Security Wing, units from the Intelligence Security Wing and Railway Protection Force are pressed into service to spot the terrorists.

Task Force sleuths and bomb disposal teams were also deployed, sources said. All the officials of city police were put on standby.

Lakhvi wants use of Kasab’s confession barred

Lashker-e-Taiba ‘commander’ Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, facing trial with six others for his alleged involvement in the Mumbai attacks, has filed a petition in Pakistan’s Supreme Court asking it to bar the prosecution from using Ajmal Amir Kasab’s confessional statement against him.

The petition was filed by Lakhvi’s counsel in the Lahore Registry of the Supreme Court on Wednesday. It asked the Supreme Court to bar the prosecution from using Kasab’s confession to Indian authorities against Lakhvi in the trial in the Rawalpindi-based anti-terror court.

It could not immediately be ascertained when and if the petition would be taken up by the Supreme Court.

Lakhvi’s counsel Khwaja Sultan claimed the prosecution had not levelled “any allegation” against his client about his “connection or interaction” with any of the co-accused and persons allegedly involved in the Mumbai attacks of November 2008.

“The investigation of the case is based on the alleged confession of Kasab, who is in Indian custody,” Mr. Sultan said.

Though three charge sheets were filed by the prosecution, no witness had supported Kasab’s statement and Lakhvi was not “accused of giving training to the terrorists involved in the attack,” he added.

“The prosecution, in its challan (charge sheet), maintained that the petitioner was commander of the Lashkar-e-Taiba but could not establish his link with the Mumbai attacks’ accused. Under article 43 of Qanoon-i-Shahadat Order (Pakistan’s law of testimony), a confessional statement of an accused can only be used against his co-accused if they are being tried jointly,” Mr. Sultan said.

Mr. Sultan further claimed that Kasab’s name was never mentioned in the ‘challans’ submitted against Lakhvi.

“Therefore the statement of Kasab cannot be used against Lakhvi,” he said.

Lakhvi and six others — Zarar Shah, Abu al-Qama, Hamad Amin Sadiq, Shahid Jamil Riaz, Jamil Ahmed and Younas Anjum — are being tried for planning and facilitating the Mumbai attacks.

The prosecution has said that Lakhvi’s lawyers are causing “unnecessary hindrances” in the trial by filing petitions in higher courts. The hearings in the anti-terror court have often been affected by these petitions.

Pakistan to seek Red Corner Notices against Ajmal, Ansari

Pakistan has decided to approach Interpol — which facilitates cross-border police cooperation — to issue Red Corner Notices against Ajmal Kasab and Fahim Ansari, who are undergoing trial in India for their involvement in the Mumbai terror attacks of November 2008.

This information was provided by the Special Prosecutor of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to the anti-terrorism court that is conducting the trial of seven persons accused in the same attack. The seven undertrials here include Lashkar-e-Taiba operations chief Zaki-ur Rehman Lakhvi.

According to defence lawyer Malik Mohammad Rafiq Khan, the hearing was adjourned till April 17 when the prosecution will apprise the court of the progress and developments with regard to the Red Corner Notices.

During the day's proceedings in the Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi — where Judge Malik Mohammad Akram Awan is hearing the case because of security considerations — defence challenged the FIA Special Prosecutor's contention that Interpol was being approached to bring Kasab and Ansari to Pakistan.

The defence argument was that a Red Corner Notice was issued only for fugitives and in this case both Kasab and Ansari were in custody. Further, it would be possible for Pakistan to get Kasab and Ansari only if there was an extradition treaty between the two countries.

The FIA has decided to approach Interpol in view of the defence argument that Kasab's confessional statement could not be used against the seven accused in Pakistan.

The defence lawyers have been arguing that Kasab's confessional statement could be used only if he was being tried in the same court along with the seven others.

26/11 trial ends, verdict on May 3

Marking an end to the year-long 26/11 trial, the special sessions court here on Wednesday announced May 3, 2010, as “the day of judgment.” Judge M.L. Tahaliyani announced the date after the defence lawyer for the third and last accused, Sabahuddin Ahmed, concluded his final arguments.

On May 3, the court will give its verdict on the various charges against Mohammad Ajmal Amir Kasab, and co-accused Fahim Ansari and Sabahuddin. The recording of the judgment will be done in April.

“May 3 ko faisla hoga aapka [Verdict will be pronounced for you on May 3],” Mr. Tahaliyani informed Kasab, who appeared unmoved by the announcement. He did not interact with his lawyer K.P. Pawar on Wednesday and has not done so in a long time.

Speaking to The Hindu over phone, Mr. Pawar said, “I have tried to put my case successfully. I have submitted my arguments in writing. So, there is no fear of leaving anything out. My work was to show the improbability of evidence, which I have done. I am satisfied with my arguments on all accounts. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on my expectations at this point.”

A total of 86 charges have been framed in the case. The three accused face charges of waging war, criminal conspiracy and those under sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act among others.

The trial which began on April 15 last year had 191 hearings during which 653 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The final arguments began on March 9 and lasted through the month with the prosecution laying out its case over a span of 11 days.

Sabahuddin's lawyer Ejaz Naqvi said his client was “innocent” and should be given the benefit of doubt. He said the prosecution had not brought anything on record to prove that Nuruddin Mehboob Shaikh, the only eyewitness against his client, had ever been to Kathmandu, in Nepal. He termed the witness “bogus.”

He blamed the prosecution for remaining silent on the role of American terror operative David Coleman Headley. “The prosecution spoke about the historic depositions by the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigations], but there is nothing on what the FBI has investigated about Headley.”

The court said that since Headley was in the FBI custody, he was not its lookout. “At present we can't discuss these things. The Home Ministry is doing what it wants to do,” Mr. Tahaliyani said.

As for the map, which Sabahuddin allegedly conveyed to the Lashkar-e-Taiba, Mr. Naqvi said Kasab and his partner Abu Ismail's movements in the city are not as per the directions of the handmade sketch. Referring to Kasab's confession where he names Sabahuddin, Mr. Naqvi said since all the trainees were assigned different aliases, Sabahuddin could be anybody, other than his client.

The court expressed its displeasure over Mr. Naqvi's seemingly tenuous arguments, which had the courtroom in splits on certain occasions. When they were concluded, Mr. Tahaliyani told Mr. Naqvi, “I thought you would present serious arguments. I am disappointed.”

Mr. Tahaliyani posed four queries to the prosecution. It emerged from Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam's replies to them that the investigators had not taken any steps to verify Nuruddin Shaikh's visit to Kathmandu. The map which was recovered from Ismail's pocket was not examined for bloodstains and for traces of Ismail's DNA.

Asked if the handmade sketch would have served the purpose of navigation better than what was already available, Mr. Nikam answered it was difficult to establish what went on in the minds of the Lashkar handlers.

LeT behind Kabul attack: India

Stressing that Indians doing reconstruction in Afghanistan are soft targets for terrorists, the external affairs minister, Mr S.M. Krishna, has indicated that the February 26 attack in Kabul that killed seven Indians was the work of Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Tayyaba.
Denying that India was being marginalised in the emerging US strategy in Afghanistan at Pakistan’s behest, Mr Krishna said in an interview that the US had never asked New Delhi “directly or indirectly” to reduce its presence in the violence-torn country.
“We have in our interactions with the US administration at various levels not got the impression that the US is trying to convey directly or indirectly to the Indian government that our presence in Afghanistan should be minimised,” Krishna said.
“We have absolutely no evidence otherwise. I think it has been the handiwork of those forces who are out to see that the relationship between India and Afghanistan is jeopardised,” Mr Krishna said on Sunday.
He was replying to a question on whether the attack on Indians was the work of LeT.
“It is for everyone to see that the network that you find operating from the soil of Pakistan — the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, the other terrorist outfits and all — they are fused both ideologically and operationally,” he said.
“They cannot come to any other conclusion other than to accept that it was the handiwork of these terrorist organisations,” Mr Krishna said, when asked if the US has accepted that the Kabul attack was perpetrated by the LeT.
Mr Krishna stressed that Indian aid workers in Kabul have become “soft targets” for terrorists. The minister added that there was a warning that Indian missions and volunteers on humanitarian work “are going to be under attack because what India has been doing in Afghanistan is the visible symbol of what India intends to do in building up Afghanistan.
“The Indians who have gone there to Afghanistan on humanitarian purposes are unarmed. So, naturally they become easy targets, soft targets,” Mr Krishna said. The Indian government was taking “some additional measures”, for their protection, he said.

Resumption of dialogue with Pak difficult in current situation: Rao

Voicing concern over Pakistan’s inaction against perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks, including Hafiz Saeed, India on Tuesday warned that its restraint should not be confused with weakness and said it is “very, very difficult” to resume composite dialogue at present.

”... please realise that there are groups in Pakistan that continue to follow an agenda of violence, of hatred,” Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao said at the Woodrow Wilson Centre in response to a question from a Lahore-based Pakistani national who asked why India was refusing to restart the composite dialogue with Pakistan which itself was a victim of terrorism.

“I did not want to bring the name of Hafiz Saeed and Jamaat-ud-Dawah and the LeT ... we feel (they) continue to roam, to speak, to be allowed unhindered access to media, to channels to communicate that agenda (of violence).. that effects us, our people are concerned about it,” Ms. Rao said.

The general feeling in India right now is: “We have suffered too much for too long,” she said.

“It is very, very difficult to be convinced in such a situation that we should set aside these concerns and just move on. And that is why, I said when you talk of resuming composite dialogue (it) becomes very, very difficult to do that in the current situation,” Ms. Rao said.

At the same time, she said the door for talks with Pakistan had never been shut.

“India has always condemned terrorist attack inside Pakistan,” Ms. Rao, who is in the US on a six-day visit, said. “We have never in any way condoned that. We condemn it whole heartedly.”

Composite dialogue

Earlier in her address also, she ruled out resumption of composite dialogue with Pakistan till Islamabad guarantees that terrorism can be controlled by its authorities.

“Today, Pakistan claims that it is in no position to give us such a guarantee that terrorism can be controlled by its authorities. In such a situation, the people of India who are already bitterly affected by the series of terrorist attacks directed against them, can hardly be expected to support the resumption of a full-blown Composite Dialogue with Pakistan,” Ms. Rao said.

She asserted that despite the brazen and malignant nature of the threats India face, New Delhi has made several genuine efforts to restore trust and confidence.

“Aggressive pronouncements by persons identified by the world as terrorists continue to be made openly against India.

Distinctions made between the various terrorist outfits are now meaningless, since they are now in effect fused both operationally and ideologically,” she said.

“We have consistently emphasised the need for governments concerned to act decisively to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism and to effectively deal with groups that perpetrate it.”

However, Ms. Rao said, “our restraint should not be confused with weakness or unwillingness to act against those that seek to harm our people, create insecurity and hamper our developmental goals.”

“It is also important that there are strict accountability criteria that apply to defence assistance rendered to Pakistan for operations against terrorists and insurgents on the border with Afghanistan,” Ms. Rao said.

New Delhi’s past experience regarding such assistance has taught it to be vigilant to the possibility of the aid being used “for purposes that generate tension and hostile actions against India,” the Foreign Secretary said.

“We do not have aggressive designs against Pakistan and we want it to be a stable and prosperous country. But we will be vigilant about our security. That is our sovereign right.”

Ms. Rao said India has time and again made genuine attempts to address outstanding issues, most importantly, the issue of terrorism through dialogue with Pakistan. “My meeting with my Pakistani counterpart (Salman Bashir on February 25) represented the latest such move.”

Despite the provocations India has faced constantly from terrorists whose linkages it has traced back to Pakistani soil, New Delhi has not abandoned the path of dialogue, she said.

Terrorism

“And in our recent meeting, India’s approach was to focus on our concerns regarding terrorism, pending humanitarian issues and some bilateral visits that have been planned or spoken of, but have not taken place,” Ms. Rao said.

“But it continues to be our conviction that for this dialogue to really make progress, Pakistan should take meaningful steps to address our concerns on terrorism, and cease the encouragement of terrorism targeted against India.”

Afghanistan

Turning to Afghanistan, Ms. Rao said the recent attacks on Indians were aimed at forcing India out of the war-torn nation and ruled out scaling down New Delhi’s operations there.

“We are not scaling down our operations in Afghanistan, we are taking all necessary security measures to safeguard Indian lives there,” she said in response to a question.

Ms. Rao said there was “no quick solution” to the Af-Pak situation and “it was important for international community, in its own interest, to stay the present course for as long as it was necessary.”

Indo-China ties

About Sino-India ties, she said the relationship has improved significantly in the last two decades and the two neighbours are discussing ways to resolve their border issue.

“The rise of China and the rise of India has become an object of world attention. I think, in both the countries, we see a competitive edge but we also see a greater degree of collaboration between the two counties,” Ms. Rao said. “There is peace on our borders with China.”

On the Indo-US relationship, she said the conclusion of the civil nuclear Agreement in 2008 was “a major definitive milestone” in bilateral ties.

The implementation of the deal is “proceeding smoothly and satisfactorily”, she said. “We are in the process of operationalising the agreement through close coordination between our two governments.”

The nuclear liability bill is likely to be introduced in India Parliament after the recess, Ms. Rao -- who is set to meet US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, National Security Advisor James Jones and Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns -- said replying to a query.

"ISI maintaining links with Lashkar"

The ISI continues to maintain links with Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), the terrorist outfit responsible for 26/11, and Islamabad is reluctant to take action against its leaders and its network, several eminent U.S. scholars and experts of South Asia have categorically told U.S. lawmakers.

Attending a special Congressional hearing on Thursday on “Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Growing ambition of Islamic Militancy in Pakistan”, Congressmen unanimously expressed concern that despite best of the efforts by the Obama Administration, the ISI continues to maintain links with LeT and that Pakistan is not taking decisive action against the terrorist outfit.

"The LeT is a deadly serious group of fanatics. They are well financed, ambitious, and most disturbingly, both tolerated by, and connected to, the Pakistani military," said Gary L. Ackerman, Chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia of the House Committee on International Relations.

And it is the same Pakistani military, to which the Obama Administration is selling advanced arms, he pointed out.

Testifying before the Congressional committee, Marvin G Weinbaum, from the Middle East Institute –- a Washington-based think tank, said despite the government official ban of LeT, ISI continued to consider the organisation as an asset.

The ISI is believed to continue to share intelligence and provide protection to LeT, he said.

"It is a measure of the impunity with which LeT is allowed to operate in Pakistan that the authorities have been unwilling to contain LeT chief Hafiz Mohammad Saeed.

His inflammatory remarks would be expected to land him among the hundreds of disappeared political activists in the country. Although he has been periodically arrested, his house detentions have been cosmetic," Mr. Weinbaum said.

Noting that LeT poses a threat to the U.S. national security interests, Lisa Curtis from the Heritage Foundation said the appearance of LeT leader Hafez Muhammed Sayeed at a recent public rally casts grave doubts about Pakistan’s commitment to reining in the group’s activities.

Policy failure

Ms. Curtis said it has been a failure of U.S. policy to not insist Pakistan shut down the LeT long ago. U.S. officials have shied away from pressuring Pakistan on the LeT in the interest of garnering Pakistani cooperation against targets the U.S. believed were more critical to immediate U.S. objectives, that is Al-Qaeda shortly after 9/11 and the Afghan Taliban more recently.

“To degrade the overall international terrorist threat emanating from Pakistan, the US must convince Islamabad to confront those groups it has supported against India," Ms. Curtis said.

The Mumbai attacks and subsequent Headley investigations reveal that the LeT has the international capabilities and ideological inclination to attack western targets whether they are located in South Asia or elsewhere.

Eminent Pakistani scholar Shuja Nawaz too conceded that the relationship between the ISI and LeT has stayed overtime.

Ms. Nawaz is currently the director, South Asia Center, The Atlantic Council of the United States.

"The LeT's emerging role as a trans regional force that has broadened its aim to include India and perhaps even Afghanistan, by linking with the Students Islamic Movement of India or SIMI and the Harkat ul Jihad al Islami or HUJI of Bangladesh poses a serious threat to regional stability," Mr. Nawaz said.

"Another Mumbai-type attack involving the LeT might bring India and Pakistan into conflict, a prospect that should keep us awake at night. In Pakistan, both the civil and the military now appear to recognise the existential threat from home grown militancy.

"The army appears to have dislocated the Tehreek e Taliban of Pakistan. Yet, it faces a huge and, to my mind, greater threat in the hinterland, in the form of the LeT," he said.

‘Pak a safe haven’

Ashley J Tellis, senior associate at the prestigious Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told lawmakers that today LeT relies on the ISI primarily for safe haven and political protection for its leadership, intelligence on selected targets and threats, campaign guidance when necessary, and infiltration assistance, particularly in regard to long distance operations involving transits through third countries.

"Although the interrogation of David Headley has now established that there were clearly some shadowy ISI connections with the Bombay (Mumbai) attacks, the management of the LeT detainees by the Pakistani state and the tortured progress of their trial demonstrates that, whatever the outcome of this charade, the ISI has simply no intention of eviscerating LeT (or any other anti-Indian jihadi groups) because of their perceived utility to Pakistan’s national strategy vis-à-vis India," Mr. Tellis said.

"So long as the Pakistani Army and the security establishment more generally conclude that their private interests (and their conception of the national interest) are undermined by a permanent reconciliation between India and Pakistan, they will not rid themselves of the terrorist groups they have begotten and which serve their purposes-irrespective of what New Delhi or Kabul or Washington may desire," he said.

"This fact ought to be understood clearly by the Obama administration. Once it is, it may push the United

States to either compel Pakistan to initiate action against LeT or hold Pakistan responsible for the actions of its proxies.

If these efforts do not bear fruit, the United States will have to contemplate unilateral actions (or cooperative actions with other allies) to neutralize the most dangerous of the terrorist groups now resident in Pakistan.

Doing so may be increasingly necessary not simply to prevent a future Indo-Pakistani crisis, but more importantly to protect the United States, its citizens, its interests, and its allies," Mr. Tellis said.

Another LeT strike on India to undermine US efforts in Pak

Amidst reports that terror outfit LeT might be planning a major attack in India, the CIA chief on Wednesday told US lawmakers that another such strike would undermine US efforts in Pakistan by raising tensions between the two neighbours.

CIA Director Leon Panetta said at a Congressional hearing that besides al Qaeda the US now faces a series of threats from terror groups like al-Shabaab, Hezbollah and Hamas.

“A particular concern is Lashkar-e-Taiba which, if they should conduct an attack against India, could very well undermine our efforts in Pakistan,” Mr. Panetta said expressing his apprehension of the impact that attack could have on relationship between India and Pakistan.

Mr. Panetta said this in his appearance before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence which held a hearing on ’Current Projected Threats to the United States’

A US-based security think tank in its yearly forecast had recently said that Pakistan-based terror groups have a .

“strategic intent” to launch major new attacks on the Indian soil to trigger a conflict between the two countries.

Mr. Panetta said one of the greatest concerns was of an al Qaeda attack on the United States, and the threat was a prime reason why the US has undertaken the task of dismantling terror infrastructure.

He said the greatest threat comes from the fact that al Qaeda, which had launched the 9/11 attacks, had adapted its methods making them difficult to detect.

“We have done a very effective job at disrupting their operations in FATA,” forcing them to move to other regional nodes like Yemen and Somalia, the Maghreb and others, Mr. Panetta said.

“I think intelligence confirms that they are finding it difficult to be able to engage in planning and command --and -- control operations to put together a large attack,” he said.

He said the terrorists were now pursuing an effort to try to strike at the US in three ways, including deploying individuals like Zazi and Headley in the country and by using terrorists who have hitherto had “clean credentials” like Abdulmutallab.

“And the third is the loner, an individual like Hasan (Texas military base shooter) who, out of self-radicalisation, decides that the moment has come to engage in an attack by himself,” Mr. Panetta said.

The bottom line here, he said, is that the war on terrorism is against a series of groups confronting the US.

Appearing before the same committee, FBI Director Robert Mueller said al-Qaeda trainers see Pakistan’s tribal areas as less secure and this had led al Qaeda to franchise into regional components in places such as North Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.

“This evolution has been most rapid with al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula which has changed from a regional group with links to al-Qaeda to a global threat with reach into American cities such as Detroit,” he said.

Hijack threat, Air India planes put on high alert

Government has put all Air India planes operating in the country’s neighbourhood on high security alert and directed the airlines to deploy sky marshals following intelligence inputs that Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and other terror groups were planning to hijack a flight.

A directive has been issued to all Indian missions abroad to sensitise the staff of the airlines, official sources said.

According to intelligence inputs, terrorist groups having allegiance with Al-Qaeda, LeT and Jamat-ul-Dawa were planning to hijack an Air India plane especially operating in or from SAARC countries — Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India as well.

Hijacking could be attempted by the terrorists from airports located at Yangon, Dhaka and Colombo. Security of planes operating to Bhutan has also been beefed up, the sources said.

Following this input, the Civil Aviation Ministry has directed all the airlines especially Air India to take extra steps besides asking Bureau of Civil Aviation Security to deploy sky marshals on aircraft operating on such routes, the sources said.

On its part, the External Affairs Ministry has asked Indian missions, particularly in SAARC countries, to brief the staff of the Air India and other Indian carriers about the threat.

Most wanted LeT operative arrested

The Hyderabad police foiled the attempts of Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) to organise major ‘actions’ in south India, with the arrest of its south Indian chief Shaik Abdul Khwaja alias Amjad at Afzalgunj bus stop here on Monday. The arrested man was allegedly involved in the twin blasts in Hyderabad in 2007, New Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Jaipur and Ahmedabad.

Amjad (27), who also goes by the nom de guerres of Saif, Pappu and Abdullah, hails from Malakpet locality in the old city and is accused of having close links with other terror groups like the Harkat-ul-Jehad-al-Islami (HuJI) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), Commissioner of Police B. Prasada Rao told a news conference.

Mr. Rao declined to elaborate on what Amjad was planning to do in south India pointing out that the police had to interrogate him and learn more about his plans. Asked whether the terror suspect was planning something on Republic Day, the city police chief asserted that the interrogators could not cull out any such information.

He said the arrested man was a close associate of Shaheed Bilal, another terrorist from Hyderabad, who was shot dead in Pakisatan in 2007. He was involved in several terror attacks in the country and had fled to Pakistan via Saudi Arabia on the pretext of performing Umrah in May 2005. The police are planning to take him on police remand for further questioning. Authorities had seized 348 US dollars, 313 Saudi Riyals, 225 UAE Dirhams and Pakistan rupees 28,640 and 348 Bangla takas.

Police suspect that Amjad and his associates had recced certain targets in the country. He was involved in an attempt to murder over a dispute of installing a Ganesh idol in 2003 in Hyderabad. He jumped bail and escaped to Saudi Arabia.

‘India faces threat of another 26/11’

Facing the “undeniable” threat of another Mumbai-type attack by Pakistan-based terror groups which may act under al-Qaeda’s direction, India is most likely to retaliate militarily in such a scenario, according to a prominent US think tank.

“The threat of another Mumbai-type attack is undeniable, numerous Pakistan-based groups remain motivated and able to strike Indian targets,” said Daniel Markey, of the prestigious Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in his latest paper ’Terrorism and Indo-Pakistani Escalation.’

Many of these Pakistan-based terror groups have incentives to act as spoilers, whether to disrupt efforts to improve Indo-Pak ties or to distract Islamabad from counter-terror crackdown at home, said Markey, a well known South Asia expert.

“Thus the immediate risk of terrorism may actually increase if New Delhi and Islamabad make progress on resolving their differences or if Pakistan-based terrorists are effectively backed into a corner,” he said in his 11-page contingency planning memorandum of the CFR.

While traditionally Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed are the two terror groups that have proven themselves the most capable and motivated to carry out attacks in India, this time al-Qaeda could don the mantle, he said.

“Al-Qaeda has historically focussed its efforts outside India, but if the group’s leadership feels threatened in the Pakistan/Afghanistan border areas, it might direct and assist regional proxies to attack India as a way to ignite a distracting Indo-Pakistani confrontation.”

Other regional terrorist groups, including those based in India, are improving their capacity to inflict mass-casualty violence, but because these outfits lack clear-cut connections to Pakistan-based organisations, their attacks are far less likely to spark another crisis between India and Pakistan, Markey said.

He said the more clearly a terrorist attack can be identified as having originated in Pakistan, the more likely India is to retaliate militarily.

He said groups that India perceives to have closer links with Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment - especially LeT - are more likely to “inspire retaliation against official Pakistani state targets” than those that are perceived as more autonomous, such as al-Qaeda.

The perception in India that Islamabad has responded inadequately to the Mumbai attacks - trials of accused plotters are moving slowly and LeT ideologue Hafiz Muhammad Saeed is not in custody - strengthens Indian advocates for unilateral military retaliation, Markey said.

Should multiple attacks occur in quick succession, the cumulative effect would further diminish India’s inclination for restraint, he said.

“Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has been a strong voice against Indian military retaliation, but his voice could be silenced by a future attack or otherwise drowned out by domestic political pressures,” Markey said.

Markey, an American, said if New Delhi determines that its assailants acted with little or indirect assistance from Pakistan’s military or intelligence agencies, its most likely response would be to conduct air strikes against suspected terrorist training camps in Pakistan.

“During these operations, India would attempt to limit civilian casualties and direct combat with the Pakistani military to reduce the prospects for escalation. Such an attack would not significantly curtail the terrorist threat, but it might satisfy India’s domestic compulsions to punish the perpetrators,” he said.

Markey said the more egregious the terrorist attack and the more India’s leadership is convinced that members of the Pakistani state sponsored it, the more it will be treated as an act of war.

“Under these conditions, New Delhi would consider a wider range of options, including, for instance, a large ground-force mobilisation of the sort India conducted in 2001-2002 in the wake of the terrorist attack on the Indian parliament or a naval blockade.”

“Unless the initial terrorist attack is nuclear - which is implausible for now because Pakistani terrorists do not appear to have access to nuclear materials or the capacity to utilise them - India would refrain from using its nuclear weapons in retaliation,” Markey said.

He said Pakistan’s leaders would come under tremendous domestic pressure - and for the most part would be inclined - to counter nearly any sort of Indian military retaliation.

Even the least invasive of India’s possible military options, “such as a resumption of artillery shelling across the Line of Control,” Pakistan’s military and civilian leadership would be consumed by the crisis and distracted from other issues, Markey said.

“Pakistan’s military response could be intentionally disproportionate to the initial Indian attack so as to compel the international community to force a ceasefire.”

“That said, Pakistan’s present government and military command also have meaningful incentives to calibrate their actions from the start, not least the desire to limit international pressure and to retain ties with partners in Beijing, Riyadh and Washington,” he said.

However, Markey said a military exchange between India and Pakistan sparked by a terrorist attack in India is not likely to cross the nuclear threshold.

Several conceivable circumstances could alter this conclusion, but two stand out: “(1) India suffers additional catastrophic terrorist attacks in the midst of the crisis, driving it to intensify the conflict to a point where Pakistan’s army determines it cannot defend the state by conventional means, and (2) Pakistan’s nuclear command, as yet untested by major conventional attacks, is blinded or confused to the point that it authorises a first strike.”