) |
|
The expectation that Pakistan will cooperate with India in the investigation and prosecution of terrorists linked to the Pahalgam terror attack, as expressed by US Vice President JD Vance, appears to be based more on wishful thinking than on historical precedent. While Vance's sentiment underscores the international community's desire for regional stability and the eradication of terrorism, a closer examination of Pakistan's past behavior reveals a pattern of denial, obfuscation, and even outright support for extremist groups operating within its borders. This makes any prospect of genuine cooperation on this matter exceedingly unlikely. The article highlights several instances where Pakistan has initially denied involvement in terrorist activities, only to later admit to its role, often under immense international pressure or when faced with irrefutable evidence. The case of Ajmal Kasab, the surviving terrorist from the 2008 Mumbai attacks, is a prime example. Initially, Pakistan vehemently denied that Kasab was a Pakistani national, but eventually, it acknowledged his origins after Indian authorities presented substantial proof. Similarly, Pakistan's involvement in the 1999 Kargil War was initially dismissed as the actions of independent “freedom fighters,” only to be later admitted by then-President Pervez Musharraf in his autobiography. These instances demonstrate a consistent pattern of denial followed by grudging acceptance, which suggests that Pakistan's current denial of involvement in the Pahalgam attack should be treated with a high degree of skepticism. Furthermore, the article points out that Pakistani politicians themselves have acknowledged the country's past support for terrorist organizations. Former Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari admitted that Pakistan has a “past” concerning extremist groups and that the nation has suffered as a result. Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif went even further, describing Pakistan's past support for terrorist organizations as doing “dirty work” for the West. These admissions, while perhaps intended to portray Pakistan as a reformed nation, also serve as a stark reminder of the country's history of supporting and harboring extremist groups. The acknowledgement of past mistakes, however, does not automatically translate into a commitment to future cooperation. Pakistan's strategic interests often conflict with those of India, and supporting certain terrorist groups, either directly or indirectly, has been seen as a way to exert influence in the region and counter India's growing power. Therefore, expecting Pakistan to genuinely cooperate in hunting down terrorists who may be seen as assets, or who may have ties to the Pakistani state, is unrealistic. The Pahalgam terror attack itself further complicates the prospect of cooperation. The identification of Pakistani nationals as being involved in the attack, including the alleged mastermind Hashim Musa, who is believed to be a former soldier of the Pakistan Army’s Para Forces, further implicates Pakistan in the incident. While Islamabad has called for a “neutral” investigation into the attack, this call is likely a tactic to deflect blame and delay any meaningful action. Given Pakistan's history of denying involvement in terrorist attacks, its strategic interests in maintaining influence in the region, and the direct involvement of Pakistani nationals in the Pahalgam attack, the likelihood of genuine cooperation with India is minimal. The US's hope for cooperation is therefore likely to remain unfulfilled, and India will need to rely on its own resources and strategies to address the threat of terrorism emanating from Pakistan.
The broader context of India-Pakistan relations further underscores the unlikelihood of cooperation. The two countries have a long and fraught history, marked by wars, territorial disputes, and mutual mistrust. The Kashmir issue, in particular, remains a major point of contention, and Pakistan has consistently supported separatist movements in the region, some of which have resorted to violence. This support has taken various forms, including providing training, funding, and safe haven to militant groups operating in Kashmir. While Pakistan may deny direct involvement in these activities, the evidence suggests otherwise. The presence of numerous terrorist groups operating on Pakistani soil, many of which have explicitly stated their intention to target India, further complicates the situation. These groups often operate with impunity, and their leaders are sometimes even treated as honored guests by the Pakistani government. This creates a climate of impunity and emboldens terrorists to carry out attacks against India. The international community has repeatedly called on Pakistan to take action against these groups, but progress has been slow and uneven. There are several reasons for this. First, Pakistan's security establishment has historically viewed these groups as assets, useful for exerting influence in the region and countering India's power. Second, Pakistan's civilian government is often weak and unable to effectively control the security establishment. Third, Pakistan faces its own internal security challenges, including a long-running insurgency in Balochistan and the threat of terrorism from groups based in Afghanistan. This makes it difficult for Pakistan to focus its resources on combating terrorism targeting India. Given these challenges, it is unlikely that Pakistan will be able or willing to genuinely cooperate with India in the fight against terrorism. The best that can be hoped for is that Pakistan will take some limited steps to curb the activities of terrorist groups operating on its soil, but even this is far from certain. India, therefore, needs to be prepared to address the threat of terrorism emanating from Pakistan on its own. This will require a multi-faceted approach, including strengthening border security, improving intelligence gathering, and working with international partners to put pressure on Pakistan to take action against terrorist groups.
The international community, particularly the United States, often finds itself in a delicate position when dealing with Pakistan. On one hand, the US recognizes the importance of maintaining a relationship with Pakistan, given its strategic location and its role in regional security. On the other hand, the US is deeply concerned about Pakistan's support for terrorism and its lack of progress in combating extremist groups. This has led to a complex and often contradictory approach, with the US providing Pakistan with both security assistance and conditional aid, while also expressing concerns about its counterterrorism efforts. The US has repeatedly urged Pakistan to take action against terrorist groups operating on its soil, but these calls have often gone unheeded. This has led some in the US to question the effectiveness of its current approach and to call for a tougher stance on Pakistan. However, there are also concerns that a more confrontational approach could destabilize Pakistan and further complicate the regional security situation. Ultimately, the US needs to find a way to balance its competing interests and to encourage Pakistan to take meaningful action against terrorism, without jeopardizing its own strategic goals. This will require a nuanced and sophisticated approach that takes into account the complex political and security dynamics in the region. In conclusion, while the US's hope for Pakistan to cooperate with India on the Pahalgam terror attack is laudable, it is unlikely to be realized. Pakistan's history of denial, its strategic interests in the region, and its internal security challenges all make genuine cooperation highly improbable. India will need to rely on its own resources and strategies to address the threat of terrorism emanating from Pakistan, while the international community needs to continue to exert pressure on Pakistan to take meaningful action against terrorist groups operating on its soil. The path forward is fraught with challenges, but a realistic assessment of the situation is essential for developing effective strategies to combat terrorism and promote regional stability.
Source: Why India can’t expect 'cooperation' from Pakistan on Pahalgam terror attack