http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24747364-25377,00.html

Asia's Islamism engine
Greg Sheridan, Foreign editor | December 04, 2008 

Article from:  The Australian 
FOLLOWING the terror massacres in Mumbai, Pakistan may now be the single 
biggest state sponsor of terrorism, beyond even Iran. Yet it has never been 
listed by the US State Department as a state sponsor ofterrorism.

In 1998, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, the State Department's 
counter-terrorism co-ordinator recommended listing Pakistan as a state sponsor 
of terrorism. Then secretary of state Madeleine Albright decided against it, 
saying it would destroy US influence in Islamabad. And that has been the 
dilemma of Western policy towards Pakistan ever since. 

India is now deciding whether to strike at a training base of Lashkar-e-Toiba, 
the Pakistan-based terrorist group involved in the Mumbai massacres. It may be 
that prudence will prevent India from conducting the strike. However, in law 
and morality, India would certainly be entitled to strike. The US has been 
conducting strikes across the Pakistani border to hit Taliban terrorists, who 
have been trying to kill NATO soldiers in Afghanistan. India would have the 
more urgent justification of protecting its civilians. 

Every civilised person in the world has a duty to express maximum solidarity 
with India, which is what the Rudd Government has done and which is why US 
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is in India. 

Above all, the world must do nothing that rewards the terrorists for their 
actions. 

US president-elect Barack Obama has expressed his absolute solidarity with 
India, but he has been a bit schizophrenic on Pakistan nonetheless. During the 
primaries, Obama said he would order military strikes on targets within 
Pakistan if he had information of high-value terrorists sheltering there and if 
the Pakistan Government could not or would not take action itself. 

At first I thought this a little imprudent until the Bush administration 
started to do exactly the same thing. So, one tick to Obama's tough-minded 
realism. 

However, he also has suggested appointing a special presidential negotiator on 
Kashmir. This is a very stupid and dangerous move indeed. In light of the 
Mumbai bombing it would be a pure political reward for terror outrages. The 
wretched message such a move would send would be: You murder enough civilians 
and we'll start making concessions. 

As the epicentre of global terrorism shifts from the Middle East to South Asia, 
you can see the effort to transform the Kashmir dispute into the equivalent of 
the Palestinian dispute; that is, the fountainhead, all-purpose grievance can 
be used to explain, if not justify, every act of Islamist butchery and murder 
in the region. 

But the history of Kashmir doesn't bear that out. Nor do negotiations on it 
offer any solution. 

When India was partitioned in 1947, there were disputes over which bits should 
go to Muslim majority Pakistan and which should go to Hindu majority India. 
Kashmir's government, though it was a Muslim majority state, decided to go to 
India. Subsequently, a large chunk of its territory was taken by Pakistan, and 
the line between the territory Pakistan controls and that which India controls 
has been the effective border between India and Pakistan since. If anything, 
Pakistan should give back the territory it took. But during the intervening 
years the Pakistani government has constantly fuelled terrorism, separatism and 
insurgency in Kashmir. Islamabad thus has made it impossible for Kashmiri life 
to develop normally. 

Undoubtedly, in response to this, at times India has been guilty of human 
rights abuses in Kashmir. 

However, Kashmiris, like everyone else in India, enjoy Indian democracy, and 
state elections have recently been under way. If it were not for what are in 
effect constant acts of war by Pakistan, Kashmir could have settled into a 
fully normal life. Even with the constant Pakistani military intervention, 
India is still winning the allegiance of Kashmiris. 

Pakistan's ruthless and amoral military establishment has always seen stoking 
the Kashmir dispute as in its interests. It keeps India off balance. At best it 
puts a cloud over the legitimacy of India as a modern, democratic, secular 
state. 

It also confuses the distinction between India, which is a multiracial, 
multi-religious democracy with a booming economy, and Islamic Pakistan, which 
is a broken-backed state on the brink of failure and collapse. More than 10 per 
cent of India's population is Muslim, whereas few Hindus or Sikhs remain in 
Pakistan. 

The only possible solution to Kashmir that Islamists would accept is all of 
Kashmir becoming Pakistani territory and some local Taliban-style government 
ruling day by day. The more Obama, or anyone else, tries to internationalise 
Kashmir, the more he is playing into the hands of terrorists. 

We do not know for sure what degree of active involvement Pakistani authorities 
may have had in the Mumbai massacres. 

The Pakistan Government denies all involvement and most senior Indians I speak 
to do not think the ineffectual Pakistani civilian Government was directly 
involved. 

But it is becoming increasingly difficult to believe that an operation of such 
scale and sophistication, mounted by Pakistanis from within Pakistan, had no 
involvement from the Pakistani military or some element of its Inter Services 
Intelligence agency. 

The ISI founded Lashkar-e-Toiba to prosecute its low-level war against India in 
Kashmir, just as the ISI founded the Taliban to ensure a government in Kabul 
sympathetic to Pakistani interests. 

Lashkar-e-Toiba is notionally illegal in Pakistan but operates openly under 
another name. The ISI is asking us to believe that, having founded 
Lashkar-e-Toiba, it has no control or even knowledge of its biggest operations. 

The parallel with the behaviour of Pakistan in the A.Q. Khan scandal is 
instructive. The Pakistanis expect us to believe they are a responsible nuclear 
power, yet have no responsibility or even knowledge when their chief nuclear 
scientist sells nuclear weapons technology to rogue regimes across the world, 
often using Pakistani military transports in the process. 

The Pakistan Government has a long record of bad faith. In August it was 
involved in a terrorist bombing against the Indian embassy in Kabul. The 
Americans got this information, through their pervasive eavesdropping on 
electronic communications and passed it to the Indians. 

There is no obvious path forward with Pakistan, which occupies that diabolical 
category of divided state, where part of the state fights terrorism and part of 
it enables and helps terrorism. 

India, among others, is locked in a struggle with the pro-terrorist elements of 
the Pakistani state

Kirim email ke