Terrorism is asymmetrical warfare in more ways than one. Small groups of terrorists can cause disproportionate damage and fear and become harder and harder to track as they blend in with the civilian population, but terrorism also crosses borders in asymmetrical ways. The attacks in Mumbai are just a recent example of the fact that the world can no longer be divided into neat geopolitical areas like it once could during the Cold War.

Current evidence is pointing to the conflict in Kashmir as the political cause for these attacks. But they have other direct and indirect causes and effects. By all accounts, the terrorists were targeting American and British citizens as much as possible. While America and Britain have certainly played a role in the Kashmir conflict, it’s hard not to see our war in Afghanistan as part of the underlying tapestry of causes. Evidence is saying that Pakistani militants were responsible:

American intelligence and counterterrorism officials said Friday that there was mounting evidence that a Pakistani militant group based in Kashmir, most likely Lashkar-e-Taiba, was responsible for this week’s deadly attacks in Mumbai.

The officials cautioned that they had reached no firm conclusions about who was responsible for the attacks, or how they were planned and carried out. Nevertheless, they said that evidence gathered in the past two days pointed to a role for Lashkar-e-Taiba or possibly another group based in Kashmir, Jaish-e-Muhammad, which also has a track record of attacks against India.

Now a picture is emerging with India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Britain, and America all connected in a series of long-running conflicts. Historical tensions and human rights abuses in Kashmir by both sides, high civilian “collateral damage” in Afghanistan by NATO forces, and cross-border raids by NATO into Pakistan all cause anger among various ethnic and religious groups in the area. Sometimes that anger expresses itself in the form of local militia forces like the Taliban. Sometimes it breaks free of borders and turns into global terrorism.

Most people don’t go on suicide missions for no reason. If we want to reduce terrorist and militia attacks, we need to lower the temperature, not only in Afghanistan but in Pakistan and India as well. As Alex Thurston has repeatedly urged, NATO needs to stop killing civilians and invading Pakistan to root out militants. At the very least, we cannot send another 20,000 troops to Afghanistan - beyond the fact that in these times of financial crisis we simply can’t afford it, escalation will only raise tensions.

We should also remember that not all of this situation is under our control:

Lashkar-e-Taiba denied any responsibility on Thursday for the terrorist strikes. American intelligence agencies have said that the group has received some training and logistical support in the past from Pakistan’s powerful spy service, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or I.S.I., and that Pakistan’s government has long turned a blind eye to Lashkar-e-Taiba camps in the Kashmir region, a disputed territory over which India and Pakistan have fought two wars.

Officials in Washington said Friday that there was no evidence that the Pakistani government had any role in the attacks. But if evidence were to emerge that the operation had been planned and directed from within Pakistan, that would certainly further escalate tensions between India and Pakistan, bitter, nuclear-armed rivals. It could also provoke an Indian military response, even strikes against militants’ training camps.

If Pakistan’s fingerprints do directly turn up in the planning, financing, or execution of the terror attacks in Mumbai, let’s just say we’re in for some pretty rough stuff. Either way, America should not be doing anything to further inflame passions on any side of this sprawling conflict. Let’s control what we have control over. That means no more troops in Afghanistan.

WHAT'S NEXT?

Subscribe via RSS or Email  ::     ::  Leave a comment

Bookmark to: