WHEN Bombay’s police went public last week with their startling news that they have evidence that Pakistan’s intelligence agency, ISI, was involved in the latest terror act in the city, it was clear that their statement had already been cleared with New Delhi. Yet it quickly became equally clear that this was not a mere diplomatic play by the Indian government. Thus far the Indians have handled this extremely serious accusation in a measured manner. They have pledged to furnish the Pakistani authorities with proof of their allegations. This is welcome. Once that evidence is tabled, President Gen. Musharraf must have his government examine it dispassionately.
To do this, ministers in Islamabad will have to put aside the understandable suspicion that this is another part of a concerted denigration campaign by Washington and executed by the UK and Afghanistan in particular, to have Pakistan do America’s bidding. If the Indian allegations that the ISI was behind the attack have any truth whatsoever, the evidence ought to be apparent, should be tested thoroughly and all necessary action then taken.
It is not unheard of for intelligence organizations to pursue their own illegal path. In the 1970’s Britain’s much-vaunted MI5 became seriously split with some senior officers believing that Communist spies were running their service and that the socialist government of Harold Wilson was equally compromised. There was even talk of mounting a coup. The shadowy world of intelligence almost encourages plots and conspiracies. Matters can be further complicated by the presence of retired intelligence mandarins who continue to hang around in the shadows, guiding or obstructing their successors.
If elements of the ISI were indeed involved in the Bombay attacks, it does not mean that the whole organization is rotten and certainly does not implicate the Pakistani government. At the moment the Musharraf administration is rightly defending its intelligence service but that defense will only remain credible if it gives a full and open examination to whatever proof the Bombay police think they have uncovered. Musharraf seems to already have his suspicions. In an interview in America last week, he accepted the possibility that retired ISI officers might have continued to be involved in Afghanistan.
A small minority of Pakistanis does not welcome a settlement with India, neither over Kashmir nor on a wider normalization of relations. Peace will bring a loss of power and influence. Indo-Pakistani friendship could also bring commercial dominance by the stronger partner. There is therefore a chance that renegade officials, from the ISI or pretending to be from the ISI, assisted the Lashkar-e-Taiba group in their latest despicable attack on Bombay’s commuter trains. The wicked aim would be to sabotage the slow but steady progress being made between the two nuclear-armed countries in resolving their dangerous differences. If the Indian police have got it right, it can be expected that Musharraf will use his considerable powers to root out the guilty men and cooperate with the Indian authorities. Nothing less would do.
