news details |
|
|
| Banning outfits alone won’t help | | | NIRBHAY JAMMUAL
India has sought ban on Laskhar-i-Toiba front as part of the ongoing campaign by Pakistan and other countries against terrorism. Can such a ban end terrorist activities ?Experience has shown that banning militant outfits is not a remedy to terrorism.See what happened in Jammu and Kashmir. When insurgency peaked in Jammu and Kahmir in 1990 the then Governor, Jagmohan, Imposed a ban on JKLF and Hizbul Mujahideen. Afer the expiry of the ban period the state Government had recommended to the centre that the ban be extended. There was no response. However, in 1997 the centre responded by extending the ban on the JKLF which since 1994 had bid adieu to the gun. Again in 1999 the state Government had recommended to the centre to impose ban on Harkatul Ansar,Harkatul Mujahdeen,Lashkar-i-Toiba and Hizbul Mjahdeen and again there was no response from Delhi.
Even when the ban was imposed on the JKLF and Hizbul Mujahideen the two organisations did not cease to exist. Instead the JKLF and Hizbul Mujahideen succeeded in building their cadres in the state. At one stage the Government of India had suggested to the US and the UK Governments to impose ban on Jash-e-Mohammad and other outfits but neither Washington nor London acted on the suggestion.Years later the USA banned Harkatul Ansar but the activists of the same outfit started operating either under the banner of Lashkar-i-Toiba or under the name of Harkatul Mujahideen.Well between 1989 and 1995 there used to be more than 100 militant outfits in Jammu and Kashmir. Even a five-man group formed an outfit and indulged in subversive activities. Experience has shown that banned outfits give rise to new outfits and so on.Now that the number of militant outfits, operating in Jammu and Kashmir, has shrunk to four or five groups any ban on them could give birth to yet another new ones.In the recent terrorist strikes in Deli, Jaipur and Mumbai activists of Indian Mujahideen and the Deccan Mujahideen had claimed responsibility.
The aim behind this plan was to Indianise terrorist outfits when actually they were part of the Lashkar front. Again the aim behind indianising the terrorist activities was to bail out Pakistani agencies that were behind rebel attacks in Jammu and Kshmir and in other Indian states.When India pleaded for a global ban on Jamaat-ud-Dawa,the front organisation of Lashkar-i-Toiba Pakistan informed the UN Security Council that it would proscribe the organisation if the Council put sanctions on the group for being associated with terrorism. This way Islamabad is not ready to initiate a unilateral action against the Lashkar or its front organisation,Jamaat-ud-Dawa.However,whatever step Pakistan has taken so far by arresting several top activists of Lashkar, including Zaikur Rehman Lakhvi and Zarar Shah, besides placing Jash-e-Mohammad Chief, Azhar Masood under house arrest, need not be ignored. Whether Islamabad's crackdown on terrorists is the result of the American pressure or the outcome of its desire to avoid any armed conflict with India but it is a positive sign indicating that sustained operations against terrorist outfits alone held the key to peace.Mere ban on such outfits may not prove productive. At times imposition of ban proves counterproductive in the sense that a banned outfits attract even the fence sitters. It is in this context I think Indo-Pakistan joint management on taming terrorists could be a viable alternative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
