What's new

Zawahiri kill raises question — If assassination ends terrorism, why can’t others follow US?

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
54,470
Reaction score
87
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan

Zawahiri kill raises question — If assassination ends terrorism, why can’t others follow US?​


Except for Balakot, where India executed a level of retaliation, we have been stopped from doing anything that remotely resembles what the US is doing itself.​

Vir Sanghvi
VIR SANGHVI
4 August, 2022 08:45 am IST

Ayman al-Zawahiri


Illustration by Prajna Ghosh | ThePrint
Text Size: A- A+

Idon’t know anyone who shed a tear over the assassination of Ayman al-Zawahiri, the terrorist mastermind and al-Qaeda chief. But the US policy of assassinating terrorists does raise many questions that should concern us in India.

But first, the assassination. Al-Zawahiri was killed when two US missiles (possibly Hellfires) struck his home in Kabul, where he had been hiding under the noses of his old pals, the Taliban. When the US pulled out of Afghanistan, it told the world that the Taliban had assured it that Kabul would not become a safe haven for terrorists. But history has a way of repeating itself. Just as Osama bin Laden hid out in Abbottabad, probably with the connivance of the US’ great ally, Pakistan, Zawahiri was sheltered by people who the US told us were actually not such bad chaps, really.

It is a measure of how safe Zawahiri felt in Kabul that according to the US, he spent long periods of time on his balcony where he was clearly visible from the streets and the skies. At least bin Laden had tried to remain out of sight.

There is evidence to suggest that Afghanistan is now becoming a centre of al-Qaeda operations. We already know about Pakistan’s terrorist infrastructure. This means that India has two terrorism-supporting countries at our doorstep.

Over the last year, as Pakistan grappled with internal problems of its own, terrorist attacks in India have slowed down. Although the US officially accepts the Pakistani position that the terrorism is carried out by non-State actors (the ‘snakes’ that Pakistan is supposed to keep in its backyard), no Indian intelligence officer seriously believes that the attacks are not State-sponsored or State-encouraged. And once things settle down in Pakistan, they will resume. That has been the pattern over the last two decades.


The US has two answers on terrorists

So, how does a country cope with the threat of terrorism from across its border?

There are two answers. The first is the answer the US gives to the rest of the world: We must rely on foreign governments to apprehend terrorists in their own countries. We must use diplomatic pressure. And so on.
This is the answer the US has always given India. When the Taliban facilitated the ISI-sponsored hijacking of IC-814 in late 1999, the US was not particularly concerned. It did not even blink as India was forced to release dangerous terrorists in return for the lives of the passengers.

When the Mumbai attacks took place in 2008, the US advised restraint. Worried by reports that India was considering retaliation against Pakistan, it warned us not to escalate the situation and assured us that Pakistan would cooperate in tracking down the plotters of the attack.

That’s the answer the US gives us and the rest of the world.

And then there is the answer the US provides when its own interests are threatened. After the 9/11 attacks, it asked the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden. When the Taliban refused, America launched a full-scale invasion of Afghanistan, ousted the Taliban and took control of the country itself.

When ISIS and other terrorist groups continued to plot attacks against America, the US used drone strikes to destroy terrorist hideouts. Later, it created a so-called Disposition Matrix. The US press recognised this for what it really was: A kill list.

A list of individuals who were potential threats to the US was sent to the President on a regular basis. The President (Barack Obama was the first to get this list) would then tell his officials who they could kill. Once presidential approval was granted, the US would assassinate the targets with missiles, drones or (as in the case of Osama bin Laden) actual ground assaults.


One rule for all?

There is, first of all, a moral issue here. Who made the US President judge, jury, and executioner? And even if you assume that due process is followed (when, of course, it can’t be, by definition, because the condemned person has no right to a defence) isn’t there a question of morality here? Should elected officials sanction the murder of individuals?

The US has been here before. In the 1970s when it emerged that the CIA had been involved in assassination attempts against world leaders and other figures, there was widespread outrage and a storm in US Congress. The mood has now changed 180 degrees, but it is hard for America to argue that there are no moral questions to confront.

And then of course there is the basic problem. One rule for America. One rule for the rest of the world.

It is not my case that the US is necessarily wrong to kill terrorists. It may well explain why there are so few terror attacks on the US now. (But let’s not forget that when policemen make the same who-to-kill decisions in India, there is global outrage over staged ‘encounters’.) My problem is this: If assassination is such an effective way of ending terrorism, why can’t other countries follow the US example?

With both Pakistan and Afghanistan next door to us and with the history of the terrorist attacks we have suffered, why can’t we take direct action without Washington getting all self-righteous and indignant?


A talk India needs to have

Over a decade and a half after the Mumbai attack, most of its planners remain free. As for the IC-814 hijack, Pakistan never returned the terrorists we released, the hijackers themselves went on to live in Pakistan with the connivance of the government. And except for Balakot, where we executed a level of retaliation, we have been stopped from doing anything that remotely resembles what the US is doing itself.

I have long argued that the only way to fight terrorism is through covert operations, if not retaliatory strikes. Only a fool would hope to get justice from the Taliban or the Pakistan Army. When the terror attacks resume (as they surely will), this is a discussion we need to have in India.

Let’s not do as America says. Let’s do as America does.

Vir Sanghvi is a print and television journalist, and talk show host. He tweets at @virsanghvi. Views are personal.
Recommended Content by theprint.in

 
Waiting for the day Bush, Obama, Modi and all real terrorists are assassinated.

Zawahiri kill raises question — If assassination ends terrorism, why can’t others follow US?​


Except for Balakot, where India executed a level of retaliation, we have been stopped from doing anything that remotely resembles what the US is doing itself.​

Vir Sanghvi
VIR SANGHVI
4 August, 2022 08:45 am IST

https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https://theprint.in/opinion/zawahiri-kill-question-if-assassination-ends-terrorism-why-cant-others-follow-us/1066911/
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Zawahiri+kill+raises+question+—+If+assassination+ends+terrorism,+why+can’t+others+follow+US?&url=https://theprint.in/opinion/zawahiri-kill-question-if-assassination-ends-terrorism-why-cant-others-follow-us/1066911/&via=ThePrintIndia
https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https://theprint.in/opinion/zawahiri-kill-question-if-assassination-ends-terrorism-why-cant-others-follow-us/1066911/&title=Zawahiri+kill+raises+question+—+If+assassination+ends+terrorism,+why+can’t+others+follow+US?

https://api.whatsapp.com/send?text=Zawahiri+kill+raises+question+—+If+assassination+ends+terrorism,+why+can’t+others+follow+US? https://theprint.in/opinion/zawahiri-kill-question-if-assassination-ends-terrorism-why-cant-others-follow-us/1066911/
Ayman al-Zawahiri


Illustration by Prajna Ghosh | ThePrint
Text Size: A- A+

Idon’t know anyone who shed a tear over the assassination of Ayman al-Zawahiri, the terrorist mastermind and al-Qaeda chief. But the US policy of assassinating terrorists does raise many questions that should concern us in India.

But first, the assassination. Al-Zawahiri was killed when two US missiles (possibly Hellfires) struck his home in Kabul, where he had been hiding under the noses of his old pals, the Taliban. When the US pulled out of Afghanistan, it told the world that the Taliban had assured it that Kabul would not become a safe haven for terrorists. But history has a way of repeating itself. Just as Osama bin Laden hid out in Abbottabad, probably with the connivance of the US’ great ally, Pakistan, Zawahiri was sheltered by people who the US told us were actually not such bad chaps, really.

It is a measure of how safe Zawahiri felt in Kabul that according to the US, he spent long periods of time on his balcony where he was clearly visible from the streets and the skies. At least bin Laden had tried to remain out of sight.

There is evidence to suggest that Afghanistan is now becoming a centre of al-Qaeda operations. We already know about Pakistan’s terrorist infrastructure. This means that India has two terrorism-supporting countries at our doorstep.

Over the last year, as Pakistan grappled with internal problems of its own, terrorist attacks in India have slowed down. Although the US officially accepts the Pakistani position that the terrorism is carried out by non-State actors (the ‘snakes’ that Pakistan is supposed to keep in its backyard), no Indian intelligence officer seriously believes that the attacks are not State-sponsored or State-encouraged. And once things settle down in Pakistan, they will resume. That has been the pattern over the last two decades.


The US has two answers on terrorists

So, how does a country cope with the threat of terrorism from across its border?

There are two answers. The first is the answer the US gives to the rest of the world: We must rely on foreign governments to apprehend terrorists in their own countries. We must use diplomatic pressure. And so on.
This is the answer the US has always given India. When the Taliban facilitated the ISI-sponsored hijacking of IC-814 in late 1999, the US was not particularly concerned. It did not even blink as India was forced to release dangerous terrorists in return for the lives of the passengers.

When the Mumbai attacks took place in 2008, the US advised restraint. Worried by reports that India was considering retaliation against Pakistan, it warned us not to escalate the situation and assured us that Pakistan would cooperate in tracking down the plotters of the attack.

That’s the answer the US gives us and the rest of the world.

And then there is the answer the US provides when its own interests are threatened. After the 9/11 attacks, it asked the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden. When the Taliban refused, America launched a full-scale invasion of Afghanistan, ousted the Taliban and took control of the country itself.

When ISIS and other terrorist groups continued to plot attacks against America, the US used drone strikes to destroy terrorist hideouts. Later, it created a so-called Disposition Matrix. The US press recognised this for what it really was: A kill list.

A list of individuals who were potential threats to the US was sent to the President on a regular basis. The President (Barack Obama was the first to get this list) would then tell his officials who they could kill. Once presidential approval was granted, the US would assassinate the targets with missiles, drones or (as in the case of Osama bin Laden) actual ground assaults.


One rule for all?

There is, first of all, a moral issue here. Who made the US President judge, jury, and executioner? And even if you assume that due process is followed (when, of course, it can’t be, by definition, because the condemned person has no right to a defence) isn’t there a question of morality here? Should elected officials sanction the murder of individuals?

The US has been here before. In the 1970s when it emerged that the CIA had been involved in assassination attempts against world leaders and other figures, there was widespread outrage and a storm in US Congress. The mood has now changed 180 degrees, but it is hard for America to argue that there are no moral questions to confront.

And then of course there is the basic problem. One rule for America. One rule for the rest of the world.

It is not my case that the US is necessarily wrong to kill terrorists. It may well explain why there are so few terror attacks on the US now. (But let’s not forget that when policemen make the same who-to-kill decisions in India, there is global outrage over staged ‘encounters’.) My problem is this: If assassination is such an effective way of ending terrorism, why can’t other countries follow the US example?

With both Pakistan and Afghanistan next door to us and with the history of the terrorist attacks we have suffered, why can’t we take direct action without Washington getting all self-righteous and indignant?


A talk India needs to have

Over a decade and a half after the Mumbai attack, most of its planners remain free. As for the IC-814 hijack, Pakistan never returned the terrorists we released, the hijackers themselves went on to live in Pakistan with the connivance of the government. And except for Balakot, where we executed a level of retaliation, we have been stopped from doing anything that remotely resembles what the US is doing itself.

I have long argued that the only way to fight terrorism is through covert operations, if not retaliatory strikes. Only a fool would hope to get justice from the Taliban or the Pakistan Army. When the terror attacks resume (as they surely will), this is a discussion we need to have in India.

Let’s not do as America says. Let’s do as America does.

Vir Sanghvi is a print and television journalist, and talk show host. He tweets at @virsanghvi. Views are personal.
Recommended Content by theprint.in

Indians try something and they’ll pay heavily.
People like Hafiz Saaed have millions of followers who’ll rain hell on Indians if he’s harmed.

Zawahiri kill raises question
He was killed in a game. He was played and sold out. It was for power.
Usa has 0 achievement in this.
 
There is a message here. The Yanks don't easily forget and forgive. They have taken their revenge may it cost them a 20 years war.
They have successfully crippled Al kayda since sources are telling there is a succession leadership crysis now after killing of jawahiri .
With regards to India I am pretty sure that Pakistan need not worry ever. As here people forget easily are gullible and the leadership is busy in other worse activities.
There is no harm from Indian side .Forget about Hafiz saeed If efficient and intelligent people were present here dawood ibrahim would have met the same fate a long time ago instead of roaming freely in Karachi and Dubai after commuting the henous act.
 
Interestingly you only mentioned PTI journalists

Apparently Maryam Nawaz and her social media and electronic media cell can say whatever they want to. That is halal endorced from Rawalpindi
All their abuses over the decade are Halaal so is their corruption.
 
Indians do not have the strength of the United States, but they want to imitate the actions of the United States.
Assassination cannot solve terrorism. If one person dies, more people will stand up and resist the tyranny in his mind.
 
Interestingly you only mentioned PTI journalists

Apparently Maryam Nawaz and her social media and electronic media cell can say whatever they want to. That is halal endorced from Rawalpindi
I have come across it recently. I am glad you told me otherwise. I was looking into other external factors of 5GW and hybrid war against Pakistan.
 
:-)

Not Pakistan, but Pakistan Army. Interesting.
Bringing this expression (Pakistan Army) in media, just like PTI journos, although they started using other terms - neutrals, establishment etc.

One mission - many factions.

Well done sir, well done. A round of applause.

Coming back to the topic now, did the writer honestly compare India with the US?

Can India have 24/7 surveillance of a point, and then unleash a R9X from a drone high in the sky without any collateral damage?

Writers such as these really need to come out of the delusion that they are somehow at par with the US or the western world in what they can do and achieve. You tried doing something once and were left to clean and hide the mess you found yourself in, but still have grand thoughts about carrying out a similar operation as the US.
 
Well done sir, well done. A round of applause.

Coming back to the topic now, did the writer honestly compare India with the US?

Can India have 24/7 surveillance of a point, and then unleash a R9X from a drone high in the sky without any collateral damage?

Writers such as these really need to come out of the delusion that they are somehow at par with the US or the western world in what they can do and achieve. You tried doing something once and were left to clean and hide the mess you found yourself in, but still have grand thoughts about carrying out a similar operation as the US.
If you truly find an issue regarding my post pointing towards the factors I mentioned, you are welcome to delete it, I wont get offended. I am working on a few things atm and finding relevant information in many threads, this being one of them.
 
If you truly find an issue regarding my post pointing towards the factors I mentioned, you are welcome to delete it, I wont get offended. I am working on a few things atm and finding relevant information in many threads, this being one of them.

I have deleted the offending posts which took the thread off topic.
 
Big question is, was Zawahiri living in a somewhat posh Kabul enclave all that time right under the the umreekan noses or had he just moved in?
If it is tge former then what does it say about the US?
 
Waiting for the day Bush, Obama, Modi and all real terrorists are assassinated.


Indians try something and they’ll pay heavily.
People like Hafiz Saaed have millions of followers who’ll rain hell on Indians if he’s harmed.


He was killed in a game. He was played and sold out. It was for power.
Usa has 0 achievement in this.
Don't give a cheap Indian website importance. Indians talk a lot, fantasise great infliction on Pakistan and know the consequences. Let them dream Bollywood action. The only thing Pakistan needs to plan for is the joint US and Indian attack on China on the Himalayas and perhaps on Kashmir.
 
Back
Top Bottom