Follow @southasiaanalys

China unmasks its Connivance in Pakistan’s State-Sponsored Terrorism

Paper No. 6096                                  Dated 07-Apr-2016

By Dr Subhash Kapila

China once again unmasks its connivance in Pakistan’s state-sponsored terrorism when last month it vetoed in the United Nations a resolution supported by all other Security Council and other members designating JEM Chief Azhar Masood as an international terrorist, notwithstanding the fact that the Pak ISI-supported JEM stands designated as an international terrorist organisation.

China’s rebuttal of widespread criticism on its connivance with Pakistan’s state-sponsored terrorists like Azar Masood that this individual does not qualify to be labelled as an international terrorist on “technical grounds” is preposterous in that the terrorist organisation that Azhar Masood heads, the JEM has stood designated since 2001 by the United Nations as an international terrorist organisation. China in effect has provided protection to Pakistan Army’s terrorist organisation affiliates and further encouraging them to continue with their terrorist bombings in India and Afghanistan. Is the United States listening?

China’s specious plea of vetoing the UN Resolution on “technical grounds” does not provide China with even a fig-leaf to hide its nakedness of travesty of justice. It amounts to nothing more than reinforcing and rewarding Pakistan Army Generals for their concubinage relationship with China.

China has thereby reinforced the global perception that China adheres to its own selective dictionary of what constitutes international terrorism and what constitutes an ‘international terrorist’. In China’s dictionary, Pakistan Army ISI’s notorious intelligence agency’s terrorist affiliates like JEM and LET do not qualify to be designated as terrorists, simply because China depends heavily on Pakistan’s ISI agency to further the China-Pakistan Axis agenda in the Indian Subcontinent of complicating India’s security challenges.

China’s open and outright connivance in supporting Pakistan Army’s state-sponsored terrorism is politically reprehensible and against international norms. It is equally regrettable that the United States, France and Britain, all victims of Islamic Jihadi terrorist bombings of the type perpetrated by Pakistan Army’s ISI affiliates JEM and LET against India and Afghanistan, could not come out with more vociferous condemnation of China.

Such attitudes of Big Powers to be permissive on China’s connivance in supporting Pakistan Army’s state-sponsored terrorism encourages China  to destabilise different regions of the world extending from North Korea, South China Sea conflict escalation to underwriting Pakistan Army’s state-sponsored terrorism against India and Afghanistan.

Islamic Jihadi terrorism has an uncanny characteristic trend that it re-visits with glee and full vengeance on its earlier benefactors and those permissive about it. China should therefore be ready for JEM and LET strikes in Xingjian in the future and also possibly in Tibet under Chinese military occupation.

China should then not seek international condemnation for Islamic Jihadi strikes. Xingjian terror organisations have already struck at targets within Chinese Mainland. China has in the past been asking Pakistan to restrain Pakistani terrorist organisations providing support to Xingjian freedom movement organisations.

In Chinese damage-control exercise after getting China exposed in the United Nations as a supporter of Pakistan Army’s Islamic Jihad affiliates like the JEM and LET, China seems to have circulated stories in some sections of the Indian media that China’s veto at the United Nations against JEM Chief Azhar Masood being designated as an internal terrorist was cleared at a junior level in the Chinese policy establishment, in a futile effort to shield the Chinese President’s concurrence.

Well-known is the fact that nothing moves in China without Chinese President Xi Jinping’s assent. Today, President Xi Jinping is being compared to Chairman Mao in terms of full and unquestioned control of China. So to suggest that the Chinese veto at the United Nations was due to the involvement of Chinese middle-level functionaries in league with Pakistan Army Headquarters at Rawalpindi are laughable. Should India believe that the all-powerful Chinese President is powerless against the pro-Pakistani Chinese gladiators in the PLA HQs conniving with the Pakistan Army HQs in Rawalpindi?

If the above is true, then it is high time that India factors-in its policy formulations that the Chinese President is not a force to be reckoned with in the Chinese power pyramid.

India must then live with the strategic and military reality that the China-Pakistan Axis is going to be a “run-away” enterprise of the Pakistan Army GHQ at Rawalpindi and the Chinese PLA HQs in Beijing and that eventuality opens up formidable military challenges for India’s security establishment.

The critical question that unfolds itself in the above contextual setting is whether India should be content with its reactive condemnations of China for shielding Pakistani terrorists at the United Nations or as a consequence move ahead to more reactive postures to tame China’s compulsive obsessions to underwrite Pakistan Army’s state-sponsored terrorism against India.

The sky is the limit in terms of proactive options open to India to impose terrorism support-deterrence on China and all with plausible deniability exits. Spelling them out publicly would amount to forewarning China .But I am confident that within India’s s security and intelligence establishment there are many bright sparks who could devise and put into operation blueprints in this direction, if they have not already devised such blueprints but await political sanction to do so.

Concluding, it needs to be stressed that India must awaken to the strategic reality that China is no friend of India but a military threat to India in connivance with Pakistan Army Generals sitting in Rawalpindi. Peace with militaristic neighbours with aggressive military brinkmanship instincts cannot be bought by ‘olive branches’ of Track II diplomacy, Special Envoys and behind the curtains parleys in foreign lands. In relation to China and Pakistan peace with honour can only come with India’s NATIONAL RESOLVE and high state of war-preparedness of the Indian Armed Forces coupled with the WILL TO USE POWER.