Behind the Smoke of False Flag Operations

Signalian

THINK TANK
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
112
Reactions
153 28
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
Pulwama attack and the subsequent debate based on cost-benefit analysis has amply proved that the real beneficiary of any such act of violence was the Modi government and not Pakistan. The later logical arguments prove Pulwama attack as a false flag operation to achieve various ill-intended objectives against Pakistan. Since the beginning of the first decade of 21st century, the United States of America has forged deep defence ties with India, and calls it a ‘strategic partner’, its role in the region along with U.S.’ key partner Israel has also come under sharp focus in the security circles. The security analysts deciphering the false flag operations in recent past and in various countries do not see Pulwama in isolation, rather as part of a regional strategy especially pursued by hostile intelligence agencies.
There are two types of contemporary terrorism namely: authentic and synthetic. Authentic terrorism has three distinct features. Firstly, it is accompanied by concrete or plausible political demands; secondly, it is conducted by a bonafide organization for specific political objectives; and thirdly, it is accompanied by a non-violent struggle and acceptance by members of their society as freedom fighters, heroes or martyrs. When an act of terrorism lacks these features it definitely is synthetic terrorism or a false flag operation.1

Background of the Regional Strategy

The Iran-Iraq War came at a time when Israel had recovered from the loss of the 1973 war and had become the frontline ally state of the U.S. in the Middle East. With the cementing of U.S.-Israel relations, Israel found itself in a position to reassert and expand itself in the Middle East. To achieve this A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties was written by Oded Yinon, which was published in the World Zionist Organization's journal, Kivunim in February 1982. Oded Yinon is an Israeli journalist and was formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of Israel. The paper was translated by Israel Shahak, a Jewish leftist who is the author of several books. The Yinon Planbasically is a blue print for how to create “Greater Israel” a Jewish state stretching from Nile to Euphrates including areas of Syria and Lebanon. To achieve this goal, the plan calls for balkanization of neighbouring Arab States into smaller states on ethnic as well as sectarian lines. In the Yinon Plan, Egypt and Iraq were considered the major strategic challenges to Israel, while Syria was considered a major threat. In order to realize the dream of “Greater Israel”, as far as Iraq is concerned, the Israeli strategists believed that Tel Aviv must work for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two independent Sunni and Shia Arab states.2 The plan envisioned the destruction of the Arab Muslim states from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions.

After the Yinon Plan, in 1996 Richard Perle (a prominent American Jew who has headed a number of policymaking organizations in the U.S.) and Douglas Feith, another Jew (who was Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in the Bush Jr. administration from 2001 to 2005) wrote “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” The strategy was presented to the then Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu. The plan called for not only eliminating Saddam Hussein and installing a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad, but also for trashing the Oslo Accords, permanent Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights, and overthrowing or destabilizing the governments of Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Perle’s master plan for Likud regional dominance (otherwise known as “Greater Israel”) was crafted for the Jerusalem and Washington, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS).3

Since 2001, being sole superpower of the world the U.S. has undertaken a number of military interventions and occupations in the Muslim world in-line with these plans. The stated political objectives of these military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria have been: dismantling of Al-Qaeda network/fight against terrorism, fight against proliferation and weapons of mass destruction, introduction of democracy and regime change of tyrant Assad respectively. While the UN approved the use of force in Afghanistan, military operations in other countries were undertaken on the basis of might is right. As professed by the American establishment, these military operations were conducted in the best interest of humanity and mankind, but an objective analysis can also lead to the conclusion that the two countries which benefitted the most geopolitically from these operations are Israel and India, the two closest American allies in the region.

By dislodging Talibans from the seat of power from Kabul, U.S. paved the way for pro-Indian Northern Alliance dominated government to assume power in Afghanistan. With the pro-Indian government in place at the end of 2001, New Delhi started pouring in more men and material into Afghanistan to achieve the following strategic objectives: creation of pro-Indian political and military elite comprising non-Pashtuns; projecting power throughout South Asia (and beyond); gaining access to Central Asian trade and energy resources; develop ability to support separatists in the Pakistani province of Balochistan; creating two-front dilemma for Pakistan by sponsoring and abetting religious fanatics and anti-state elements to take up arms against Islamabad while operating from FATA and adjoining areas; and, to undo or fragment Pakistan to an extent whereby it ceases to exist and/or is forced to surrender its nuclear weapons. To achieve these aims, apart from reopening its embassy in Kabul, India also established four consulates in Herat, Jalalabad, Kandahar and Mazar-i-Sharif. These consulates in due course have become the operating bases for Indian intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) to undertake terrorist operations against Pakistan and even Iran.

In the same context with neocon becoming dominant in the George W. Bush administration, both the Yinon Plan and Clean Breakstrategy were executed with perfection in the Middle East. Since Israel did not have the wherewithal to undertake the job alone, where necessary, Tel Aviv had incited, forced or lured Washington to take punitive actions against Iraq, Libya and Syria which are or could pose a threat to Israel. As a result, not only were Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gaddaffi removed from the scene but through well-orchestrated moves, Sunni and Shia Muslims were pitched against each other in proxy wars raging from Syria to Iraq including Bahrain, Yemen, Iran, Pakistan and elsewhere in the Middle East. Apart from exploiting Shia/Sunni sectarian divide, of late, Turkish/Persian/Arab/Kurdish ethnic fault lines have also been manipulated whereby Muslim countries continue to fight each other as group or as individual states for no clear agenda or end state in mind. It is also an established fact that Israel, in collusion with the West, also regularly sponsored, trained and used political Islam to create upheaval in host country or encouraged them to undertake ‘jihad’ in another state. Israel also provided technological, financial and military intelligence and diplomatic support to countries hostile to the Muslim states such as India and Myanmar. In essence, Tel Aviv kept all the Muslim countries of the region unstable while using its own clout with Washington to ensure that no credible voice could be raised at the UN.

Today, growing Indo-U.S. strategic cooperation is one of the most important strategic partnerships of the 21st century which is likely to have profound effects on Asian and global politics in future. The U.S.’ growing defence partnership with India has multiple aims. However, the broader efforts are aimed at containing China's growing influence around the world and to keep Muslim countries as an entity under check so that they cannot pose any threat to Israel. To achieve these objectives, various defence analysts are of the view that the U.S. policymakers are terming this bilateral defence cooperation as “an anchor of global security”.4 Backed by Washington and Tel Aviv and with improved ties with EU, Japan and Australia; New Delhi is working on the agenda of assuming the role as a net provider of security in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).5 Meanwhile, right wing Likud party (led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu) and right wing Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (led by Narendera Modi) are laying foundations for strategic partnership between Israel and India based on a common ideology which is common hatred for Islam as well as Muslims not only in their own countries but globally. Similarly, both leaders are working tirelessly to create Greater Israel and Akhand Bharat according to their own religious aspirations.

Sistan-Baluchestan and Pulwama Terrorist Attacks: False Flag Operations

On February 14, 2019 a suicide attack at Pulwama in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) occurred, which mirrored a suicide bombing in Iran’s Sistan-Baluchestan border province on February 13 that left 27 Iranian Revolutionary Guards dead. According to sources, the modus operandi of both the attacks was similar – ramming an explosive-laden vehicle into a bus carrying soldiers. In both cases, the terror outfits that claimed responsibility for the bombings have the same first name Jaish. According to details, the attack in Iran was conducted by Jaish al-Adl (Army of Justice). It is a Salafi jihadist terrorist organization based in the Sistan and Baluchestan Province of Iran. The organization is responsible for several attacks against civilians and military personnel in Iran. The group claims that it is a separatist group fighting for independence of Sistan-Baluchestan province and greater rights for Baloch people.6 The group was founded in 2012 by members of Jundallah, a Sunni militant group that had been weakened following Iran's capture and execution of its leader, Abdolmalek Rigi, in 2010. The organization conducted its first major attack in October 2013 when it abducted and killed five Iranian border guards.7 On April 26, 2017 the group claimed resposibility for an ambush that killed at least nine Iranian border guards and injured two others while they were patrolling at the Pakistan-Iran border.8
Since Jaish al-Adl is successor organization to Jundallah let us review the background of its parent organization. Jundallah (soldiers of God) is a Sunni Balochi nationalist group which emerged on the scene in 2003. Headed by Abdolmalek Rigi, the group operated in the Iranian province of Sistan-Baluchestan, bordering Pakistan. The group conducted a series of terrorist attacks including suicide bombings in Sistan-Baluchestan, targeting Iranian military and civilians. Reportedly, on December 14, 2005 the group attacked the motorcade of President Ahmadinejad on the Zabol-Saravan highway in Sistan-Baluchestan, killing two and injuring one security guard. In March 2006, the group carried out gun attacks killing more than 20 people while on February 14, 2007 Jundallah claimed the responsibility for a bomb attack on a bus in Zahedan, killing 11 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. The organization also conducted a malicious media campaign through the internet, condemning the Shia regime for committing atrocities against the Sunni Baloch minority living in Sistan-Baluchestan. On April 1, 2007 Abdolmalek appeared on Persian service of Voice of America (VOA) radio, a mouthpiece of the U.S. government, introducing himself as the "leader of the Iranian people's resistance movement". During the broadcast he accused the Islamic regime of depriving the Sunni Balochs of their right to live freely in Iran.9 In August 2007, the organization killed 21 Iranian truck drivers and in December 2008, it killed 16 Iranian border guards.10 In May 2009, the organization carried out suicide bombing in a mosque located in Zahedan, killing 25 people meanwhile on October 18, 2009 the group claimed responsibility for suicide bombings killing over 40 individuals, including six top Iranian Revolutionary Guard commanders during their meeting with the local people.11

In his Foreign Policy article titled ‘False Flag’ Mark Perry wrote: “Jundallah head Abdolmalek Rigi was apprehended by Iran in February 2010. Although initial reports claimed that he was captured by the Iranians after taking a flight from Dubai to Kyrgyzstan, a retired intelligence officer with knowledge of the incident told me (Mark Perry) that Rigi was detained by Pakistani intelligence officers in Pakistan. The officer said that Rigi was turned over to the Iranians after the Pakistani government informed the United States that it planned to do so. The United States, this officer said, did not raise objections to the Pakistani decision. Iran, meanwhile, has consistently claimed that Rigi was snatched from under the eyes of the CIA, which it alleges supported him…. Rigi was interrogated, tried, and convicted by the Iranians and hanged on June 20, 2010”.12 In an interview aired by Iran’s state-run English language channel, Press TV, Rigi stated: “The Americans said... that we don't have a problem with Al-Qaeda or the Taliban, but the problem is Iran and we don't have a military programme against Iran… They [Americans] promised to help us and they said that they would co-operate with us, free our prisoners and would give us [Jundallah] military equipment, bombs, machine guns, and they would give us a base”.13 In order to avenge the killing of Rigi, the Jundallah struck back in July 2010 by carrying out twin bombings in Zahedan, killing at least 28 persons, including some Revolutionary Guards. The U.S. State Department, coming under pressure for having links with the organization and for the fear of reprisal from Iran, designated the organization as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) on November 4, 2010. Despite being declared as a terrorist outfit, the organization conducted a group bombing at a mosque in Chabahar on December 15, 2010 killing 38 people.14

Though the U.S. has been fighting against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the duplicity of the American policy to run with the hare and hunt with the hound is clear from what has been revealed by Peter Symonds. In his article titled Bush authorises covert CIA operations to destabilise Iran, Symonds stated that: "Alexis Debat, a senior fellow on counterterrorism at the Nixon Centre, told ABC News that Jundallah leader Abdolmalek Rigi ‘used to fight with the Taliban. He’s part drug smuggler, part Taliban, part Sunni activist.’ According to this week’s report, U.S. officials deny any “direct funding” of Jundallah but “say the leader of Jundallah was in regular contact with U.S. officials.” In other words, in its efforts to bring about a “regime change” in Iran, the Bush administration is collaborating with the Sunni extremists associated with the Taliban, which is the main target of the U.S. “war on terror” in the neighbouring Afghanistan".15

Apart from the U.S., Jundallah had links with Israel and the UK too, that had maintained intimate relations with the organization. Mark Perry’s article ‘False Flag’ made very disturbing revelations. While referring to the CIA secret memos he stated “Buried deep in the archives of America's intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush's administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives – what is commonly referred to as a "false flag" operation”. He further elaborated that the recruiting took place in London, (where most of the Baloch insurgents had taken asylum). It is opined that Mark has very aptly exposed the plot of how Mossad has been using Jundallah terrorists in the past to assassinate people in Iran. Since Jaish al-Adl is successor organization to Jundallah it has only changed name to stay off the FTO list. Therefore, it is easy to establish that Jaish al-Adl is a terrorist organization which is operating in Sistan-Baluchestan, Iran with the help of Mossad and CIA to destabilize Iran. Since borders among Afghanistan, Pakistani Balochistan and Iranian Baluchestan are very porous, the same gaps are likely to be used by RAW and other collaborative intelligence agencies to plan and conduct terrorist operations in Iranian Baluchestan as well as Pakistani Balochistan. To mask these operations, an impression has been created through well-orchestrated information warfare that somehow ISI is behind Jaish al-Adl but on ground it is controlled and operated by Mossad, CIA and even RAW.

India has a history of conducting synthetic terrorist operations and blaming Pakistan and other militant organizations for it. Surprisingly in March 2000 a dozen of Sikhs were gunned down by RAW operators in Chittisinghpura in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) ahead of President Clinton’s visit to India. The main aim of these ruthless killings was to defame Pakistan, derail the Kashmir freedom struggle and create a wedge between Sikhs and Muslims; both minorities in India who have been combined victims of Hindu nationalist agenda of Hindutva for years.

On December 13, 2001 Indian Parliament came under a terrorist attack which led to the deaths of six Delhi Police personnel, two Parliament watch and ward staff, a gardener and the five terrorists who were shot dead. The incident increased tensions between India and Pakistan, resulting in the 2001-2 India-Pakistan military standoffs. The attack triggered extensive investigations which revealed involvement of four accused, namely Mohammad Afzal Guru, Shaukat Hussain Guru (cousin of Afzal Guru), S.A.R. Geelani (Syed Abdul Rahman Geelani) and Shaukat's wife Navjot Sandhu (alias Afsan Guru). Some other proclaimed offenders were said to be leaders of the banned terrorist organization known as Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). After the conclusion of investigation, the investigating agency filed the report under Section 173 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (India) against four accused persons on May 14, 2002. Charges were framed under various sections of Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA), and the Explosive Substances Act by the designated sessions court. A campaign by a group of lawyers and activists exposed how innocent people had been framed by the police and the press, how evidence was fabricated, how witnesses lied, and how due process had been criminally violated at every stage of the investigation. Eventually the courts acquitted two out of the four accused, including S.A.R. Geelani, the man who police claimed was the mastermind behind the operation. A third, Shaukat Guru, was acquitted of all the charges brought against him, however, was then convicted for a fresh, albeit comparatively minor offence. Supreme Court upheld the death sentence of the accused, Mohammad Afzal. In its judgment the court acknowledged there was no proof that Mohammed Afzal was affiliated with any terrorist group, but went on to say, quite shockingly, "The collective conscience of the society will only be satisfied if capital punishment is awarded to the offender." Even today we don't really know who the terrorists were that attacked the Indian parliament and for whom they worked.16

In the same context, on February 18, 2007 a terrorist attack took place on the Samjhauta Express, a bi-weekly train service connecting Delhi, India, and Lahore, Pakistan.
Bombs were set off in two carriages, both filled with passengers, just after the train passed Diwana near the Indian city of Panipat, 80 kilometers (50 miles) north of New Delhi. Sixty-eight people were killed in the ensuing fire and dozens more were injured. Of the 68 fatalities, most were Pakistani civilians. The victims also included some Indian civilians and three railway policemen. The Indian government and media initially blamed Pakistan for the terror attack as usual. Widespread condemnation of Pakistan ensued, particularly from the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party, and Pakistan was accused of harbouring terrorists and intentionally derailing peace attempts with India. Later Hindu extremist leader, Swami Aseemanand, a leader of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) confessed that he was involved in several bombing incidents. He also claimed to have been a part of the incident itself.

In fact, ideology of Hindutva (extremist Hindu nationalism) prevails in every field at the cost of other minority groups, even covertly supported by Indian defence forces. This could be judged from the incident, when on April 6, 2008 in the house of Bajrang Dalfundamentalists in Nanded, a bomb went off. The investigation proved that these militants were found involved in bomb-making and attack on a mosque in Parbhani in 2003. Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) of the Maharashtra arrested a serving Lt Col Srikant Purohit along with other army officials, indicating that they were helping in training the Hindu terrorists, providing them with the military-grade explosive RDX used in the Malegaon bombings and terrorist attacks in other Indian cities. ATS further disclosed that Lt Col Purohit confessed that in 2007, he was involved in the bombing of Samjhauta Express. The Indian National Investigation Agency (NIA) on June 20, 2011 charged Aseemanand, Sunil Joshi (now dead), Lokesh Sharma, Dange alias Parmanand and Kalasangra for hatching a criminal conspiracy which resulted in blasts in the Samjhauta Express. Aseemanand’s statement in the Samjhauta Express blast case was recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code before a magistrate. His earlier admission was recorded in the Mecca Masjid case, which was being probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Aseemanand stuck to his confession that Hindutva radicals were behind the bomb attack on the Samjhauta Express. Aseemanand, Aka Naba and Kumar Sarkar, named absconding Hindutva militants Ramji Kaisangra and Sandeep Dange as the key plotters in the terror attack. Apart from Ajmer Dargah blast, which claimed three lives and left 15 others injured, Aseemanand and Sharma were accused in several other blast cases across India, including those at Hyderabad’s Mecca Masjid and Malegaon.17

Totally frustrated with the outcome of war in Afghanistan as the Taliban were gaining upper hand, in July 2008 the Coalition Forces led by U.S. started military buildup near Pak-Afghan border. Meanwhile, during the same month, CIA officers stationed in Islamabad informed Pakistan that President Bush had signed off on a set of secret orders authorizing a new strategy in the drone wars. No longer would the CIA give Pakistan advance warning before launching missiles from Predator or Reaper drones in the tribal areas. From that point on, the CIA’s killing campaign in Pakistan became a unilateral war.18 Announcing that the U.S. would send more troops to Afghanistan, General Petraeus hinted at cross-border operations such as hot pursuits, interdiction of militant traffic and hitting target of opportunity inside Pakistani territory of FATA. Cognizant of political implications of such a misadventure, Pakistan warned that befitting response would be given in case of any territorial violation from ground.

Historically, the U.S.-Pakistan standoff has caused stir in the region. Like the 2001 Parliament attack, or the Mumbai terror attacks of November 26, 2008 when a group of about 10 terrorists allegedly travelling by sea from Karachi (Pakistan) to Mumbai (India) conducted a very sophisticated and complex attack in the city. At least 164 people including many foreigners were killed in the 2008 attack. The Mumbai attacks brought both nuclear capable rivals India and Pakistan on the brink of an all-out war. At this crucial juncture, with the backing of the U.S., India through UN Security Council (UNSC) was able to secure sanctions against Jamaat-ud-Dawah (JuD). UNSC also declared Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, Haji Muhammad Ashraf and Mahmoud Ahmed Bahaziq as terrorists. To the utter surprise of Pakistan, on December 7, 2009 federal charges were filed against David Coleman Headley, an American citizen, that he had conducted extensive surveillance of the targets in Mumbai that were attacked during the November 2008 armed assault. According to details, Headley became an informant for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) after being arrested and charged with smuggling heroin into the United States from Pakistan in 1997. Following the 9/11 attacks, he started working for CIA as a terrorism informant. Headley, who is the son of a Pakistani father and an American mother, was named Daood Gilani on his birth in 1960. In 2006, Headley legally changed his name from Daood Gilani to David Coleman Headley to disguise his identity while operating in Pakistan and traveling to India for surveillance. In April 2007, Outhalla – Headley’s second wife – accompanied him to Mumbai. Less than a month later, discovering that Headley was already married, she visited the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad and informed them of his links with jihadists. “They told me to get lost,” she told The New York Times.19 Since American Embassy at Islamabad was actively pursuing a goal of collecting data and whereabouts of jihadists stationed in Pakistan, brushing aside a very serious complaint by the wife of an American citizen clearly leads to the conclusion that Headley’s CIA handlers had prior knowledge of Mumbai attacks but did nothing to prevent it.

Subsequently, Americans did facilitate Indian authorities in interrogating Headley, however, no such facility was extended to Pakistan. Following the Mumbai attacks, Pakistan was put under a lot of pressure to dismantle its so called terrorist organizations in Azad Kashmir and take decisive military action against Taliban in FATA. According to informed circles, the Mumbai attack was a setup to defame and discredit Pakistan Armed Forces and the ISI for using militants as a tool for achieving politico-military objectives. This was also used as an instrument by India and its new strategic ally to create a perception worldwide that there was security paralysis in the country and something serious might have to be done against Pakistan in future. Of late, a book written by Elias Davidsson titled The Betrayal of India: Revisiting the 26/11 Evidence has conclusively determined that Mumbai attack was a farce and main beneficiaries of the attack were Indian nationalists, the U.S. establishment and Israel. “The book offers three conclusions that the author designates as concrete:
1. That India’s major institutions are suppressing the truth on 26/11;
2. India’s judiciary has failed its duty to seek truth and render justice; and
3. Business, political and military circles in India and the United States profited from the mass murder of 26/11.”20

Davidsson also concluded: “The author could not find any benefits for the Pakistani government, military or businesses. The main profiteer seems the Hindu nationalist constituencies by the ‘elimination’ of Hemant Karkare, who was on the verge of exposing Hindutva terrorist networks”.21
In 2015, R.V.S. Mani, who as Home Ministry Under-secretary signed and submitted the affidavits in Indian court in fake “Ishrat Jahan encounter case”, stated that Satish Verma, until recently a part of the Central Bureau of Investigation’s Special Investigation Team, told him that both the terror attacks were set up "with the objective of strengthening the counter-terror legislation (sic)". Mani has said that Verma "…narrated that the 13.12. 2001 (attack on Parliament) was followed by POTA (Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act) and 26/11 2008 (terrorists’ siege of Mumbai) was followed by amendment to the UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act)." The former Under-secretary for the Home Ministry has alleged that Verma levelled the damaging charge while debunking IB’s inputs labelling the three killed with Ishrat in the June 2004 encounter as Lashkar terrorists.22 From this Times of India report it becomes abundantly clear how the Indian establishment is consistently busy in implicating Pakistan in false flag operations.

At least 44 Indian Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel were killed on February 14, 2019 in the suicide attack in the strife-torn Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK). According to details, local Kashmiri militant Adil Dar drove a vehicle packed with explosives of about more than 300 kgs into a bus that was part of a CRPF convoy of 78 vehicles. The convoy was on its way to Srinagar from Jammu when the explosion hit a bus full of CRPF personnel at Lethipora near Awantipora in Pulwama District. Surprisingly, within an hour of attack the video of Adil Dar was released on internet and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), a banned terrorist outfit, claimed responsibility for it. In a dramatic turn of events, on February 18, 2019 Indian security forces claimed to have killed the JeM commander, Abdul Rasheed Ghazi alias Kamran, in a 12-hour-long encounter with multiple JeM terrorists in Pulwama area. According to the Indian sources Ghazi was a Pakistani national and the brain behind the Pulwama attack.
The use of vehicle bombs in the Kashmir freedom struggle is a new development as Kashmiris have never used these tactics before. However, since both attacks in Sistan-Baluchestan and Pulwama employed the identical modus operandi, the common thread is laid out in the open. It is an open secret that Israel has been training Indian security and intelligence personnel on how to suppress freedom struggle by using oppressive measures like demolition of houses, burning of mosques and planting of own agents into the ranks of freedom fighters. Therefore, it is no coincidence that recent attacks in Pulwama and the Sistan province of Iran took place on eastern and western borders of Pakistan almost concurrently. Interestingly, the mastermind of Pulwama attack has been eliminated. Thus it would never be established that in presence of credible intelligence warning of imminent vehicle borne attack by Indian intelligence agencies, how a 20-year-old boy was able to dodge the security cordon and ram the bus. It would also never come to light how Adil Dar, a known Hizb-ul-Mujahedeen activist and in the custody of Indian forces got released, switched his allegiance to JeM and became a suicide bomber. Similarly, it would also never be established that in the most militarized region of the world, having one of the most intense intelligence networks (both human as well as electronic) how more than 300 kgs of explosives – used by Indian Forces for blowing up rocks for road construction – ended up in the hands of freedom fighter. From the above discussions it is evident that both Sistan-Baluchestan as well as Pulwama are false flag operations in pursuit of combined Indo-Israel strategy of guile and deceit.

Having established beyond doubt that Indo-Israel duo is the mastermind of the false flag operations or synthetic operations in Iran and IOK, the question arises: what are the real motives behind these attacks? Certainly, both want to see Pakistan and Iran isolated and fragmented. At the same time, they want chaos in the Middle East and Afghanistan to continue so that Muslims in the region as an entity may not emerge as a power in the future. Since Pakistan is trying to bridge the gap between Iran and Saudi Arabia diplomatically and trying to diffuse tensions in the Middle East and Afghanistan, therefore, these attacks were executed at a time when Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia was about to visit Pakistan to achieve multiple strategic aims. The first and foremost aim was to paint Pakistan as the epicentre of terrorism and an unsafe place for Saudi investment. Secondly, it was aimed to make Iran view Pakistan acting as a Saudi proxy that is fueling terrorism in Iran. Thirdly, to send a message to the world community that ongoing freedom struggle in Kashmir is actually nothing but terrorism fueled and abetted by Pakistan. Lastly, the attacks were aimed to stoke nationalist and Hindutva sentiments in India so that Modi-led BJP could win the forthcoming elections.

Why Pakistan is the Target of the Combined Onslaught?

India and its two strategic allies have long been advocating the establishment of greater Balochistan, comprising Irani Sistan and Pakistani province of Balochistan. For this purpose, the UK has given asylum to Balochi rebels who are spearheading insurgency in Balochistan. The aim of creating a greater Balochistan is to have direct access to Central Asia, bypassing Iran and Pakistan. China is a great land power and the U.S. and its allies cannot defeat China on land. The U.S. Navy has unchallenged supremacy at sea and Washington dominates and controls all Sea Lines of Communication around the globe while China is heavily dependent upon the sea to undertake trade and the import of POL via sea from the Gulf. In case of a showdown, the U.S. Navy has the ability to impose a naval blockade against China. The Pakistani port of Gwadar under China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project is going to connect the Xinjiang Province of Western China with the Indian Ocean through a road/rail network. If this happens, it will not only usher in an era of economic prosperity for Pakistan, but would also address the major vulnerability of China in transporting fuel from the Arabian Gulf. This is the point where the U.S.-Israeli-Indian interests converge, thus, for these geostrategic reasons, not only is the insurgency fueled by these powers in Balochistan, of which apprehended Indian spy is a living example, but Pakistan has also been blamed for all terrorist activities in the region which are actually planned and sponsored by this trio. The extension of this sinister design is to keep relations between Iran and Pakistan estranged and Muslim world divided on sectarian lines. In addition, today’s Pakistan is becoming the pivot of Muslim world and with the help of friendly countries is now on the road to progress. If CPEC, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Malaysian sponsored projects materialize as envisaged, it would pave way for Pakistan to emerge as powerful country in the region. Since a powerful and prosperous Pakistan runs contrary to the grand strategic objectives of these countries in the region, therefore, false flag operations are conducted to embroil and implicate Pakistan to derail it from the road to progress.

The writer is a retired Vice Admiral of Pakistan Navy. He is currently serving as Ambassador of Pakistan to Maldives.
E-mail: waseemakram55@hotmail.com

1 Davidsson, Elias. (2017). The Betrayal of India, Revisiting the 26/11 Evidence. New Delhi: Pharos Media and Publishing Pvt Limited. P. 19.
2 Shahak, Israel. (1982). The Zionist Plan for the Middle East. Belmont: Association of Arab-American University Graduates. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/The Zionist Plan for the Middle East.pdf
3 Nimmo, Kurt. (2002, December 14). Bush and the Neo-Con Pharisees. Counter Punch. Retrieved from Bush and the Neo-Con Pharisees.
4 IANS. (2015, December 11). India-US defence ties to become anchor of global security. Business Standard. Retrieved from India-US defence ties to become anchor of global security: US
5 Mukherjee, Anit. (2014). India as a Net Security Provider: Concept and Impediments. RSIS Policy Briefs, August 6.
6 Paraszczuk, Joanna. (2013, December 10). Iran Spotlight: Sunni Insurgents Jaish al-Adl Warn Tehran to End “Crimes Against Oppressed Peoples of Iran, Syria”. EA Worldview. Retrieved from Iran Spotlight: Sunni Insurgents Jaish ul-Adl Warn Tehran To End “Crimes Against Oppressed Peoples Of Iran, Syria” – EA WorldView
7 Siddique, Abubakar. (2014, March 20). Iran’s Sunni Baloch Extremists Operating from Bases in Pakistan. Jamestown Foundation. Iran’s Sunni Baloch Extremists Operating from Bases in Pakistan - Jamestown
8 Pakistan condemns terrorist attack against Iranian border guards
9 BBC News. Iran Jundullah leader claims US military support, BBC News - Iran Jundullah leader claims US military support.
10 Perry, Mark. (2012, January 13). False Flag. Foreign Policy. Retrieved from http:// foreign policy.com/articles/2012/01/13/false-flag.
11 Katzman. K. (2014, November). Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses. Congressional Research Services.
12 Perry, Mark. (2012, January 13). False Flag. Foreign Policy. Retrieved from http:// foreign policy.com/articles/2012/01/13/false-flag.
13 BBC News. Iran Jundullah leader claims US military support, BBC News - Iran Jundullah leader claims US military support.
14 Katzman. K. (2014, November). Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses. Congressional Research Services.
15 Symonds, Peter. (2007, May 25). Bush authorises covert CIA operations to destabilise Iran. World Socialist Web Site. World Socialist Web Site - Marxist analysis, international working class struggles & the fight for socialism /en/articles/2007/05/iran-m25.html
16 Roy, Arundhati. (2008, December 15). The Monster in the Mirror. Counter Currents. The Monster In The Mirror By Arundhati Roy
17 Naqwi, Jawed. (2012, Feb 15). Hindu extremists bombed Samjhauta Express. Dawn. Hindu extremists bombed Samjhauta Express
18 Mazzetti, Mark. (2013, April 9). How a Single Spy Helped Turn Pakistan Against the United States. The New York Times Magazine. How Raymond Davis Helped Turn Pakistan Against the United States
19 Swami, Praveen. (2016, Feb 12). Inside the strange life of David Coleman Headley. The Indian Express. http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/2008-mumbai-attack-inside-the-strange-life-of-david-headley/
20 The Betrayal of India book tells truth of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. Punekar News. http://www.punekarnews.in/the-betrayal-of-india-book-tells-truth-of-the-2611-mumbai-terror-attacks/
21 Watzal, Dr. Ludwig. (2017, Aug 15). The Betrayal of India. The 26/11 2008 Mumbai Attacks: Book review of "The Betrayal of India: Revisiting the 26/11 Evidence" by Elias Davidsson. Global Research.
22 TNN. (2013, July 14). Govt behind Parliament attack, 26/11: Ishrat probe officer. Times of India. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/21062116.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst


 

Top