Who was Behind Mumbai Attacks?

On November 26, 2008, several persons were killed in the simultaneous terror attacks in Mumbai. Without any investigation, Indian high officials and media had started blaming Pakistan. Mumbai attacks was just another false flag operation of Indian establishment to gain sympathies of world community and defame Pakistan in the comity of nations. The whole drama was staged to put blame Pakistan and its intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

Mumbai Attacks

It is notable that renowned thinkers, Hobbes, Machiavelli and Morgenthau opine that sometimes, rulers act upon immoral activities like deceit, fraud and falsehood to fulfill their countries’ selfish aims. But such a sinister politics was replaced by new trends such as fair-dealings, reconciliation and economic development. Regrettably, India is still following past politics in modern era.

Mumbai terror attacks

Mumbai Attacks

Under the cover of the Mumbai catastrophe, India began a deliberate propaganda campaign against Pakistan and tried to isolate the latter in the comity of nations by showing that Islamabad was sponsoring terrorism in India.

In this regard, Indian former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and its other high officials, while repeating old rhetoric of baseless allegations, stated that Pakistan has “epicenter of terrorism” and Islamabad should “end infrastructure of terrorism.” L.K. Advani, leader of the BJP, while accusing Pakistan as the hotbed of terror in the region, said that Pakistan’s secret agency ISI should be declared a terror outfit.

In this respect, Indian top officials and TV channels had remarked that Indian Mujahideen and the banned Lashkar-e-Tayba (LeT) based in Pakistan and ISI were behind the Mumbai terror attacks.

Mumbai attack

Mumbai terror attacks

With the assistance of Indian secret agency RAW, Indian investigators fabricated a false story that 10 terrorists who executed Mumbai carnage came in a boat from Karachi and were in contact with the members of the banned Lashker-e-Taiba through phone calls.

But a number of questions arise in relation to the so-called links, deliberately entangling Pakistan. First, how it is possible that the militants phoned 100 times inside Pakistan, but they did not call their families? Second, the lonely gunman Ajmal Kasab who was arrested, knew his address and why he did not indicate the names and home addresses of other 9 fugitives with whom he lived for a long time? Third, after the hard journey of more than 50 hours, traveling on the slow moving water, evading 20 coastal guards of Indian Navy, how they reached Mumbai? Fourth, where did they change their muddy shoes and wet dresses? Fifth, how it became possible that they immediately hired a taxi and reached their targets, without taking some rest? Sixth, why the terrorists killed only four people at the Nariman house, sparing the other six guys present there?

Availing the pretext of the Mumbai catastrophe, New Delhi had suspended the process of ‘composite dialogue’ in wake of its highly provocative actions like mobilization of troops. Islamabad had also taken defensive steps to meet any Indian prospective aggression or surgical strikes. But, India failed in implementing its aggressive plans, because Pakistan also possesses atomic weapons.

However, in the post-Mumbai terror attacks, Indian rulers had started blackmailing Islamabad that they would not resume the talks unless Islamabad takes actions against the culprits of Mumbai mayhem.

Who was Behind Mumbai Attacks?

New Delhi urged Islamabad to arrest the perpetrators of the Mumbai terror attacks. Rejecting Pakistan’s stand that its government or any official agency was not involved in the Mumbai attacks, New Delhi wanted to make Islamabad accept all other Indian demands since our rulers admitted that Ajmal Kasab was Pakistani national.

In fact, Islamabad’s admission which had emboldened New Delhi was forced by the US. And, Ajmal Kasab was tortured by the Indian intelligence agencies so as to endorse Indian false story against Islamabad, while giving statement in an Indian court. Suppose, even if he was Pakistani, it did not matter because he was a non-state actor, as non-state actors like smugglers and the militants are found in many countries.

It is of particular attention that on July 19, 2013, the Indian former home ministry and ex-investigating officer Satish Verma disclosed that terror attacks in Mumbai in November 26, 2008 and assault on Indian Parliament in January 12, 2001 were carried out by the Indian government to strengthen anti-terrorism laws.

It has clearly proved that Indian secret agencies; particularly RAW arranged coordinated terror attacks in Mumbai and orchestrated that drama only to defame Pakistan in the world, but also to fulfill a number of other sinister aims.

As a matter of fact, a lack of seriousness on India’s part to settle all disputes, especially Kashmir issue has compelled New Delhi to follow a self-contradictory and confused strategy towards Islamabad.

Hence, New Delhi earnestly found various pretexts to cancel peace talks, while shifting the blame to Islamabad. For example, besides Mumbai attacks, in 2002, under the pretension of terrorist attack on the Indian parliament, India postponed the dialogue process.

In this connection, on July 27, 2015, three gunmen dressed in army uniforms killed at least seven people, including three civilians and four policemen in the Indian district of Gurdaspur, Punjab.

Without any investigation, Indian high officials and media started accusing Pakistan, its banned militant outfits and intelligence agencies for the Gurdaspur incident. Indian Police remarked that the attackers are from Indian-held Kashmir, and some said that they were Sikh separatists, while Indian Punjab police chief claimed that the three gunmen were Muslim, but as yet unidentified. Contradicting speculations, India’s Home Minister Rajnath Singh told parliament that the gunmen came from Pakistan.

Khalistan Movement Chief Manmohan Singh stated that the Gurdaspur incident is “a conspiracy of Indian secret agency RAW to defame Pakistan.”

Besides, prior to the US President Obama’s second visit to New Delhi, Indian intelligence agencies orchestrated a boat drama to defame Pakistan, allegedly reporting that a Pakistani fishing boat as a Pakistan-based outfit group Lashkar-e-Taiba was intercepted by Indian Coast Guards, off the coast of Porebandar, Gujarat. And Indian Coast Guard crew set the boat on fire and it exploded. But, its reality exposed Indian terrorism, because, some Indian high officials admitted that there was no such boat which came from Pakistan.

Similarly, India orchestrated the drama of militants’ attack at Indian Air Force Base in Pathankot on January 2, 2016. Indian media and top civil and military officials started claiming that the attackers had arrived from Pakistani Punjab’s Bahawalpur district, and had links with Jaish-e-Mohammad and ISI.

But, despite Islamabad’s cooperation with New Delhi like formation of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) consisting of professionals to investigate the Pathankot attack, crackdown against the militant group Jaish-i-Mohammad—lodging of a First Information Report (FIR) in relation to the incident, India failed in providing any proof of Pakistan’s involvement in the Pathankot episode.

Indian authorities did not cooperate with Pakistan’s Joint Investigation Team which visited India to probe into Pathankot attack. The JIT members visited Pathankot Airbase on March 29 where Indian National Investigation Agency officials briefed and showed them the route from where the attackers stormed the airbase. In fact, besides fulfilling other sinister designs against Pakistan, New Delhi staged that drama to postpone secretary-level talks with Pakistan, which were scheduled to be held in Islamabad on January 15, 2016.

Sources said that the lights along the 24-km perimeter wall of the Pathankot airbase found to be faulty on the eve of the attack. The Pakistani investigators were allowed to enter the military airbase from the narrow adjacent routes instead of main entrance and their duration of the visit was just 55 minutes, enough to take a mere walk through the airbase.

The JIT could not collect evidence in this limited time. And the visiting team was only informed about the negligence of Boarder Security Force (BSF) and Indian forces. It was disclosed that at the time of the assault, the BSF was sleeping, even though they had been alerted of a possible attack 48 hours earlier.

India’s orchestrated drama of the Pathankot incident could also be judged from the fact that earlier, Indian Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar had stated in confusion that New Delhi would not allow access to the JIT into the base, though it was allowed on very limited scale to fulfill the formality. It can undermine the seriousness of bilateral commitments to find the truth.

Continuing false flag operations, on Setember18, this year, India also staged the drama of the terror attack in the Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) at a military base in Uri, close to the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan.

Like the previous terrorism-related events, without any investigation, Indian media, civil and military high officials started blaming LeT and ISI, saying that the militants who target the Uri base came from Pakistan’s side of Azad Kashmir. In this regard, a senior Home Ministry official and a spokesman of the Indian army allegedly said, “It is clearly a case of cross-border terror attack…the militants infiltrated across the Line of Control from Pakistan before attacking the base in Uri.”

The situation developed in the aftermath of the Uri base terror assault like creation of Indian war hysteria against Pakistan, mobilization of troops near the LoC, exposure of the myth of Indian surgical strikes inside Azad Kashmir, differences between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Country’s Army Chief Gen. Dalbir Sing about the ‘fake video’ of this episode, criticism Modi government inside India, continuous violations at the LoC, targeting villages of Azad Kashmir etc., and diversion of attention from the new phase of uprising in the Indian held Kashmir where Indian security forces have martyred more than 100 innocent Kashmiris since July 8, 2016, who have been protesting against the martyrdom of the young Kashmir leader Burhan Wani by the Indian security forces in the Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) in wake of continued sieges and prolonged curfew have clearly proved that with the help of Indian intelligence agencies, especially RAW, India has itself arranged the Uri base assault not only to defame Pakistan abroad, but also to achieve a number of sinister designs.

Nevertheless, all these terror attacks were planned by Indian security agencies to distort image of Pakistan and its primary intelligence agency, ISI, linking it with the banned group Lashkar-e-Taiba. In these terms, coordinated terror assaults of November 26, 2008 in Mumbai were part of the same Indian scheme.

Spread the love

Article Author Details

Sajjad Shaukat

I got master degrees in English and Journalism including diploma in English Learning and Teaching from the University of Punjab. I am a freelance writer and wrote a number of articles on various topics of international affairs, published in Pakistan’s English newspapers. Besides, I also wrote a book, “US vs Islamic, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations”, published by Ms. Ferozsons Pvt. Lahore in 2005. In this book, I have evolved a thesis that the non-state actors like Islamic militants are checking the world dominance of the US. However, I have condemned the old theories which support role of force and power in international affairs. Taking the ongoing war on terror as a conflict between the privileged and unprivileged status quo, I have suggested reforming the unequal world order. And I have favoured global peace, based upon idealism--which is possible by reconciling realism with idealism. Moreover, it is essential to combat terrorism by resolving various issues like Palestine, Kashmir etc., and by acting upon an exit strategy from Iraq and Afghanistan. Moreover, my future assessments like failure of military paradigm by the state actors in coping with the non-state actors, increase in US cost of war, rise of more terrorism, plane plot in UK and present international financial crisis have proved true. So, central thesis of the book remains valid today.