- It is very much within and it is not Nawaz Sharif alone
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gate is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor not appears traitor, he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and be wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to be feared.”
Marcus Tullius Cicero
The above quote from Marcus Tullius Cicero, Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer, political theorist, Rome’s greatest orator, prose stylist and Roman constitutionalist, rings true of Mian Nawaz Sharif.
Apparently, in sheer desperation, with the noose of incarceration closing in on himself and his progeny, the former three-time prime minister has committed the cardinal sin of treachery against his own country.
The Mumbai Attacks in 2008 caused irreparable damage to Pak-India relations besides the loss of precious lives. The Composite Dialogue process was scuttled; Pakistan was blamed squarely and has continuously been flogged by India for not having taken adequate legal action against the alleged perpetrators of the heinous crime.
The journalist Cyril Almeida, flown into Multan on a special aircraft arranged by the government of Pakistan to interview Nawaz Sharif and accorded VIP protocol, speaks of state’s complicity
Pakistan’s narrative, on the contrary, has been quite different. It did arrest some of the suspects who were tried but in light of the evidence provided; Pakistan’s judiciary did not find merit in apportioning blame and finding the suspects culpable of planning and executing the mass murder.
India not only provided flimsy evidence, but did not allow consular access or an investigative team from Pakistan to meet or cross question the sole surviving attacker Ajmal Kasab. He was hanged hurriedly, while his confession too was reportedly obtained under duress.
Both Indian and international analysts have concluded that the Mumbai Attacks were a false flag operation and served Indian interests rather than Pakistan’s. In 2013, Times of India disclosed a real story about this incident, which was later removed from internet. As per this report, a former Under Secretary of the Indian Home Ministry, R V S Mani, revealed that, “the Indian government, and not Pakistan, was behind the parliament (13/12, 2001) and Mumbai (26/11 2008) attacks in India.” The officer of home ministry was categorical in his revelation that, this was orchestrated by India to formulate and strengthened the counter-terrorism laws in India and to defame Pakistan. According to the Times of India Shri Mani submitted a signed affidavit in the court. These documentary evidences were given to a member of CBI-SIT probe team, Satish Verma. The facts revealed that these attacks were set up “with the objective of strengthening the counter-terror legislation.” But, apart from this, this Indian narrative provided India an opportunity to prepare a case against Pakistan, based on which it blocked negotiations with Pakistan on core issues including Kashmir.
The first victims of the Mumbai Attacks were the Head of Maharashtra’s Anti-Terrorist Squad Hemant Karkare and his team. Inspector General Hemant Karkare, the chief investigating officer of the Malegaon Mosque blasts and Samjhauta Express carnage in which 59 Pakistanis were burnt alive, had arrested a serving officer of Indian army, Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit and members of his extremist anti-Muslim group, Abhinav Bharat. Karkare was under tremendous pressure from the Sangh Parivar, the Saffron extremists of India, to drop the charges against the Indian army officer but he declined. When the Mumbai attack took place, Karkare and his team were duped into rushing to the attack scene and were killed by unknown assailants. For his bravery, Hemant Karkare was awarded the gallantry award of Ashoka Chakra posthumously but his widow refused to accept the award on his behalf.
Former Inspector General of Police Maharashtra, SM Mushrif, in his bold an incisive book ‘Who Killed Karkare?’ has revealed that the Mumbai attack was an inside job and stage managed to eliminate Hemant Karkare and a number of other odious aims. Demanding re-investigation into the 26/11 incident, the former senior Indian police officer, with a distinguished career, states that the claims made in the book are so shocking that it made him feel unsecure about his own country.
Recently, German scholar and analyst Elias Davidsson’s book The Betrayal of India: Revisiting the 26/11 Evidence has raised a storm in India. The erudite scholar has painstakingly laid bare the Indian plot of orchestrating the Mumbai attack. Davidson has concluded that Indian state’s investigation of the attacks was a big eye wash to deceive the state narrative and cheat Indian and international audiences, just to blame Pakistan. The author blames Indian establishment and their US partners and writes, “It is highly plausible, that major institutional actors in India, the United States and possibly Israel, were complicit in conceiving, planning, directing and executing the attacks of 26/11; evidence of a deceptive investigation is even stronger”.
Mumbai attacks in November 2008 were projected as India’s 9/11, with an objective to tell US and international community that India was a victim of Pakistani state terrorism and the world needed to ostracise Pakistan. The Indian media went into a mad frenzy to build anti Pakistan sentiments and rage amongst Indian, and, to some extent, Pakistani audience. Some Pakistani channels and media houses deliberately supported Indian version and strengthened the Indian case.
Elias Davidson has rebutted the Indian narrative and proved with authenticity that Indian version was totally concocted, based on deceit and outright lies, and that it was promulgated through a well thought out disinformation campaign ensconced in hyperbole. The book is based on perceptive and critical analysis of the official narrative of 26/11 and the author has endeavoured to go through court documents and testimonies of dozens of important witnesses and their linkages with media outbursts parroted by Indian media
It brings us back to the question as to Mian Nawaz Sharif’s motive behind blaming the state of Pakistan for dispatching the terrorists and not concluding the lawsuit against the accused. With the FATF meeting due in June, in which Pakistan is likely to be placed in the black list and face serious economic sanctions, India’s narrative against Pakistan being accepted and Donald Trump’s warnings to Pakistan ringing true, Nawaz Sharif may have cooked Pakistan’s goose. He may be inviting a crackdown on Pakistan, its nuclear assets and the country being isolated and declared a failed state.
One pertinent question that arises is why Nawaz Sharif did not ensure that the trial against the alleged protagonists of Mumbai attacks is concluded while he was the prime minister?
The journalist Cyril Almeida, flown into Multan on a special aircraft arranged by the government of Pakistan to interview Nawaz Sharif and accorded VIP protocol, speaks of state’s complicity. The enemy is very much within and it is not Nawaz Sharif alone. He may have caused irreparable damage and the state has to fight back, but it is the international protagonists, whose agenda the enemy within is advocating.
