Whodunnit in Mumbai
The U.S. is claiming, alongside Pakistan, that it did its best to prevent an escalation between India and Pakistan over the recent bombings in Mumbai.
Indian and Pakistani intelligence agencies separately shared their findings with the CIA, which relayed the details while also vetting the intelligence and filling in blanks with gleanings from its networks, the sources said.
The Pakistani Government also says that it is cracking down on the organizers of the attack on India. Yet at the same time the Pakistani Government is condemning the deadly U.S. drone attacks on Pakistani soil:
Qureshi told journalists before flying to the federal capital that U.S. drone attacks were affecting Pakistan’s sovereignty, and clarified that the drones were not being flown from bases inside Pakistan. He said Pakistan had always condemned the drone attacks over which no understanding or agreement existed.
The Pakistani foreign minister also expresses his country’s intention to act against U.S. activity on its territory:
Yet there are no reports of retaliation of any kind, leading one to conclude that Pakistan is allowing the U.S. to do what it pleases at its border with Afghanistan. This is just more mushroom treatment, methinks.
It looks safe to conclude that relations between Pakistan and the U.S (and Australia, for that matter) have been and continue to be stable. It has been said here and there that the U.S. may have in some way had a hand in the Mumbai attacks, even if it might mean having had an eye on the groups involved, perhaps an informer or two. It remains an open question and it still appears that a third, well resourced party (not India or Pakistan) had a role to play:
The scale and sophistication of the attacks in Mumbai, India, have taken many intelligence analysts by surprise. The only claim of responsibility so far is from a previously unknown group calling itself the Deccan Mujahideen. But analysts believe it took a well-established and organized group with plenty of resources and training to mount this type of attack.
Who, then, is well-established, organized with plenty of resources and training who might benefit from this type of attack?
Well, it could have been someone wanting to sell weapons (with associated allegiances) to India (or its only realistic rival, China). A list of the countries with recent weapons contracts with India is easily determined and worth a bit of a look. Europe, the U.S., Israel, are among the list, and an article in Forbes raised a particularly interesting point: Russian Arms Sales to India reached new heights in 2008.
In other words, it could have been anyone, and we, the public, are unlikely to ever find out, except by accident. However, lack of answers can still help to work out what is going on. In the grand scheme of things, there are escalating tensions between major arms trading nations. With the economic crisis, the market for weapons can only expand (particularly India), yet the pressure to generate weapons sales is ever greater as other industries are wound down.