By Dr. Farhan Zahid The global campaign against terrorism may have started after the tragic events on 9/11, but it was certainly not the first time the world community had to deal with this issue. Terrorism has for long affected many societies including several western democracies. Starting in the mid-1970s, Italy, a highly industrialized, modern and developed European country, struggled for over a decade to curtail terrorism. Statistics show that between 1968-1985 the country experienced 15,000 terrorist incidents peaking in 1978 with 2,498 attacks. These figures could be compared with most affected countries of today like Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan. The Italians initially found it difficult to deal with a variety of terrorist organizations of several ideologies at odds with one another, but eventually managed to outsmart them. These groups included ultra-right wing terrorist groups such as Armed Revolutionary Nuclei (ARN) as well as foreign groups operating from Italian soil such as the Palestinian Abu Nidal Organization (ANO) and the Japanese Red Army (JRA). The most dangerous of these groups were the neo-fascist ARN and the Marxist-Leninist Red Brigades, or Brigate Rosse (BR). ARN conducted the biggest terrorist attack in Europe at the time by bombing the waiting area of Bologna Railway Station in Italy in 1980, killing 84 and wounding more than 180. BR was formed by students at the University of Trento in 1970 who were inspired by Marxist-Leninist ideology. The ultimate goal of their activities was to turn Italy into a communist state. To achieve their objectives, the BR launched a terror campaign across Italy with bomb attacks, assassinations, kidnappings, arson and robberies during most of 1970s and early 1980s. The most notorious and highly publicized act was the kidnapping and murder of former Prime Minister and leader of the Christian Democratic Party (CDP), Aldo Moro, in 1978. Italians had no previous experience of fighting home-grown insurgencies....

Novelist and activist Arundhati Roy has called the Indian caste system, “the great project of unseeing.” In an effort to be seen and heard, a powerful group of Indian women are traveling through the United States drawing attention to the plight of Dalit (formerly called “untouchable”) communities in India. For those unfamiliar: The Indian caste system is a social structure that divides different groups into ranked categories. A person’s caste can determine their social status, their livelihood, who they can marry and where they can live. People in “higher” castes have more access to social, political, and economic power than those in “lower” castes.  The system is understood to have ancient roots — Sanskrit texts from the second millennium BC refer to a practice of dividing individuals into social groups called “varnas.” These categories, associated with early Hinduism, are the first record of India’s caste system. Over time, the caste structure has become an elaborate system known as “Chatuvarnya,” bolstered by the British colonial rulers. They put categories in place that exist to this date. Now there are more  more than 3,000 castes in India, and an even greater number of sub-castes. Even though discrimination based on caste is illegal in India, it still occurs, and against some communities with complete impunity. The organization of the traditional caste structure is as follows: Brahmins are considered the highest of all the castes, and traditionally priests or teachers. They make up a tiny percent of the population, but dominate the key positions in science, business and government. Kshatriyas were traditionally the military class. They are now predominantly a land-owning caste with less power and influence than they have had in the past. Vaishyas were traders,  traditionally agricultural workers, artisans and merchants. They make up 20 percent of India’s population and are now associated with middle class advancement. The Shudras are the lowest of the four...

The Kashmir issue is typically cast as a "territorial dispute" between two belligerent and well-armed powers in South Asia. But there is much more to the story than that. In Demystifying Kashmir, Navnita Chadha Behera breaks away from conventional assumptions and challenges long-held stereotypes to redefine the dangerous conflict over control of that tumultuous region. Her nuanced portrait brings much-needed fresh and important perspective to the Kashmir question and the conflict between India and Pakistan. The Jammu and Kashmir state is home to an extraordinary medley of races, tribal groups, languages, and religions, making it one of the subcontinent's most diverse regions. Behera argues that recognizing the rich, complex, and multi-faceted character of Kashmir is critically important not only for understanding the structural causes of the conflict but also for providing opportunities to establish a just, viable, and lasting solution. Demystifying Kashmir provides a deeper understanding of the region, its people and politics, and the dangerous controversy swirling around them. This remarkable book traces the history of Kashmir from pre-partition India to the situation today. It provides a comprehensive analysis of the philosophical underpinnings of the conflict and the local, bilateral, and international dynamics of the key players involved, including New Delhi, Islamabad, political groups and militant outfits on both sides of the Line of Control, and international powers. The book explores the political and military components of India's and Pakistan's Kashmir strategy, the self-determination debate, and the insurgent movement that began in 1989. The conclusion focuses on what Behera terms the four Ps: the parameters, players, policies, and prognosis of the ongoing peace process in Kashmir. Based on extensive field research and primary sources, Demystifying Kashmir breaks new ground by framing the conflict as a political battle of statemaking between India and...

AT SIX O’CLOCK IN THE MORNING of February 26, 2010, Major Mitali Madhumita was awakened by the ringing of her mobile phone. Mitali, a 35-year-old Indian army officer from Orissa, had been in Kabul less than a year. Fluent in Dari, the most widely spoken language in Afghanistan, she was there to teach English to the first women officer cadets to be recruited to the Afghan National Army. It was a sensitive posting, not so much because of gender issues as political ones: India’s regional rival, Pakistan, was extremely touchy about India providing military assistance to the government in Afghanistan and had made it very clear that it regarded the presence of any Indian troops or military trainers there as an unacceptable provocation. For this reason everyone on the small Indian army English Language Training Team, including Mitali, and all the Indian army doctors and nurses staffing the new Indira Gandhi Kabul Children’s Hospital, had been sent to Afghanistan unarmed, and in civilian dress. They were being put up not in an army barracks, or at the Indian Embassy, but in a series of small, discreet guest houses dotted around the city’s diplomatic quarter. I was the only one of my team who came back alive. The phone call was from a girlfriend of Mitali’s who worked for Air India at Kabul airport. Breathless, she said she had just heard that two of the Indian guest houses, the Park and the Hamid, were under attack by militants. As the only woman on her team, Mitali had been staying in separate lodgings about two miles away from the rest of her colleagues, who were all in the Hamid. Within seconds, Mitali was pulling on her clothes, along with the hijab she was required to wear, and running, alone and unarmed, through the empty morning streets of Kabul toward the Hamid. “I just thought they might need my help,” she told me recently in New Delhi. As she dashed past the Indian Embassy, Mitali was recognized by one of the guards from diplomatic security who shouted to her to...

Renowned South Asian writer Arundhati Roy returned on Thursday her National Award for Best Screenplay, which she won in 1989. Returning her award, the Booker Prize winner said that she was “so proud” to join the writers, filmmakers and academics, who have returned their awards to protest against attacks on minorities, murder of rationalists, threats to free speech, enforcement of beef bans, and the vicious remarks by leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. “I am very pleased to have found (from somewhere way back in my past) a National Award that I can return, because it allows me to be a part of a political movement initiated by writers, filmmakers and academics in this country who have risen up against a kind of ideological viciousness and an assault on our collective IQ that will tear us apart and bury us very deep if we do not stand up to it now,” Roy said, in an article in theIndian Express. Explaining her decision, she said, “First of all, ‘intolerance’ is the wrong word to use for the lynching, shooting, burning and mass murder of fellow human beings. Second, we had plenty of advance notice of what lay in store for us — so I cannot claim to be shocked by what has happened after this government was enthusiastically voted into office with an overwhelming majority.” “It is politics by other means. I am so proud to be part of it. And so ashamed of what is going on in this country today,” she added. “Life is hell for the living too. Whole populations — millions of Dalits, Adivasis, Muslims and Christians — are being forced to live in terror, unsure of when and from where the assault will come,” she added. Further, she said, “Today, we live in a country in which, when the thugs and apparatchiks of the New Order talk of “illegal slaughter”, they mean the imaginary cow that was killed — not the real man who was murdered. When they talk of taking “evidence for forensic examination” from the scene of the crime, they mean the food in...

Renowned South Asian writer Arundhati Roy returned on Thursday her National Award for Best Screenplay, which she won in 1989. Returning her award, the Booker Prize winner said that she was “so proud” to join the writers, filmmakers and academics, who have returned their awards to protest against attacks on minorities, murder of rationalists, threats to free speech, enforcement of beef bans, and the vicious remarks by leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. “I am very pleased to have found (from somewhere way back in my past) a National Award that I can return, because it allows me to be a part of a political movement initiated by writers, filmmakers and academics in this country who have risen up against a kind of ideological viciousness and an assault on our collective IQ that will tear us apart and bury us very deep if we do not stand up to it now,” Roy said, in an article in theIndian Express. Explaining her decision, she said, “First of all, ‘intolerance’ is the wrong word to use for the lynching, shooting, burning and mass murder of fellow human beings. Second, we had plenty of advance notice of what lay in store for us — so I cannot claim to be shocked by what has happened after this government was enthusiastically voted into office with an overwhelming majority.” “It is politics by other means. I am so proud to be part of it. And so ashamed of what is going on in this country today,” she added. “Life is hell for the living too. Whole populations — millions of Dalits, Adivasis, Muslims and Christians — are being forced to live in terror, unsure of when and from where the assault will come,” she added. Further, she said, “Today, we live in a country in which, when the thugs and apparatchiks of the New Order talk of “illegal slaughter”, they mean the imaginary cow that was killed — not the real man who was murdered. When they talk of taking “evidence for forensic examination” from the scene of the crime, they mean the food in...

  India’s goals are to deny Pakistan “strategic depth” in Afghanistan and the ability to block India from trade and other connections to Central Asia and beyond, and to prevent militants in Afghanistan from attacking Indian targets. This was revealed in a US Congressional report, published in October (https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL30588.pdf The report by the Congressional Research Service further stated that they saw the Afghan Taliban’s hosting of al Qaeda during 1996-2001 as a major threat because of its association with a militant organistation in Pakistan seeking to thwart India’s control in Indian-held Kashmir. As for relations between Afghanistan and India, the report said the former had “sought close ties to India—in large part to access India’s large and rapidly growing economy—but without alarming Pakistan.” The ‘Strategic Partnership’ agreement which was signed between the two countries on October 5, 2011 in New Delhi “affirmed Pakistani fears by giving India, for the first time, a formal role in Afghan security,” the report adds. Under the agreement, the two sides had agreed for India to train some 600 ANDSF personnel in India. According to the report, former Afghan president Hamid Karzai had visited India after the Afghanistan-Pakistan border clashes in early May 2013 to seek sales of Indian artillery, aircraft, and other systems that would help it better defend its border with Pakistan. He had visited again in mid-December 2013 to again request for the sales of weapons. However, India reportedly declined “in order not to become more directly involved in the conflict in Afghanistan or alarm Pakistan”. Further, current Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has withdrawn the request “to avoid complicating his outreach to Pakistan”. Moreover, the report stated that India’s relationship with the Afghan government and with individual factions reflects India’s concerns about “potential preponderant Pakistani influence” in post-2014 Afghanistan. In the...

  India’s goals are to deny Pakistan “strategic depth” in Afghanistan and the ability to block India from trade and other connections to Central Asia and beyond, and to prevent militants in Afghanistan from attacking Indian targets. This was revealed in a US Congressional report, published in October (https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL30588.pdf The report by the Congressional Research Service further stated that they saw the Afghan Taliban’s hosting of al Qaeda during 1996-2001 as a major threat because of its association with a militant organistation in Pakistan seeking to thwart India’s control in Indian-held Kashmir. As for relations between Afghanistan and India, the report said the former had “sought close ties to India—in large part to access India’s large and rapidly growing economy—but without alarming Pakistan.” The ‘Strategic Partnership’ agreement which was signed between the two countries on October 5, 2011 in New Delhi “affirmed Pakistani fears by giving India, for the first time, a formal role in Afghan security,” the report adds. Under the agreement, the two sides had agreed for India to train some 600 ANDSF personnel in India. According to the report, former Afghan president Hamid Karzai had visited India after the Afghanistan-Pakistan border clashes in early May 2013 to seek sales of Indian artillery, aircraft, and other systems that would help it better defend its border with Pakistan. He had visited again in mid-December 2013 to again request for the sales of weapons. However, India reportedly declined “in order not to become more directly involved in the conflict in Afghanistan or alarm Pakistan”. Further, current Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has withdrawn the request “to avoid complicating his outreach to Pakistan”. Moreover, the report stated that India’s relationship with the Afghan government and with individual factions reflects India’s concerns about “potential preponderant Pakistani influence” in post-2014 Afghanistan. In the...