Is LeT on US' leash?

[johnee]

linking of the LeT as a possible US puppet is an act of serendipity that I cannot get out of my mind. But I will treat the idea as I treat everything else - i.e look for many alternative explanations to fit existing observations until evidence turns up.

I have seen no "evidence" that says that the US is not linked with the LeT in terms of having infiltrated it, or bribed its way into its core. In fact the Headley trial indicates that the LeT may have been infiltrated by the US. But does that mean that the US is in cahoots with the LeT? What facts/hypotheses do we have regarding this?

One things is clear. India focused groups are having a free hand in Pakistan and either the US is unwilling or unable to do anything. I will not reach any judgment on whether the US is "unwilling" or "unable". But apart from this - for the first time the LeT has spoken with the Pakistan government's tongue and raised the water bogey.

I can think of several possible scenarios here. One is that the US has coerced the Pakis to get their dog the LeT to implement only an anti-India agenda. or that the US has enough evidence of links between LeT and army to blackmail/bribe them.

The other possibility is that alll rebel groups under pressure tend to coalesce. Many years ago (maybe 4-5 years ago) we on BRF started noting that the "Al Qaeda" - which had a purely anti US/West agenda started introducing anti-India sentences in its videos and messages. This indicated a link up between Al Qaeda and anti-India groups. There was no doubt whatsoever that the Al Qaeda was under much pressure at the time.

Now we find that the Al Qaeda is getting less attention but the LeT is in the news and suddenly - the LeT is picking up he Pakistan government agenda. I have no doubt whatsoever that both the LeT and the Pakistan (whore army) government are "under some pressure" even if it is only threats from Gen Deepak Kapoor types. Is this open coalescing of "Paki" interests with LeT an indicator of that pressure which may be forcing them to close ranks? I don't know. The water issue is hardly a Pakistani issue. It is a Pakjabi issue and the LeT gets its support from Pakjab and the whore army of Pakistan also gets its support from Pakjab.

So lets see - I will wait for more info..

The above post is from BR. Its a thought provoking and interesting question: what amount of influence does US weild on LeT? We know that Headley worked as double agent for both US and Pakistan. We know that Headley is closely related to Mumbai 26/11. And Mumbai 26/11 was an LeT operation. We know that Pakistan is nothing more than a rentier state of US. We know the enormous influence the US has on Pakistan politics in general. Connect the dots, and what do we get? Can the chief tool of Pakistan army against India(i.e. LeT) be completely out of US' influence?

 

[ajtr]

I would say usa do exercise considerable amount of influence on L-e-t through pakistan.The way usa do lip service wrt to L-e-t and david headley issue this point becomes more potent. americans and westerners were killed in 26/11 i attack is the reason it received so much attention.otherwise 26/11 news would have got reported in some middle pages of tabloids if only indians were killed.and as the person point out that even after getting banned theses groups can conduct feb 5th rally show usa wink wink attitude/relationship with these groups.USA has recently conducted congressional hearing on L-e-t-----that hearing was just to please india.usa even conducts congressional hearing on pak perfidy but its relation with pak goes deep.

 

[johnee]

If US has influence on LeT, then how much involved is US in 26/11? I remember viewing a tourist alert given to american citizens travelling in India by US, at that time I did not take it seriously, but then later 26/11 happened. Is it possible that US had the prior knowledge about 26/11 or such an event?

 

[johnee]

Could US have gained anything by 26/11? We know that our PM ran to the DC for help to control the Pakistanis...could that be considered an indirect leverage?

 

[ajtr]

If US has influence on LeT, then how much involved is US in 26/11? I remember viewing a tourist alert given to american citizens travelling in India by US, at that time I did not take it seriously, but then later 26/11 happened. Is it possible that US had the prior knowledge about 26/11 or such an event?

cross posting from USA will offer nuke deal to pak thread.This particular para from the news item caught my eyes no draw ur own conclusions.

Kayani and Qureshi did not go empty handed

The US DNA will be visible all over the place if a solution breaks out. Pakistan will not protest as long as their main instrument of negotiation, terrorism, is not curbed by the revelations of the likes of Headley and Rana.

Pakistan must have been reassured that US cooperation with India will stop short of tracing 26/11 to the ISI.

But more importantly, Pakistan has received assurances that no dispensation in Afghanistan will be inimical to Pakistani interests and that Pakistan will have a say in the determination of the future of the region.India would definitely not be part of the new order if the US could help it

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Could US have gained anything by 26/11? We know that our PM ran to the DC for help to control the Pakistanis...could that be considered an indirect leverage?

It could have been a message -look what we can do if we choose too?? This could be considered direct leverage

 

[johnee]

It could have been a message -look what we can do if we choose too?? This could be considered direct leverage

Yup, it could be message but would US go to the extent of such a big operation. May be US just looked the other way when the Pakistanis planned it.
We can arrive at a better guess if we know whether US had any direct gains in relations with India due to 26/11. Did India give in to some US demand immediately after 26/11 in the belief that US would cooperate with us in nailing Pakistanis? Maybe the answer lies in nuclear deal or in Afghanistan...

 

[Daredevil]

If US has influence on LeT, then how much involved is US in 26/11? I remember viewing a tourist alert given to american citizens travelling in India by US, at that time I did not take it seriously, but then later 26/11 happened. Is it possible that US had the prior knowledge about 26/11 or such an event?

I don't think US has any connection with LeT. US has given intelligence to India about an impending attack but our security forces have as usual lapsed. US wouldn't have supported the proscribing of LeT/JuD if it were controlling them. Much of the evidence (satellite phone information) pertaining to 26/11 came out because of US help.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Yup, it could be message but would US go to the extent of such a big operation. May be US just looked the other way when the Pakistanis planned it.
We can arrive at a better guess if we know whether US had any direct gains in relations with India due to 26/11. Did India give in to some US demand immediately after 26/11 in the belief that US would cooperate with us in nailing Pakistanis? Maybe the answer lies in nuclear deal or in Afghanistan...

It seems to be the reverse Johnny with USA giving Pak weapons and aid they are preparing Pak for war and carrying out asymettric war against India.

 

[johnee]

I don't think US has any connection with LeT. US has given intelligence to India about an impending attack but our security forces have as usual lapsed. US wouldn't have supported the proscribing of LeT/JuD if it were controlling them. Much of the evidence (satellite phone information) pertaining to 26/11 came out because of US help.

Yup, I agree. But US role is not completely white, I think its grey area there. Headley was roaming in India for a lot of time after 26/11, US knew he was involved with 26/11, and he was their agent as well. US' role after nabbing Headley also is suspect, not much official info has been coming, only few leaks.

Lastly, DD, consider this: can US realistically be not having any influence over LeT? LeT is the main terror Org(call it an official one) for PA. PA itself depends directly on US. Can US not have any influence over LeT? Seems hard to digest to me...

 

[johnee]

It seems to be the reverse Johnny with USA giving Pak weapons and aid they are preparing Pak for war and carrying out asymettric war against India.

Yup, may be US fears that the next terror attack will result in Indo-pak war, hence this desperate arming of Pak to save it...

 

[Daredevil]

Yup, I agree. But US role is not completely white, I think its grey area there. Headley was roaming in India for a lot of time after 26/11, US knew he was involved with 26/11, and he was their agent as well. US' role after nabbing Headley also is suspect, not much official info has been coming, only few leaks.

Lastly, DD, consider this: can US realistically be not having any influence over LeT? LeT is the main terror Org(call it an official one) for PA. PA itself depends directly on US. Can US not have any influence over LeT? Seems hard to digest to me...

Definitely, US behaved in a shady manner wrt Headley. I think, he played both sides - US & LeT/PA. LeT are PA's main terrorist dogs and it will go to any length to protect them. US, due to their compulsion in Afghanistan and in seeking a safe exit is unable to push PA to that extent that it wants. US is biding its time and will give a mighty blow and will punish Pakistan when it exits Afghanistan.

Remember, US is still unable to handle the Afghan taliban puppeteered by Pakistan, then how do you expect they will push for LeT who doesn't concern them directly.

 

[johnee]

Definitely, US behaved in a shady manner wrt Headley. I think, he played both sides - US & LeT/PA. LeT are PA's main terrorist dogs and it will go to any length to protect them. US, due to their compulsion in Afghanistan and in seeking a safe exit is unable to push PA to that extent that it wants. US is biding its time and will give a mighty blow and will punish Pakistan when it exits Afghanistan.

Remember, US is still unable to handle the Afghan taliban puppeteered by Pakistan, then how do you expect they will push for LeT who doesn't concern them directly.

Somehow, its not totally convincing to be these days. I bought this theory before, but it doesnt seem to stick. If thats the case, why does Pak keep running to US for mediation if its not confident that US would side with it?

Also, US keeps funding and arming pakistan beyond any reason(even the afghanistan seems like an excuse). If all these funds and weapons had gone to afghan army, then they would have defeated these talibs long back...

I think US role is more shadier than we generally have come to accept...

 

[bengalraider]

Headley was an intel man that's one point we can be sure of now whether he was a rogue agent of his own choosing or an agent that had specifically been ordered to go rogue remains open to interpretation, now there is one point specifically to consider
1)how far would an american agent be willing to go on the inside in AQ's network that could help acquire intel on any future attacks on american interests to his employers?
I believe there is no clear barrier for an agent asked to get info at all costs, any agent that infiltrates an organisation may come across snippets of information that may not directly concern him or his employer but at the same time may be vital for a third party. on such a juncture an agent may choose to put his mission at risk by passing on info or continue the mission at the risk of harm to the third party.

 

[johnee]

^^BR, good analysis, but Headley is just one data point. Also take into consideration the general US' behaviour even after officially taking Headley into custody. Also, continous and consistent funding and arming of Pakistan regardless of the indian considerations.

 

[Daredevil]

Somehow, its not totally convincing to be these days. I bought this theory before, but it doesnt seem to stick. If thats the case, why does Pak keep running to US for mediation if its not confident that US would side with it?

Also, US keeps funding and arming pakistan beyond any reason(even the afghanistan seems like an excuse). If all these funds and weapons had gone to afghan army, then they would have defeated these talibs long back...

I think US role is more shadier than we generally have come to accept...

As I said, for now whatever US doing for Pakistan is to safely exit from Afghanistan. Pakistan sensing this anxiety in US went for scruff of the neck and trying to push US to pressure India to give Kashmir, water etc. Pakistan in essence is seeking parity with India and only US can enable it and Pakistan using the present conundrum to its advantage. India getting sidelined in Afghanistan is a result of such situation.

 

[johnee]

As I said, for now whatever US doing for Pakistan is to safely exit from Afghanistan. Pakistan sensing this anxiety in US went for scruff of the neck and trying to push US to pressure India to give Kashmir, water etc. Pakistan in essence is seeking parity with India and only US can enable it and Pakistan using the present conundrum to its advantage. India getting sidelined in Afghanistan is a result of such situation.

Ok, so lets assume that US has no other choice but to give in to pakistani demands. If US exits afghanistan, what would US' role be then if its neutral and what would its role be if its not...?

 

[ahmedsid]

US is keeping LeT Alive, because its keeping Pakistan alive, giving billions in Aid and arms, even though it can make Pakistan stop the LeT. Why is the US not doing anything credible to stop the LeT? Well maybe to keep India on a leash? Terror always backfires and bites the hand that feeds it!

 

[Daredevil]

Ok, so lets assume that US has no other choice but to give in to pakistani demands. If US exits afghanistan, what would US' role be then if its neutral and what would its role be if its not...?

The basic strategy of US for south asia seems to be this

Two of the three regional balances of power are collapsed or in jeopardy. The 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq and the failure to quickly put a strong, anti-Iranian government in place in Baghdad, has led to the collapse of the central balance of power — with little hope of resurrection. The eastern balance of power between Pakistan and India is also in danger of toppling. The Afghan war has caused profound stresses in Pakistan, and there are scenarios in which we can imagine Pakistan’s power dramatically weakening or even cracking. It is unclear how this will evolve, but what is clear is that it is not in the interest of the United States because it would destroy the native balance of power with India. The United States does not want to see India as the unchallenged power in the subcontinent any more than it wants to see Pakistan in that position. The United States needs a strong Pakistan to balance India, and its problem now is how to manage the Afghan war — a side issue strategically — without undermining the strategic interest of the United States, an Indo-Pakistani balance of power.

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100322_netanyahuobama_meeting_context

This sums is up the behavior of US so far and may be also in future unless India turns the tables miraculously.

 

[Daredevil]

US is keeping LeT Alive, because its keeping Pakistan alive, giving billions in Aid and arms, even though it can make Pakistan stop the LeT. Why is the US not doing anything credible to stop the LeT? Well maybe to keep India on a leash? Terror always backfires and bites the hand that feeds it!

Ahmed was US able to make Pakistan stop Afghan Taliban - NO. So, how would you think it will be able to stop LeT.