In what’s being called the worst attack on a sports team since Palestinian militants killed 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olymic games, gunmen with rifles, grenades and rocket launchers ambushed the Sri Lankan cricket team today in Lahore. Seven players, an umpire and a coach were wounded. Six Pakistani policemen and a driver for the Pakistan Cricket Board were killed.
<
blockquote>
The attackers abandoned machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and plastic explosives…They carried backpacks stuffed with dried fruit, mineral water and walkie-talkies — provisions also abandoned at or near the scene, officials said.
Sri Lanka had agreed to this tour — allowing Pakistan to host its first test matches in 14 months — only after India and Australia backed out of scheduled trips over security concerns. The assault will end hopes of international cricket teams — or any sports teams — playing in the country for months, if not years.
Tuesday’s attack came three months after the Mumbai terror strikes that killed 164 people. Those raids were allegedly carried out by Pakistan militants, and the assault in Lahore resembled them in many respects. Both were coordinated, used multiple gunmen, apparently in teams of two, who were armed with explosives and assault rifles and apparently had little fear of death or capture.
Authorities will also consider possible links to Sri Lanka’s Tamil Tiger separatist rebels who are being badly hit in a military offensive at home, though Sri Lankan military spokesman Brig. Udaya Nanayakkara said it was unlikely the group was involved.
Two Sri Lankan players — Thilan Samaraweera and Tharanga Paranavitana — were being treated for bullet wounds in a hospital but were stable…Umpire Ahsan Raza was hit in his abdomen…Team captain Mahela Jayawardene and four other players had minor injuries…British assistant coach Paul Farbrace also sustained minor injuries.
Sri Lankan Foreign Secretary Palitha Kohona said little could be done to stop such an attack, saying “there is never enough security to counter a well organized and determined terrorist group.” link
Update: Commenter pingpong points us to this great article in the The Economist that provides context re the Sri Lankan team’s bravery in agreeing to play, and the tragic ramifications for Pakistan.
You’re saying Pakistan and Sri Lanka need to get broken up because the “negative externalities” (define, please) are too great, but even once these nations are partitioned, terrorism will still happen? Since you also seem to say that the currently high economic (transaction) costs will only increase, what exactly would be the point of this rational exercise?
the amount of terrorism and violence will decrease.
1) it will be harder to move around and coordinate because of the inconvenience of borders (this is kind of a moot point for sri lanka, i know).
2) some of the motivating factors behind the terrorism will be removed. the separation of pathan areas in pakistan from those in afghanistan is a colonial accident of how far british hegemony penetrated.
3) the downside is that coordination of labor and resources across the vast free trade and movement zones that are nations will have fewer economies of scale as you break up the zones. but it seems like nations like pakistan and sri lanka are losing more from the destabilization of terrorism and social anomie than they are gaining from having a bigger country.
re: externalities, i just mean that there are costs and gains from various actions. having a big country has a negative outcome insofar as it allows bad guys to move around easily because there are no internal borders.
Troll #16:
Trust me, no “Goras” have any interest in dividing and conquering Pakistan. A stable, dare I even hope tolerant, Pakistan benefits everyone.
Huh? Really? Pakistan finds itself in this mess thanks to its dalliances (under considerable pressure, I would guess) with some major “gora” powers, wouldn’t you say? Pakistanis knew what they were getting into, I guess, but let’s look at reality, not some cooked up delusions of peace. Let’s not even talk about Afghanistan!
I’m tired of Indian (or Indian-American) commentators using the “failed state” cliche and generally ponitificating on everything related to terrorism as if things are black and white.
Also, when the US and UK establishment speaks about terrorism, it is nothing but well honed Orwellian speak.
Razib #51 Ok, your previous comment stated that “terrorism will still happen” so the argument was unclear. Even so, your point appears to be predicated on a few assumptions:
I can tell that breaking Pakistan up is the typical Indian wet dream.. Also the self righteous attitude of claiming India to be the champion of human rights and its smaller neirghbours as uncivilized beasts is a popular past time among Indians on the web, this after training tamil tigers in Sri Lanka and separatists in Balochistan, who openly claim that RAW supports them. But its only after Pakistan has broken up you guys will realize that a civil or military led united Pakistan was a much better option for India than a broken taliban warlord ruled anarchy. You cannot even fire a nuke in Pakistan without its fallout effecting an Indian city you think such a big calamity will have no effects on India? for one you can mark being a superpower off your to-do list if this happens secondly India itself will start breaking up. This is the only reason benazir govt. gave the names of Khalistan movements leaders to the Indian govt because she knew breaking India will mean breaking Pakistan. so be careful what you wish for.
using the “failed state” cliche
it’s kind of a vague catchall term. from what little i know it seems implausible that the taleban could take over all of pakistan. and unlike iran in the 1970s the islamic movement seems relatively unsophisticated. a friend who has worked as a physicist in the defense sector also says that handling nuclear weapons requires seriously non-ret*rded people. do the fundies have any in pakistan?
56 · razib said
I would be careful about dismissing their knowledge base so blithely. Fundamentalism doesn’t preclude cunning, or the ability to use other people in the service of particular ends. Al-Queda used unsophisticated methods to wreck a whole lot of damage on 9/11, and has been pretty sophisticated in its media-savvy.
Also, please let’s not equate fundamentalism with terrorism because not all terrorists are fighting for religions reasons. The LTTE, for example, considered itself vaguely Maoist at some point.
I can’t believe that this is either naivete or plain stupidity. Surely there must be a plan behind this madness? I think the Pakistani army (and the civilian govt) has perfected the “give me money or I will shoot myself” routine, and is holding the GOTUS hostage. Rob- 30 days is too short a period for this natak to unfold. I say by 2010, there will be major changes. Are you a betting man?
What’s not black and white about the Taliban? Is there some sort of “pro”-side that we’re overlooking? Please elaborate. . . . I agree with “p4k1st4n1” that breaking up Pakistan is the stupid goal of some Indian nationalists–it’s almost certainly not in the interests of either India or the Pakistani people. Perhaps the oddest factor in this whole mess is the almost surreal weakness of the Indian army (navy and airforce are better, I understand). This is the fault of the Indian gov’t (and, by extension, people), not the army itself, of course, but it does render India into a sort of strange bystander as Pakistan collapses. Hopefully they’ll at least be able to seal the border. . . .
http://tr.im/gZcC
More here: http://tr.im/gZcC
What an awful article to link to (the Economist one) in the main post… it is full of gross stereotyping and ridiculous insinuations of a “fundamentalist” Mohammed Yusuf, a non-playboy Imran Khan as being somehow symptomatic of terrorism. Ridiculous! And for Sepia to link to it as some sort of enlightening analysis indicates something about this site itself.
45 · rob said
The drastic thing is that this happened in Lahore – which is the far east, far away from the Taliban strongholds. And it happened even despite the fact that warnings apparently led to a change in the route of the team (although one theory holds that an accidental delay of the convoys means that the attack was actually targeted at the Pakistani team, which would have really resonated strongly inside Pakistan). No way that this occured without cooperation from the extreme factions of the ISI/army. (also, apparently, the terrorists had dry fruits, which indicates a long haul hostage plan might have been in the works).
I wonder how long it is before noble and brave army folk step in to save Pakistan and eliminate the security weakness of the (obviously ineffectual) Zardari government that these repeated attacks have exposed.
59 · rob said What’s not black and white about the Taliban? Is there some sort of “pro”-side that we’re overlooking? Please elaborate. . . .
‘The Taliban’ is a grey term. There’s no such thing. It’s a clusterfuck or fundie groups and nationalist groups and just plain pissed off groups, half of which hate each other (in addition to hating freedom and liberty).
There’s no unified leadership. No common goals. No clear strategy. And actually some of these groups don’t ever target civilians. That’s why the situation is grey. We just call anyone with a gun ‘The Taliban’ and get confused when our solutions don’t work.
How do you work this quotey thing?
LOL! Yeah, it’s a shame the Chinese didn’t spend more time in 1930 splitting hairs over intra-palace disputes and factions in Imperial Japan. “You know, when you say the Japanese are a threat to China, you’re really missing some nuance. . . .”
Rob (#59),
Nothing is black and white about the whole issue AFAIK, but that’s just me. Everything that’s going on in Pakistan and Afghanistan is attributed to one or a combination of Taleban / Al Qaeda / IIS (whatever that is). It takes a lot of digging to find out what really is going on. Things that happened 25-30 years ago in other parts of the world are only coming to light now, so it would be prudent not to reach conclusions. If the Taleban were so bad (as I believe they are), why are Pakistan and NATO forces making deals with them or their allies? Now juxtapose this with historical links between various Jihadi groups and intelligence agencies and what you get is a web of lies and counter lies and so on.
65 · robb said
I have no rebuttal to your awesome analogy. It is perfect in its awesomeness. LOL @ me.
OK, well, things are so hopelessly complex and opaque that–I guess we should just sit back and let the Taliban take over. And, yeah, pat ourselves on the back for our embrace of “nuance” and “complexity.” Ahh,the joys of being half-educated!
68 · rob said
Yes. Stay the course! Don’t cut and run! If you’re not with us, you are against us! Mission Accomplished! Because clearly what AS and Nand Kishore are advocating is to roll up in a ball and wait to die.
p4k1st4n1 (comment #55 above), the dying down of Khalistani movement had nothing to do with Benazir Bhutto supplying names to the Indian government. It had everything to do with KPS Gill’s “ten of theirs for one of ours” philosophy (and the numerous human rights violations that followed). He came down very heavily on these terrorists. The fact that by the end a majority of the terrorists had become plain thugs did not help them win the hearts and minds of the people they were supposedly fighting for.
rob (# 68),
Please calm down – Pakistan’s army is no lightweight force to be pushed over by Taliban easily (or whoever else is working with them). This is not about nuance – this is about asking uncomfortable questions that need to be asked. The elephant in Pakistan is the NATO presence and the so called War on Terror. How about calling for a withdrawal of these forces, especially if the fundies / extremists are going to take over large parts of Afghanistan anyway? In some cases, this seems to have tacit NATO approval! You can pat yourself for being in favour of action over analysis, but in any case we are not the ones on the ground paying for someone’s ‘policy decisions’.
Btw, this is not intended as a barb against anyone, but there are large parts of India where the term failed state may be somewhat inadequate. Let the likes of The Economist or “thinktanks” use this (while carefully omitting who may be responsible), Indians should think twice before blithely using the term to describe neighbouring nations or even Somalia or DRC.
I am reminded of the good old days when such minor distinctions between Muslims such as Shia and Sunni were irrelevant, and a foreign policy expert presidential candidate could talk about Shia Iran’s support for the Sunni Al-Qaeda, and warn of danger on the Iraq-Pakistan border (It is a pretty thick border, and that border’s called Afghanistan).
Uhhhh–I guess this is why they say one man’s reductio ad absurdum is another man’s modus ponens”–that actually, is what they’re advocating, isn’t it? They can’t even bring themselves to identify the enemy–everything is so God-damned “nuanced,” don’t-you-know? Meanwhile, the enemy executes its moves–who’s gonna win that game??
Hey! Quit screwing around in the sandbox, kids! I will close the comment threads and drag you home if you don’t behave.
Rob, you’re painting yourself into a very “mission accomplished” us-vs-them corner as you get carried away with your own sarcasm. No one is supporting the Taliban or Al-Queda, and saying the situation is gray and complicated doesn’t make it otherwise. Chill out.
AS, The Economist article in no way links Khan to terrorism, so please take your indignant-goggles off.
Am very glad to see the sympathy and outrage over this incident though. To echo ANNA’s comment #26, whoever did this gets full credit for being miserable SOBs…The SL team arrived in the spirit of good sportsmanship, bringing world-class cricket to a country that’s increasingly looked askance at by the rest of the world. Way to ruin the last few things of joy.
Did you ever hear of the Nazi-Soviet pact, Mr. Glib?
73 · rob said
If you actually see the strategies on the ground, given the limited resources the US is willing to expend, they involve strategic alliances (a polite word for hiring mercenaries) with “less horrible” tribal leaders agains the more horrible ones (“less horrible” because they accepted US bribes). This is, in fact, the strategy that got your boy Petraeus much kudos in Iraq, and the one he has now been assigned to Afghanistan to adapt and implement. The US is not on a civilizing mission to eliminate the Taliban, nor is it willing to make the serious long term commitments to these societies, it only wants to tamper with them enough to neutralize the threat to itself in the short term, and it does that not with the unnuanced approach you advocate because that is unsustainable and often counterproductive (as are the alliances of convenience it builds, but they are more politically palatable).
Cicatrix, Sorry if I’m getting carried away! But this endless attempt to distinguish like from like and claim that ‘nothing can really be said’ b/c it’s all just too “complex” and “nuanced” really irks me. Some of the Taliban wear Nikes, and other wear Pumas, but I don’t think that that “distinction” matters when it comes time to decide whether to fight them or let them take over Peshawar. . . .
74 · cicatrix said
While it is important to recognize the nuance and underlying causes of these problems I’d hate to admit that I come down on Rob’s side here. It’s important not to let our emotions (sympathy) cloud our better judgment. It’s an ugly world we live in and while we can understand why good people go bad, we should still understand that they went bad and when it comes down to it, we kind of have to break some eggs to make the peaceful and stable omelette in the long term. So when we try to psychoanalyze the Taliban we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that they are very bad people, regardless of how much one may understand or sympathize with what drove them to be bad.
OK, so when the Taliban takes over Pakistan later this year and millions of Pakistanis are dead, you’re going to be blaming who–the US? India? Lack of “nuance” in NATO intervention in Afghanistan? Couldn’t be the Taliban now, could it? Nahh . . . . (and I’d put secondary blame on the average Pakistani, who is apparently so overcome with conspiracy theories that he (let alone she!) can’t bring himself to resist.)
78 · Yoga Fire said
Strawman alert! The people were calling for understanding who the enemy was, not empathy.
And in an aside, while there has been worldwide outrage about the players, the poor reserve umpire was hurt the worst – shot in the back, and is in critical condition. Hope he recovers.
I am still stunned that the Pakistan government took the terror threat so lightly that they did not provide armored vehicles for the teams!
79 · rob said
Yes, it is clear that my comment was saying that America and India are responsible for the injured Sri Lankans and the upcoming Taliban takeover of Pakistan.
Come on. No one is saying we need to understand them so we can solve this with hugs. We need to understand them so we can bitchslap them properly. Fighting them in a conventional us vs. them straight up gunfight is impossible without a much greater commitment of resources AND either (a) a willingness to kill a bunch of civilians or (b) a willingness to take significantly more casualties yourself with a ground attack. That’s the reality of fighting guerrillas.
82 · AV said
I believe that when I said that in my comment (counterproductive and unsustainable, and not politically palatable), it could directly be translated into saying I was blaming the US and India 🙂
Why do you persist in thinking this is laughable, given the obvious ability of people to cooperate against a common foe? It’s just dumb. As in low IQ.
Rahul,
Since you agree with me (I think), I think you make a very good point.
Moving on to more important things, can someone please tell me how to quote a post.
74 · cicatrix said
So, let’s consider this quote from the article:
Even without my goggles, I see absolutely no reason for this paragraph’s inclusion in the article, followed by a rather meek, and completely insincere (well it had to be, it was the point of the article) “coincidentally” in the next paragraph. Read the comments on the articles; even many readers (Indians/Pakis alike) didn’t appreciate the insinuations and innuendo suggested by the author. What does increasing religiosity among cricketers (consider Inzamam’s outright indignation over this incident and his close ties with the Indian cricket leagues) have anything to do with this? Would the author have preferred that Imran stayed the playboy he was, because it sure seemed he was reminiscing about it?
If you read my post on MuslimMatters (http://tr.im/gZcC), you’d see I don’t wear goggles too often. I like to call a spade a spade. And if you read the Economist article carefully, you’d agree with me if you took off the goggles you thought you lent to me.
Wow, Muthalik got his pet lolcat peeing all over the interwebs?
Yes, a few Indian defense analysts claim that this may have been the motivation behind the attacks. They believe that attackers could have succeeded in getting at the Sri Lankan team, but did not hurt them. But I doubt that this was a sane way of preventing the agitation, given how many things could go wrong here. Conspiracy theorists are having a field day. In any case, it is hard to trust any subcontinental government; so at this point, theorists find nothing implausible.
As opposed to governments in South Asia?
rob, lol. Clearly, your solution, funding Hindutva rowdies in India is a great contribution ordinary folks can make toward good governance in India and rule of law in greater South Asia. It’s this proactive take-charge machismo that inspires women to send pink chaddis to some sons of guns.
AV, my sincerest sympathies. Your point about strategic behavior and the historic links/aversions between various jehadi outfits is absolutely correct, and considered to be one of the greatest weaknesses of RAW strategy (strategy suggests they know what they’re doing :)) and the American war on terror.
Reading this comment thread is like running through an obstacle course doing one’s best to avoid being sprayed by tri-colored ejaculate.
Well, if you take a big step back, Hinduism and Islam are both circling the drain, b/c neither can withstand its clash with modernity. So, if I try to provide a little bit of balm to my Hindu peeps, I’m not really sure what you’re complaining about, esp. given the much larger (and more violent) griping the Islamists are giving us as they go down (and I mean down) the well-trod path of, e.g., the Carthaginians, the Goths, and the Vandals. . . .
This is Unbelievable attack, But question is What happened to Security there.
World coins
1.Diplomatic tension between India and SL: Indian Govt instructed the BCCI not to send Team India to Pakistan, after the Mumbai attacks.Arjuna Ranatunga, the Sri Lankan cricket chief, immediately announced that SL would travel in India’s place.SL cricketers were against it.The Sri Lankan board sacked Ranatunga, but then Pakistani board requested them to honor Ranatunga’s commitment.So, Sri Lankan board finally agreed to send the team, but split the series into two halves.There were vague rumours that India was unhappy about SL touring Pakistan, but nothing came of it, really.
2.Take Swat valley – according to some estimates, there are around 2500 Taliban forces in the valley, which has a population of over a million.And yet, the Taliban has killed many police and govt officials, and hung the mutilated bodies in public squares as a warning.The Pakistani Army could do zilch against them.The Taleban and other Jihadi outfits recruit from the same villages that Pakistani Army too recruits.And the islamisation of the Pakistani Army and educational institutions that started during Zia Ul Haq’s reign is showing its effects now.
3.Obama has already made a few mistakes in his Af-Pak policy, most notably by giving in to Pakistani establishment’s demands for more military and non-military aid.Just the logistics bills for supporting NATO forces in Afghanistan are resulting in millions of USD per month for Pak Army (Yes, they run the logistics org), and a thriving ‘open’ blackmarket in Peshawar for stolen US Army weapons and equipment.
4.RAW’s covert ops capabilities have been de-fanged during the I.K.Gujral prime ministership, and many counter-espionage specialists have been transferred out.Defence analyst and ex-RAW director B.Raman has been arguing for building up covert capabilities of RAW again, from scratch.
Where do we go from here? The Taliban seems to have a lot of support from sections of the Pakistani society, and if US continues to buy Pak Army’s stories about good Taliban (Pakistani one) and bad Taliban (the Afghan one), very soon, first the Military will take the power back and then Taliban will start controlling even larger areas of Pakistan.Karachi is being targeted next, I believe.
There are several scenarios being developed for analysis purposes.The one I like is put forth by Pragati, a magazine brought out by Indian National Interest.
The Pragati authors argue for a McArthur Plan to resolve the Af-Pak mess.
B. Raman is floating the kite that Harkat was repaying an old debt to LTTE.
It is plausible, but from the way they abandoned the hostage plan sounds like they got the wrong team.
No, no–Peshawar is the first target; it’ll fall to the Taliban by the end of March. Then you will have more “targeted killings” in Lahore, Islamabad, and Karachi–they will all more or less “fall” together as the Pakistani “state” ducks and covers (or to the extent planes are still plying the route, heads to London) . . . . The Brits are pretty stupid on this issue–I hope they wise up and sever links sooner rather than later–will save them a lot of grief. Hopefully India will increase its pathetic defense budget and seal the border!
55 · p4k1st4n1 said
There is alot of opium smoke in air i see… You never heard about Mughalstan! http://www.hindujagruti.org/activities/campaigns/national/india-map-controversy/mughalstan.php . Talking about wet dreams.. Haha..
68 · rob said
How does posting comments on Sepia Mutiny stop the Taliban from taking over?
It doesn’t, but my taxpayer-funded boyzz are out there in the field, killing Taliban, left, right and by guided robot-planes! It’s nearly a video-game. So, I’ll sleep well tonight!!
“Pakistanis could not do this,†was a typical response from Shazia Sardar, a 28-year-old immigration officer. “The people who did this were not Muslims.â€
LOL–ok, when are we going to face reality?
sorry for the bad link–this should work.
http://sify.com/news/imagegallery/galleryDetail.php?hcategory=13733686&hgallery=14851638&page=1&?vsv=TopHP1
This is the best option. Finally Sindhis will be able to see their parent’s place of birth.
oops…my linky