India's diplomatic campaign to focus world attention on ``cross-border'' terrorism is beginning to bite judging by some of the reaction in Pakistan. As a writer in The Dawn notes astutely, Indian diplomacy after Kargil has been aimed at presenting India ``as a frontline state in the battle against terrorism and a primary target of the terrorist aggression from what it calls `Talibanised' Pakistan and Afghanistan.'' The writer fails to note, naturally, that Pakistan's incursions in Kargil with a combined force of army troops and Afghan mercenaries did more than anything until then to concentrate the world's mind on Islamabad's destabilising role in the South Asia and Central Asia regions. Before that most of the odium was reserved for Afghanistan under the Taliban.Even more telling are reports from Islamabad that the boss of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence, Lt Gen Ziauddin, spent a week in Washington seeking help in containing radical religious elements in Pakistan. It is hard to believe theISI which is seen in India as the instigator and sponsor of extremist violence, turning it on and off at will, should need any external help in controlling its own apprentices. But sorcerers have run into trouble before and this may be the ISI's turn.It is possible but not probable that the ISI's mission is related to domestic political developments and the public agitations led by opposition parties bent on unseating the Nawaz Sharif government. With Washington having already indicated that it does not approve of unconstitutional methods of toppling a democratically elected government, sending Ziauddin off to raise the bogey of Islamic extremism on Capitol Hill seems redundant.A more plausible explanation would be that the ISI mission was about damage control. A sharper picture is emerging since the terrorist bombings of Russian cities of an international network of terrorism centred in Afghanistan with branches reaching deep into Pakistan. There have been reports that the terrorist bombings of Russiancities are linked to Afghanistan either through Osama bin Laden who has been given sanctuary there or other extremist groups. Some of the suspects in those bombings are said to be persons of Pakistani origin.The combination of religious fanaticism and military success of the Taliban is an inspiration for religious, nationalistic and separatist groups in the region and beyond. Afghanistan's international isolation also makes it an attractive destination for outlaws from other lands. Less than a handful of countries have recognised the Taliban regime; Pakistan which is widely believed to have given the Taliban religious and military training and assistance through the ISI is Afghanistan's most important friend.India is not the first to draw the world's attention to Afghanistan's capacity to create disorder in the whole region but it has been especially active in the past two months urging collective action against states which support ``cross-border'' terrorism. In that category the Ministry of ExternalAffairs includes both Afghanistan and Pakistan.During the past two months India has been talking to a number of countries from the US and Russia to Iran and the Central Asian republics about ways and means of combatting international terrorism. New Delhi is understood to have made considerable progress in gathering support for a comprehensive convention against state-sponsored terrorism that it would like the United Nations General Assembly to adopt. Perhaps even more important from a Pakistani perspective is the fact that India and the US share a common interest in combatting religious fundamentalist and terrorist groups based in Pakistan and Afghanistan.The US does not need to be persuaded about the Taliban. Since the bombings of US embassies in Africa last year it has characterised Osama bin Laden as one of the most dangerous terrorists alive. Economic pressure has been applied on the Taliban to deny him refuge and to clean up its human rights record. But India arguing that Afghanistan and Pakistanare two sides of the same coin and a global menace would evidently like Washington to go further and take an equally tough view of Pakistan especially after Kargil.Islamabad, on its part, will no doubt try to disassociate itself from elements in the establishment with links to the Taliban or Osama bin Laden. The ISI mission will not be the only attempt to present Islamabad as a potential victim rather than the mentor of religious fundamentalists and terrorists.India can expect fairly wide cooperation in anti-terrorist measures at the level of the UN - even China which has restive provinces bordering Central Asia and oil interests in the region will be supportive of conventions to counter international terrorism. But country-specific action is an altogether different matter. The Taliban has put Afghanistan beyond the pale and as long as the civil war in that country continues, many countries will be content to withhold recognition and some will continue to castigate the regime for its oppressivepolicies. But any kind of direct military action against terrorists and their bases in Afghanistan is fairly improbable.As for Pakistan, there are those in the government who would like Washington to declare it an outlaw state. That would, however, be short-sighted and in the end achieve no more than push Pakistan a little further down the road towards chaos. It is not in India's interest to see more anarchy in Pakistan. As every political crisis in Pakistan, including the current one makes apparent, there are several centres of power in that country and their internal conflicts have weakened Pakistan almost beyond repair.India must distinguish between democratic forces and the sponsors of terrorism and support the first and battle the latter. But first it must be able to tell which is which. To that end, it would be very useful to understand exactly where an agency like the ISI stands today. Is it subordinate to the political authority, the military establishment or a law unto itself as it was at onetime? The Vajpayee government has shown it has contradictory views on this question. It is essential therefore to have a comprehensive document on the ISI such as the one Home Minister L. K. Advani promised but failed to deliver to Parliament.
