http://www.tehelka.com/channels/currentaffairs/2001/sept/14/ca091401hameed1.htm

New Delhi, September 14

What is your response to the terrorist attacks in America? And do you think that Osama bin Laden is behind them?
I said that it was a horrible…horrendous picture that one could see. But, you see, they haven't reached any conclusion. So it is prejudging the involvement of. Osama bin Laden and Afghanistan. It is a convenient bogey to divert attention, and I think that the Israelis would be very pleased about it. And so would the Indians. But that is not the real thing.

I think it is a sophisticated job: the radar jamming and the piloting of the aircraft because there are no errors. Four aircraft, two airlines were involved, and from 8.45 am - that is when the first (aircraft) hit the north tower (of the World Trade Centre) - to the crash at the Pentagon, there was a gap of one hour. In this one hour, everything seemed to be quiet. It seemed like it was a coup-like situation.

One knows that after the Florida fiasco of the Presidential election, there is a big rift between the Jewish lobbies and George Bush and his Administration. He has not taken a single Jew in his Cabinet. So (Ariel) Sharon (the hawkish Israeli prime minister) and company are very upset with George Bush.

They (the Jewish lobbies) have been told to indulge in acts of terrorism in the past. Why can't they do it now? If you would recall, after the Wye River accord when (President) Clinton went begging (Israeli prime minister Binyamin) Netanyahu to accept peace, Netanyahu said over the CNN that we (the Jews) will set Washington on fire, and they (the CNN) had quickly switched off the telecast.

But (US Secretary of State) Colin Powell has gone on record to say that the Bush Administration believes that Osama bin Laden is involved. It is obvious that pressure is being exerted on Pakistan because Powell has been in conversation with President Musharraf, and so has the American ambassador to Pakistan.
I am aware of it. It is tragic that on the basis of this great human tragedy, the strategists of America have started looking at it as a window of opportunity to get into Pakistan and establish themselves here on the pretext of going in for a strike against Afghanistan. It is an Iraq-like situation. Obviously, their new enemy is China. They want to keep China out. So, I think, they are looking for bases here. And if they come in temporarily, they will stay on permanently. We know their style.

Do you think that there is a danger of that happening?
That is what they are demanding, more or less. They are virtually demanding this when Bush says, "I am going to give Pakistan a chance." Damn it, we have always helped you with terrorism. We handed over Ahmed Kansi and Yousuf Ramzi when the US wanted them on charges of smuggling out nuclear secrets. We have always stood on your side. It is on record that Pakistan has never acted against the interests of America. Then, why is Pakistan being indicted, why is Pakistan being put in the dock?

Pakistan is going to be destabilised because of this unfriendly act of America: demanding bases from us. They can do it without demanding the bases. I will tell you how. There are other ways of doing it. One is that they can hit Afghanistan with missiles. They don't have to take our permission because they did that in the past, in 1998. And, you know, we could not even raise our voice. We are such a subservient nation that we could not raise our voice at that time. They don't need our permission now.

Second, they want to pluck Osama bin Laden from the hands of the Taliban. For that, Tajikistan is a batter base. It is very close to Afghanistan. And, in Tajikistan, they will have the benefit of 25,000 Russian troops. And they (the Russians) have signed a pact with America to fight terrorism. Indians are also present, and at least you know their moral support will be there. The Iranians will be there. So why don't they use Tajikistan? Or, better still, why don't they use the territories held by the Northern Alliance? The Northern Alliance is sitting very close to Kabul. So why don't they use their (the Northern Alliance's) territories to strike against the Taliban?

But if the objective is to attack, and physically occupy Afghanistan, then I am afraid they have gone berserk. Because that is not a possibility, from a strategic point of view. So, the whole region is going to be destabilised because of their new action. The Chinese are going to be sucked into it. The Indians will be looking over their shoulder and wondering what position to take. So there will be an entry into the subcontinent of superpowers in a physical way.

There is a strong feeling that the Taliban owes a lot to Pakistan and to the ISI and the military establishment.
I assure you that Pakistan cannot help them. I know I had gone there on August 19 after six-and-a-half years. And I have been telling the journalists, why don't you go there? I said that I would facilitate their travel to Afghanistan. I saw the military parade spread over three hours - and all their equipment, old and new, were of Russian origin. Except Stingers, which they put on display. It was an impressive parade and there was no weapon other than the ones I had told the journalists (about). There were some foreign journalists there. I said, look at it. Is there a single weapon there that can be traced to Pakistani sources?

Pakistan is one of the countries that has recognised the Taliban…
But recognition is a totally different issue. What can we do? We share a 2,500 km-long border with them. They have created no problems for us. We have no choice.

Do you think President Musharraf is in trouble at the moment?
If he allows the Americans to come in, he will be acting against the will of his own nation. And this is not just a will of a faction. This is the predominant, overwhelming will of the nation. He will be damaging Pakistan's long-term interests. And he will be damaging India's interests as well, for that matter. That will be no pleasure to us.

How does it damage India's interests?
If they come in here…you know how they expand, how they trade culture. They want to put the whole world into a straightjacket vision of the New World Order. They want to dominate the world. It is as simple as that. For the next 100 years.

Today, Taliban Foreign Minister Mullah Omar's spokesperson issued a statement warning Pakistan of serious consequences if it were to support America in any way.
No. I haven't seen that statement. I saw the statement by Mullah Abdur Salam Rahim, but he did not mention that. No.

It says that Pakistan is a Muslim nation, and there would be serious consequences for Pakistan if it supported America.
No, if it provides bases to America, then obviously there would be. That is what I am saying. There would be serious consequences for the stability for Pakistan. It is not that the Taliban would be doing anything. No. It is a friendly way of suggesting that if bases were to be given, then it could hurt Pakistan internally. And that is a statement of fact.

To what extent can General Musharraf resist American pressure to use the Pakistani soil?
Well, he can say, "Look, please take us in. We have been cooperating in the past. Take us in on the investigation. Bring hard evidence, and then we will look at it." So far, they have no evidence. They themselves admit that they have no evidence. Then why the hell are they pouncing upon Pakistan that we should say yes or no?

Have you had a chance to meet Osama bin Laden?
A long time back. About eight years ago. He was not a terrorist then but a mujahid at that time.

Not a terrorist but a mujahid! I mean, what is the difference?
At least, you should understand. Invoking the right of the oppressed, an enslaved nation, to be up in arms and throw away the yoke of slavery, that is jehad. And terrorism is taking innocent lives, and that is not on. And that is not in our book.

But there is a very thin line between jehad and terrorism. Don't you think so?
No. It does not appear to you because you are on the receiving end of jehad. But to me, it is very, very clear. For 14 years, there was jehad in Afghanistan. I was the one who was handling the Afghan mujahideen, and they had access to every capital of the world. Was there a single instance of a Russian plane being hijacked, or a Russian embassy being bombed, or a Russian woman being molested, or a Russian man being kidnapped? Not one.

But, in India, there has been…
That has been done by the Indian intelligence agencies. You can ask RAW (Research and Analysis Wing). They have done that. You know Gill, or whatever his name was. He inducted his own people to start the killing…

You are talking of K P S Gill?
K P S Gill did it. And nobody has taken him to task for that.

What about America's own role in creating the mujahideen?
America cannot create mujahideen. The mujahideen are a product of the time. If you continue to occupy land that belongs to other people, if you continue to oppress them, then it is jehad. Jehad is a liberation struggle. It is the Muslim name for liberation.

America was quite content with helping the mujahideen when it suited them, when Russia had invaded Afghanistan…
No. The point is, America is supporting the liberation movements all over the world. Europe has been supporting liberation movements.

Do you think they are paying a price for that?
They are not paying the price because this act (the recent terror attacks on New York and Washington) is not done by the mujahideen. So, why do the Americans think that they are paying the price?

You said that you had met Osama bin Laden eight years ago. Do you think he has the infrastructure and capability to do…?
Well, I don't know, I didn't ask him. It was a social meeting with him. That's all. But you know…I don't think he is capable of that. I think he is a sensitive person. He was much younger than what he is now. At that time, how could we talk about this? He was just a mujahid. The mujahideen have rendered an enormous service to Afghanistan and to its liberation.

How would you describe him now? You said he was a mujahid then? Is he still a mujahid?
Now, the Taliban says, OK, let's put him on trial. But America is shying away from the question of trial. They are simply saying, "Hand him over to us."

Would you call bin Laden a terrorist?
No, until he is proven otherwise. If he is proven not to be a mujahid but a terrorist. But then, how can I describe him as a terrorist? There is no evidence as yet. If there is hard evidence, then I would be the first one to say that he is a terrorist among the rank of mujahideen.

But what about the bombing of the two American embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam?
Again, they have not been able to bring any evidence whatsoever. The Taliban are asking them again and again: Please provide evidence. They are saying that he is responsible for these bombings, and for these strikes. Then, where is the evidence? Why do you prejudge? Take your time, relax. Nothing is going to be lost. Hang them. We are going to help you in whatever way possible. It is our moral duty. We have been the victim of terrorism ourselves. So we understand what are the sentiments of the people hit by terrorism.

But Pakistan has never denied that it provides moral and financial support to the mujahideen. They call them freedom-fighters, we call them terrorists.
Moral support, yes. Political support, yes. Diplomatic support, yes. No financial support. People themselves give chanda (donations) and they provide the support. So, it is a popular sort of a sentiment. It is the support of the people who have been oppressed, who have been subjected to wrongful occupation for 54 years. And, what is more is that the political leadership of India made a commitment to the world community and the Kashmiris that they will give them the right to self-determination. Why is the largest democracy in the world denying the right of vote to Kashmiris? This is the big question.

Do you think that the noose is tightening around Pakistan because of what happened in America?
No. I think India would be making unnecessary assumptions in this case. I told you that they (the Americans) want to get into this region. Their objectives are totally different, and I think India would be making wrong conclusions from all this. Americans have no love for anybody. They have their own axe to grind.

But the Americans seem to be coming to the same conclusions - because that is what they have said…
That is quite wishful, wishful on the part of India.

No, America…
If it suits America tomorrow, they would not be reluctant to start a jehad inside India.

But do you see strikes taking place in Pakistan in the coming days or weeks?
No I don't. I think it will blow over. They have found the proof, but they are trying to keep it under the hat.

go to top