|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| INDIAN AIRLINES HIJACKING | |
 December 28, 1999  |
|
|
Hijackers of the Indian Air airplane grounded in Afghanistan have released a list of demands. After a background report on today's developments, Margaret Warner leads a discussion with experts.
|
|
SPENCER MICHELS: The engines on Indian Airlines Flight 814 have been repaired and are now working after a 12-hour shutdown, as the plane remains on the tarmac in Afghanistan for the fourth day. For the passengers, that means heat and improved conditions.
India agreed to start negotiating with the hijackers after
they threatened to kill more passengers. Among those on board are at
least 150 Indians, 12 Europeans, one American and one Canadian. The
hijackers are demanding that the Indian government hand over $200 million
dollars,
SPENCER MICHELS: In the last few days, India's government, a coalition led by Hindu nationalists, has come under attack from hostage families for reacting too slowly. Yesterday, relatives tried to storm government buildings and residences in New Delhi. |
 |
||||||||||||||||||
| A region of unrest | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
MARGARET WARNER: For more on what's behind the hijacking we turn to
three experts on South Asia: Stephen Cohen, a senior fellow at the Brookings
Institution -- he's written numerous books about politics and proliferation
MANSOOR IJAZ: Well, I think these hijackers are elements of these fringe
radical groups that were born out of the end of the Afghan War in the
late 1980s, the war in which the Pakistanis and the United States fought
against the Soviet Union and Afghanistan. The problem is that MARGARET WARNER: Pranay Gupte, how do you read that? PRANAY GUPTE: I'm not so sure I agree with Mansoor, Margaret, because
radicalism in that area is far, far older than this current episode,
tragic though it is. It goes back more than 30 years when the subcontinent
was split into two; that these hijackers and what we know of them MARGARET WARNER: You disagree then with Mansoor Ijaz -- you think these are indigenous Kashmiri Muslims? PRANAY GUPTE: I do, indeed. In fact, four of these have been identified by the Indian government as Pakistani citizens. One of them has been identified as possibly an Afghan, and a sixth person as a Nepali, possibly a mercenary. Well, my projection is that perhaps you ought to look at where did they board the plane from, why Nepal, was that route carefully mapped? Was it scouted for its lack of security at Mandou Airport? So that this is not an isolated incident, as I see it. It really flows from the fact that there is an ongoing movement to destabilize the region. MARGARET WARNER: Stephen Cohen. STEPHEN COHEN: The group apparently are consistent members of the Mujahadeen, which is a group that's been put on the terrorist list by the United States. But there's the possibility that one of the members of this group -- hijackers -- is the brother of the person they're trying to release, so it may turn out to be much less than we think it is. It may simply be a family operation; they're attempting to spring one of the family members. The fact that the Pakistanis have talked to the father of these two sons and possibly putting pressure on the father may be part of the situation. MARGARET WARNER: Wait. Are you saying that the Pakistani government is -- you understand -- is putting pressure on the hijackers to pull back? STEPHEN COHEN: The Pakistan government has |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Reaction from India, Pakistan and Afghanistan | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
MARGARET WARNER: What do you see, Mansoor Ijaz, as the Pakistani government's role or connection here? General Musharraf, the new military leader of Pakistan, said today we have no -- the Pakistani government has absolutely no involvement in this operation. MANSOOR IJAZ: I would say that probably that statement in and of itself is correct; that is that I can't imagine that any government in that part of the world would be stupid enough to involve themselves in a terrorist act of this type. Having said that, it has to be kept in mind that for the better part of the last two decades, and certainly in the last decade where the Kashmir problem has become much more visible, it is clear to me that Pakistan's military and intelligence apparatus has provided more than just moral support to the Kashmiri and Mujahadeen or some of these other groups operating there. The problem is to identify how Pakistan can now, as a government, make -- take a responsible action and help end the hijacking with this military intelligence apparatus. That is, if they really aren't involved in any way, then the best way to prove that to the outside world is to take a leading role in ensuring that the hijacking is brought to an end. MARGARET WARNER: OK, before we jump to how to bring it to an end, Pranay
Gupte, give us now your assessment of India's reaction here. PRANAY GUPTE: Well, I think the Indian government's approach to the whole situation has been quite moderate and studied and deliberate. What else could they have done? Could they have immediately jumped into the fray and said, yes, you know, our citizens have been held hostage; therefore, we should be out there acquiescing to their demands? No. I think the Indian government realized that perhaps things ought to settle down. They knew it was not in the self-interest of the hijackers to go bumping off the passengers immediately, although they did kill one passenger, as you know. Nonetheless, their approach has been to exam the facts, to be able to examine what is it that the hijackers are actually seeking. So much of this, Margaret, is political theater. You know, it's to grab attention, do what the hijackers seek to be the fundamental problem, which remains that of Kashmir. The hijacking is only one episode intended to advance that particular cause and I think the Indian government has take an very thoughtful and I would say a rather -- not a model case, because none of this situation suggests a model case, but something that I think is likely to be if not a case study, at least a study in how to undertake diplomacy in a prudent, wise fashion. MARGARET WARNER: OK. Stephen Cohen, many governments believe you don't -- including the U.S. government -- we don't negotiate with hijackers. How do you explain -- do you think this is the right thing for the Indian government to do and how do you explain -- STEPHEN COHEN: Well, they have to negotiate with hijackers unless they're
willing to sacrifice more than 160 lives. The question is whether or
not they can do a deal with the hijackers. I think that if this does
turn out to be a personal hijacking, it may be more difficult than less
difficult now to expect the hijackers to continue on with this for some
time. To me, the interesting thing about this event is MARGARET WARNER: The Taliban's role is interesting here, isn't it? MANSOOR IJAZ: You know, it is interesting in the following sense and that is that if you believe the people that are on that airplane are a virile strain of Islamic extremism, then who better to deal with them than Islamic extremism's -- you know -- clear ... MARGARET WARNER: Born out of the same conflict in Afghanistan? MANSOOR IJAZ: Exactly. And in that sense I think the Taliban can play a very constructive role and I think they are playing that role by trying to keep the temperament, if you will, inside that aircraft at a lower pitch. MARGARET WARNER: OK. Now, go on, Mansoor Ijaz, and explain what you meant when you said it's time for the Pakistani government to cooperate with the Indian government to solve this. What is the solution? |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| The Kashmir conflict | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
MANSOOR IJAZ: For five decades, now, Kashmir has MARGARET WARNER: So Pranay Gupte, how can and should the Indian government respond? I mean, this stalemate cannot continue forever on that tarmac. PRANAY GUPTE: Margaret, Mansoor's position endows the terrorists with more intelligence and foresight than I think they're capable of demonstrating. Terrorists are terrorists, all right? You give them a gun, they'll threaten to shoot the guns. I think that the fundamental problem remains that of Kashmir. We could talk until we are blue in the face about economic development and so on. Right now the last few months there were signs that despite the military coup in Pakistan, there were signs that India and Pakistan were willing to get back to the negotiating table. Clearly this incident in which India is suspecting Pakistan of complicity is not going to be conducive to any kind of negotiations. MARGARET WARNER: OK. But briefly, do you think the Indian government should or will give in to some of these demands? PRANAY GUPTE: I don't see how it can. Perhaps there are other channels that we are not familiar with, perhaps there are channels assuring safe passage to these terrorists, but I don't see the Indian government actually saying yes, here are $200 million for you, yes, take and do what you will, because that would set a very dangerous precedent for a very volatile region of the world. STEPHEN COHEN: Pranay, I agree with you that this is a largely a question
that the terrorists are not as professional or as organized as they
might seem to be. I'd also say that in modest disagreement, with you,
Mansoor, that the PRANAY GUPTE: Also Margaret, if I may jump in here, what Stephen said is so true because that area of the world -- the Indian subcontinent -- is a gateway to Asia's globalization and we'd better damn well pay attention to what's going on there. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| A military ending? | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
MARGARET WARNER: OK, but Mansoor Ijaz, we're MANSOOR IJAZ: Well, I don't see that these hijackers are going to give in until -- I mean, look, someone who believes that they can earn heaven by killing innocent people, they're not going to let go until they get what they want, and that means there's only two options, you either storm the airplane or you negotiate your way out and give into some of their demands. It's clear to me that the Indians will not give in so there's got to be a military commando operation to get them out of that airplane. It's very simple. STEPHEN COHEN: But you don't want the Taliban doing this because they don't have the training and the question is will they allow an Indian counter-terrorist group to storm the aircraft? MANSOOR IJAZ: They have said so, Steve. What they have said is that the Indians should be the ones to deal bilaterally with the hijackers. They have said that our position is hands off. STEPHEN COHEN: And that does seem to imply a role for the Indians should force be necessary. MANSOOR IJAZ: But this is really where the international community ought to come up with an international response. Terrorism is not acceptable no matter where it is or what the root cause is. MARGARET WARNER: You're talking about international support for some commando operations? MANSOOR IJAZ: Exactly. Get the United States, China and Russia to provide logistical support, tactical support and maybe the Indians and the Pakistanis are the lead forces, if you will, because certainly if any government in the world has influence with the Taliban, it's the Pakistanis.
MARGARET WARNER: Gentlemen, I'm afraid we have to leave it there, but thank you all three very much. |
||||||||||||||||||||
 |
        |
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
The
plan began its journey Friday afternoon in Katmandu, Nepal, bound for
New Delhi, India. Within the hour, the Airbus jumbo jet, carrying 178
passengers and 11 crew members, was hijacked and diverted by five men
with pistols, knives and grenades. Flight 814 refueled in Northern India
and again in Pakistan before landing in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates,
where the captors released 27 passengers, mostly women and children,
and the body of one Indian 
man,
one of several honeymooners on board. He was killed after he reportedly
disobeyed orders to not look at the hijackers. It was Saturday when
Flight 814 arrived at its current location: Kandahar, Afghanistan. 
release
35 Kashmiri guerrillas, and free a Pakistani cleric named Maulana Masood
Azhar, who's been in an Indian jail since 1994. He was one of the leaders
among a group of militants trying to gain control of Kashmir, a majority
Muslim territory. Much of the area has been under Indian control since
the subcontinent was split into two countries in 1948 at the end of
British rule. In Afghanistan, the militant Muslim Taliban government
has warned the hijackers against further violence. Officials urged Indian
negotiators to resolve the situation quickly. 
OFFICIAL:
(speaking through interpreter) In our discussions with the hijackers
about the situation, they promised not to continue the killing, and
finally they cooled down. But we repeat our demand to the Indian government
to expedite the process and don't waste time, because time is running
out. 
JASWANT
SINGH: FOREIGN MINISTER, INDIA: Taliban have continued to warn hijackers
that any injury to any of the hostages will result in an immediate overtaking
of the aircraft by Taliban forces.
issues in the region; Mansoor Ijaz, born in Pakistan and trained as
a nuclear physicist, is now an investment banker -- he's also a frequent
op/ed columnist for international publications and is now an American
citizen; and Pranay Gupte, editor and publisher of the Earth Times
and a columnist for Newsweek International -- born in India,
he's now a U.S. citizen as well.Welcome, gentlemen. Mansoor Ijaz, tell
us more about who these hijackers are and what they're really after.
these
hijackers represent today a much more virile and radical strain of the
Islamic movements that have been resisting the Indian occupation in
Muslim majority Kashmir. So in that sense I think these people are uncontrollable.
I think they're people who don't have an agenda that is any more than
trying to ensure that the world know that Islamic radicalism is here
to stay and to send a message to the Indian government that if you think
you can hold on to Kashmir and not negotiate a proper solution to its
long-term stability that these terrorist acts will continue over and
over and over again.
suggest
they are young. These hijackers clearly have a sensibility that flows
out of frustration, frustration that in their controls Kashmir that
the matter has not been resolved, and, after all, drawing attention
to their cause is something that terrorists love to be able to do, particularly
as the new year is about to dawn. New cycles are generally on the low
side and the quiet side. What better way than to see the attention to
themselves?
interviewed
-- and I'd put that in quotes -- the father and other relatives of one
of the hijackers, and in present day Pakistan those interviews can be
rather vigorous. And it may well be that the Pakistanis are even working
with the Indians to help determine who the hijackers are and to see
if it is a family operation, as opposed to an organizational hijacking.
First
it did not negotiate, then under threats, really, from the hijackers
that they were going to start killing people, it began negotiating.
How do you read that? 
that
it's turned enemies into allies and allies into enemies. The Indian
government was hostile to the Taliban and now they're working with the
Taliban. Whereas the Taliban head was alleged to have been supporting
such groups as this and now they're very much embarrassed by these people
turning up on their doorstep and first they tried to get rid of them,
push them out, then they offered their cooperation to not only the Indians
but other foreign governments in dealing with the hijackers. So it's
been a transforming experience in terms of everybody's relationship
with Afghanistan. 
been
a flashpoint between India and Pakistan, and for five decades the United
States and other western powers have focused on trying to bring peace
and security to the region above even economic development, which is
probably the next most important thing that needs to happen. All of
a sudden since the nuclear tests last year you've seen a change in that
strategy from peace and security above economic development to economic
development above peace and security. That has led to the following
situation: India has now made the assumption that economic development
means they will be developed and Pakistan will not because Pakistan's
economy is virtually bankrupt anyway, and on top of that, they've made
the assumption that the Indians will now be able to develop the economy
in such a way that they won't have to pay attention to Kashmir, they
can just let it go. The terrorists are basically saying right now that
it is absolutely critical for India to understand that we will not allow
you to develop economically with the help of the United States or any
other western country until you have resolved this problem to the satisfaction
of everybody involved. 
United
States has not been involved in attempting to deal with regional peace
and security issues. There's been no American initiative on Kashmir
since 1962. We were briefly involved in 1990, again in 1998, and now
we may be involved behind the scenes. I think it's time for a larger
American initiative in the region, not specifically to deal with Kashmir,
because that's a very, very difficult problem to solve, but to deal
with the larger question of India-Pakistan relations. They're two nuclear
weapon states, India's the world's largest democracy. It can't manage
its relationship with Pakistan and the Pakistanis, I think, have outrageous
and wrong views of what they can get out of Kashmir.
still
left with 160 plus people on a tarmac. I mean, do you see a military
operation resolving this? What do you see?