Order Code RL32259
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Terrorism in South Asia
March 8, 2004
K. Alan Kronstadt, Coordinator
Analyst in Asian Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Bruce Vaughn
Analyst in Southeast and South Asian Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

Terrorism in South Asia
Summary
This report reviews the terrorist environment in South Asia, concentrating on
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India, but also including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and
Nepal. With U.S.-led counterterrorism efforts focused especially on Southwest Asia,
the existence of international terrorist groups and their supporters in South Asia is
identified as a threat to both regional stability and to the attainment of central U.S.
policy goals. Al Qaeda forces that fled from Afghanistan with their Taliban
supporters remain active on Pakistani territory, and Al Qaeda is believed to have
links with indigenous Pakistani terrorist groups that have conducted anti-Western
attacks and that support separatist militancy in Indian Kashmir. A significant portion
of Pakistan’s ethnic Pashtun population is reported to sympathize with the Taliban
and even Al Qaeda. The United States maintains close counterterrorism cooperation
with Pakistan aimed especially at bolstering security and stability in neighboring
Afghanistan. In the latter half of 2003, the Islamabad government began limited
military operations in the traditionally autonomous tribal areas of western Pakistan.
There are indications that such operations are intensifying in coordination with U.S.
and Afghan forces just across the international frontier.
The relationships between Al Qaeda, the Taliban, indigenous Pakistani terrorist
groups, and some elements of Pakistan’s political-military structure are complex and
murky, but may represent a serious threat to the attainment of key U.S. policy goals.
A pair of December 2003 attempts to assassinate Pakistan’s President Musharraf
reportedly were linked to both Al Qaeda and a Pakistan-based terrorist group. There
also are indications that elements of Pakistan’s intelligence service and Pakistani
Islamist political parties may have provided assistance to U.S.-designated Foreign
Terrorist Organizations.
It is thought that some Al Qaeda elements fled to Bangladesh. The Liberation
Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) of Sri Lanka have been designated as a Foreign
Terrorist Organization under U.S. law, while Harakat ul-Jihad-I-Islami/Bangladesh,
and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)/ United Peoples Front, have been listed
as Other Terrorist Groups by the State Department. This report will be updated
periodically.

---

Contents
Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Pakistani Extremism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The Al Qaeda-Taliban Nexus
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Indigenous Pakistani Terrorist Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Madrassas and Pakistan Islamists
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Pakistan-U.S. Counterterrorism Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Obstacles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Military Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Terrorism in Kashmir and India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Kashmiri Separatism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Indigenous Indian-Designated Terrorist Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
India-U.S. Counterterrorism Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Other South Asian Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Bangladesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Nepal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Sri Lanka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

---

Terrorism in South Asia
This report reviews the terrorist environment in South Asia, concentrating on
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India, but also including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and
Nepal.1 In the wake of the September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States,
President Bush launched major military operations in South and Southwest Asia as
part of the global U.S.-led anti-terrorism effort. Operation Enduring Freedom in
Afghanistan has seen substantive success with the vital assistance of neighboring
Pakistan. Yet the United States remains concerned that members of Al Qaeda and
its Taliban supporters have found haven and been able at least partially to regroup in
Pakistani cities and in the rugged Pakistan-Afghanistan border region. This area is
inhabited by ethnic Pashtuns who express solidarity with anti-U.S. forces. Al Qaeda
also reportedly has made alliances with indigenous Pakistani terrorist groups that
have been implicated in both anti-Western attacks in Pakistan and terrorism in Indian
Kashmir. They also seek to oust the government of President Gen. Pervez Musharraf
and have been named as being behind two December 2003 assassination attempts
that were only narrowly survived by the Pakistani leader. Along with these concerns,
the United States expresses an interest in the cessation of “cross-border infiltration”
by separatist militants based in Pakistani-controlled areas who traverse the Kashmiri
Line of Control (LOC) to engage in terrorist activities both in Indian Kashmir and in
Indian cities.2 In March 2004, the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia,
Christina Rocca, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the top U.S.
policy goal in the region is “combating terror and the conditions that breed terror in
the frontline states of Afghanistan and Pakistan.”3
Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Pakistani Extremism
The Al Qaeda-Taliban Nexus
Among the central goals of Operation Enduring Freedom were the destruction
of terrorist training camps and infrastructure within Afghanistan, the capture of Al
1 “Terrorism” here is understood as being “premeditated, politically motivated violence
perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents,
usually intended to influence an audience” (see Title 22 of the United States Code, Section
2656f(d)).
2 See also CRS Report RL30588, Afghanistan: Current Issues and U.S. Policy, by Kenneth
Katzman; and CRS Report RL31624, Pakistan-U.S. Anti-Terrorism Cooperation, by K.
Alan Kronstadt.
3 “State’s Rocca Outlines Assistance Plans for South Asia,” U.S. Department of State
Washington File, March 2, 2004.

---

CRS-2
Qaeda and Taliban leaders, and the cessation of terrorist activities in Afghanistan.4
Most, but not all, of these goals have been achieved. However, since the Taliban’s
ouster from power in Kabul and subsequent retreat to the rugged mountain region
near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, what the U.S. military calls its “remnant
forces” have been able to regroup and to conduct “hit-and-run” attacks against U.S.-
led coalition units, often in tandem with suspected Al Qaeda fugitives. These forces
are then able to find haven on the Pakistani side of the border.5 Al Qaeda founder
Osama bin Laden, his associate, Egyptian Islamic radical leader Ayman al-Zawahiri,
and Taliban chief Mohammed Omar may themselves be in a remote area of Pakistan
near Afghanistan. The frequency of attacks on coalition forces in southern and
eastern Afghanistan increased throughout 2003 and, in October, U.S. Special Envoy
and current Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad warned that resurgent
Taliban and Al Qaeda forces present a serious threat to Afghan reconstruction
efforts.6 A major spike in Afghan opium production in 2003 spurred acute concern
that Afghanistan may soon become a “narco-state,” and that terrorist groups and their
supporters in both Afghanistan and Pakistan may reap huge profits from the
processing and trafficking of heroin.7
The United States is concerned by indications of links between Al Qaeda and
Pakistani intelligence agents, weapons experts, and militant leaders. During the time
that Islamabad was actively supporting the Afghan Taliban regime it had helped to
create, Pakistan’s powerful Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency is believed to
have had direct contacts with Al Qaeda figures.8 Sympathetic ISI officials may even
4 Al Qaeda members are most readily identified as being Arabs or other non-Afghans who
primarily are fighting an international jihad; Taliban members are ethnic Pashtun Afghans
who primarily are fighting for Islamic rule in Kabul. Al Qaeda is designated as a Foreign
Terrorist Organization under U.S. law; the Taliban are Specially-Designated Global
Terrorists (see the U.S. Treasury Department’s master list at
[http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/eotffc/ofac/sdn/index.html]).
5 Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet, Testimony Before the Senate Select
Intelligence Committee, February 24, 2004. Pakistan’s western regions are populated by
conservative ethnic Pashtuns who share intimate religious and tribal linkages with their
counterparts in Afghanistan and who are seen to sympathize with Taliban and sometimes
Al Qaeda forces while holding vehement anti-Western and anti-American sentiments (see,
for example, Eliza Griswold, “Where the Taliban Roam,” Harper’s, September 2003; Owais
Tohid, “Tribes Inflamed By Qaeda Hunt,” Christian Science Monitor, October 20, 2003;
Iqbal Khattak, “Tribals Warn Pakistan and US Against Military Operation,” Daily Times
(Lahore), February 19, 2004).
6 Carlotta Gall, “Taliban May Be Planning Larger Attacks, U.S. Envoy Says,” New York
Times, October 7, 2003.
7 A. Brownfeld, “Al Qaeda’s Drug-Running Network,” Jane’s Terrorism and Security
Monitor, February 1, 2004; Stephen Graham, “Karzai Seeks Anti-Drugs Aid Amid Fears
Afghanistan Will Become ‘Narco-State,’ Associated Press Newswire, February 9, 2004.
8 James Risen and Judith Miller, “Pakistani Intelligence Had Links to Al Qaeda, U.S.
Officials Say,” New York Times, October 29, 2001. Declassified U.S. Defense Intelligence
Agency documents from October 2001 indicate that the Al Qaeda camp targeted by
American cruise missiles in 1998 was funded and maintained by the ISI, and that Pakistani
(continued...)

---

CRS-3
have provided shelter to Al Qaeda members in both Pakistan and Kashmir.9 Two
senior Pakistani nuclear scientists reportedly met with Osama bin Laden in 2001 to
conduct “long discussions about nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.”10
Moreover, known Islamic extremists with ties to Al Qaeda appear to remain active
on Pakistani territory. For example, longtime Pakistani terrorist chief Fazlur Rehman
Khalil, who co-signed Osama bin Laden’s 1998 edict that declared it a Muslim’s duty
to kill Americans and Jews, lives openly in Rawalpindi, not far from Pakistan’s Army
General Headquarters.11 Khalil is the leader of one of the many Pakistan-based
terrorist groups opposed to both the continued rule of President Musharraf and to
U.S. policy in the region.
Indigenous Pakistani Terrorist Groups
Pakistan is known to be a base for numerous indigenous terrorist organizations.
In January 2002, Pakistan banned five extremist groups, including Lashkar-e-Taiba
(LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP). The United
States designates LeT and JeM as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs); SSP
appears on the State Departments’s list of “other terrorist groups.”12 Following Al
Qaeda’s 2001-2002 expulsion from Afghanistan and ensuing relocation of some core
elements to Pakistani cities such as Karachi and Peshawar, some Al Qaeda activists
are known to have joined forces with indigenous Pakistani Sunni militant groups,
including LeT, JeM, SSP, and Lashkar-i-Jhangvi (LJ), an FTO-designated offshoot
of the SSP that has close ties to Al Qaeda.13 The United Nations lists JeM and LJ as
“entities belonging to or associated with the Al Qaeda organization.”14 Al Qaeda
reportedly was linked to anti-U.S. and anti-Western terrorist attacks in Pakistan
during 2002, although the primary suspects in most attacks were members of
8 (...continued)
agents “encouraged, facilitated and often escorted Arabs from the Middle East into
Afghanistan” (National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book 97, available at
[http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB97/index.htm]).
9 Bob Drogin, et. al., “Al Qaeda Gathering Strength in Pakistan,” Los Angeles Times, June
16, 2002; Philip Smucker, “Al Qaeda Thriving in Kashmir,” Christian Science Monitor, July
2, 2002.
10 Kamran Khan and Molly Moore, “2 Nuclear Experts Briefed Bin Laden, Pakistanis Say,”
Washington Post, December 12, 2001.
11 Paul Watson and Mubashir Zaidi, “Militant Flourishes in Plain Sight,” Los Angeles Times,
January 25, 2004.
12 See CRS Reports RL32223, Foreign Terrorist Organizations, and RL32120, The ‘FTO
List’ and Congress, by Audrey Kurth Cronin.
13 U.S. Department of State, Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002, April 30, 2003; Howard
French, “Officials Warn of Links Between Al Qaeda, Pakistanis,” New York Times, May 29,
2002; Hasan Mansoor, “Karachi Killings Reveal Sectarian-Jihadi Nexus,” Friday Times
(Lahore), October 10, 2003; Kamran Khan and John Lancaster, “Suspect Predicts Attack
on U.S. Forces,” Washington Post, March 7, 2003.
14 See [http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm].

---

CRS-4
indigenous Pakistani groups.15 During 2003, Pakistan’s domestic terrorism mostly
involved Sunni-Shia conflict, and a March 2004 machine gun and bomb attack on a
Shia procession in Quetta killed at least 44 and injured more than 150 others.16 Some
analysts believe that, by redirecting Pakistan’s internal security resources, an increase
in Pakistan’s sectarian violence may ease pressure on Al Qaeda and so allow that
group to operate more freely there.17 There have been past indications of collusion
between some elements of Al Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and influential Pakistanis.
For example, of the three major Al Qaeda figures captured in Pakistan, one (Abu
Zubaydah) was found at a Lashkar-e-Taiba safehouse in Faisalabad, suggesting that
some LeT members have facilitated the movement of Al Qaeda members in
Pakistan.18 Another (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed) was seized at the Rawalpindi home
of a member of the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI), one of Pakistan’s leading religious Islamist
political parties. In fact, at least four top captured Al Qaeda suspects had ties to JI.19
In a landmark January 2002 speech, President Musharraf vowed to end
Pakistan’s use as a base for terrorism, and he criticized religious extremism and
intolerance in the country. In the wake of the speech, about 3,300 extremists were
arrested and detained, though most of these have since been released (including one
man who later tried to assassinate Musharraf).20 Among those released were the
founders of both Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad. Though officially
banned, these groups continued to operate under new names: LeT became Jamaat
al-Dawat; JeM became Khudam-ul Islam.21 In November 2003, just two days after
the U.S. Ambassador expressed particular concern over the continuing activities of
banned organizations, Musharraf moved to arrest members of these groups and
15 Among these incidents was the January 2002 kidnaping and ensuing murder of Wall Street
Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Also occurring in 2002 were a March grenade attack on a
Protestant church in Islamabad that killed five, including a U.S. Embassy employee and her
daughter, likely was the work of LeT; a May car bombing that killed 14 outside a Karachi
hotel, including 11 French defense technicians, was linked to Al Qaeda; and a June car
bombing outside the U.S. consulate in Karachi that killed 12 Pakistani nationals also was
linked to Al Qaeda. There have been arrests and some convictions in each of these cases.
See U.S. Department of State, Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002, April 30, 2003.
16 About three-quarters of Pakistan’s Muslims are Sunnis. Major sectarian violence in 2003
included a July strike on a Quetta mosque that killed more than 50 Shiite worshipers
(blamed on the militant Sunni SSP), and the October assassination of Maulana Azam Tariq,
leader of the SSP and member of the Pakistani parliament, who was gunned down with four
others in Islamabad.
17 “Pakistan: A New Wave of Sunni-Shiite Violence?,” Stratfor.com, October 7, 2003.
18 U.S. Department of State, Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002, April 30, 2003.
19 “Pakistan Asked to Explain Islamic Party Link to Al Qaeda Suspects,” Agence France-
Presse, March 3, 2003.
20 Paul Watson, “A Delicate Balance of Rule for Pakistan’s Musharraf,” Los Angeles Times,
March 5, 2004.
21 Paul Watson, “Revolving Doors for Pakistan’s Militants,” Los Angeles Times, November
17, 2002; “Musharraf Says Heads of Two Extremist Groups Did Nothing Illegal,” Agence
France-Presse, March 2, 2003; “Militant Suspects Freed in Pakistan,” BBC News, January
31, 2003.

---

CRS-5
shutter their offices. Six groups were formally banned, including offshoots of both
the JeM and SSP, and more than 100 offices were raided. Musharraf vowed to
permanently prevent banned groups from resurfacing, and his government moved to
seize their financial assets.22 Some analysts called the efforts cosmetic, ineffective,
and the result of international pressure rather than a genuine recognition of the threat
posed.23
Musharraf’s further efforts to crack down on outlawed groups — along with his
suggestions that Pakistan may soften its long-held Kashmir policies — may have
fueled even greater outrage among radical Islamists already angered by Pakistan’s
September 2001 policy reversal, when Musharraf cut ties with the Afghan Taliban
regime and began facilitating U.S.-led anti-terrorism operations in the region.24 A
December 14, 2003 remote-controlled bombing attempt on Musharraf’s motorcade
and dual suicide car bomb attacks on his convoy 11 days later were blamed mainly
on Jaish-e-Mohammed operatives. Numerous Pakistanis and foreign nationals —
including Afghans, Chechens, and Kashmiris — were arrested in connection with the
attacks, with officials suggesting a possible Al Qaeda link.25 The F.B.I. played a role
in the investigations, and the United States has undertaken to provide improved
training to Musharraf’s bodyguards. Nonetheless, it is considered likely that future
assassination attempts will occur.26
Madrassas and Pakistan Islamists
A notable development in autumn 2003 was the arrest by Pakistani security
forces of 19 Indonesian and Malaysian nationals at a Karachi madrassa (Islamic
school). The men were suspected of running a sleeper cell of the Jemaah Islamiyah
(JI) terrorist network in what would be an indication that JI, a group linked to Al
22 “U.S. Committed to Strong Relationship With Pakistan,” U.S. Department of State
Washington File, November 13, 2003; “Owais Tohid, “Pakistan Tries Again to Shutter
Terror Groups,” Christian Science Monitor, November 26, 2003; Rafaqat Ali, “Musharraf
Vows to Root Out Extremism,” Dawn (Karachi), December 5, 2003; “Pakistan Freezes
Accounts of Three More Banned Islamic Groups,” Associated Press Newswire, December
12, 2003.
23 Husain Haqqani, “Skepticism Over Crackdown,” Nation (Lahore), November 19, 2003;
Najam Sethi, “Writing On the Wall,” Friday Times (Lahore), November 21, 2003.
24 Bryan Bender and Farah Stockman, “Extremist Influence Growing in Pakistan, US
Officials Fear,” Boston Globe, January 11, 2004.
25 Some also suggest a possible ISI role, noting a long history of ties between Pakistan’s
intelligence service and JeM leader Masood Azhar (John Lancaster and Kamran Khan,
“Investigation of Attacks on Musharraf Points to Pakistani Group,” Washington Post,
January 14, 2004).
26 Mubashir Zaidi, “FBI Joins Inquiry Into Blasts Aimed at Pakistani Leader,” Los Angeles
Times, December 27, 2003; Dana Priest, “U.S. Aids Security of Musharraf,” Washington
Post, January 3, 2004; Mazhar Abbas, “Agencies Fear More Suicide Attempts on
Musharraf,” Friday Times (Lahore), February 13, 2004.

---

CRS-6
Qaeda, is operating in Pakistan.27 The Taliban movement itself began among
students attending Pakistani religious schools. Among the 10,000-20,000 madrassas
in Pakistan are some that have been implicated in teaching militant anti-Western,
anti-American, and anti-Hindu values. Many of these madrassas are financed and
operated by Pakistani Islamist political parties such as Jamaat-e-Ulema Islam (JUI,
closely linked to the Taliban), as well as by multiple unknown foreign entities. While
President Musharraf has in the past pledged to crack down on the more extremist
madrassas in his country, there is little concrete evidence that he has done so.28
The Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) — a coalition of six Islamist opposition
parties — holds about 20% of Pakistan’s National Assembly seats, while also
controlling the provincial assembly in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and
leading a coalition in the provincial assembly of Baluchistan. Pakistan’s Islamists
denounce Pakistani military operations in western tribal areas, resist governmental
attempts to reform religious schools that teach militancy, and harshly criticize
Islamabad’s cooperation with the U.S. government and movement toward
rapprochement with India. The leadership of the MMA’s two main constituents —
the Jamaat-i-Islami and the Jamiat-Ulema-Islami-Fazlur, are notable for their virulent
anti-American rhetoric; they have at times called for “jihad” against what they view
as the existential threat to Pakistani sovereignty that alliance with Washington
entails.29 In addition to decrying and seeking to end President Musharraf’s
cooperation with the United States, many also are viewed as opposing the U.S.-
supported Kabul government. In September 2003, Afghan President Karzai called
on Pakistani clerics to stop supporting Taliban members who seek to destabilize
Afghanistan. In November, the Afghan foreign minister complained that Taliban
leaders were operating openly in Quetta and other cities in western Pakistan.
Musharraf has since called on Pakistan’s Muslim clerics to assist in fighting
extremism and improving Pakistan’s image as a moderate and progressive state.30
27 Owais Tohid, “Pakistan Widens Terror Dragnet,” Christian Science Monitor, September
26, 2003.
28 Author interviews with Pakistani government officials and scholars, Islamabad, January
19-23, 2004; “Unfulfilled Promises: Pakistan’s Failure to Tackle Extremism,” International
Crisis Group Report 73, January 16, 2004; Ahmed Rashid, “Afghanistan and Pakistan - Safe
Haven for the Taliban,” Far Eastern Economic Review, October 16, 2003. See also CRS
Report RS21654, Islamic Religious Schools, Madrasas, by Febe Armanios.
29 See “US Trying to Destabilize Pakistan, Iran: MMA,” Dawn (Karachi), November 4,
2003; “MMA Says Check on Seminaries to be Resisted,” Dawn (Karachi), November 11,
2003. JUI leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman reportedly said he considers Americans to be
“criminals” and the Taliban “innocent” (“MMA Opposes Pak-US Military Drive,” News
(Karachi), June 24, 2003).
30 “Karzai Tells Pakistan Clerics - Don’t Back Taliban,” Reuters News, September 12,
2003; Shaun Waterman and Anwar Iqbal, “Taliban Leaders Plotting in Cities,” Washington
Times, November 14, 2003; Rana Qaisar, “Clerics Asked to Help Fight Terror,” Daily Times
(Lahore), February 18, 2004.

---

CRS-7
Pakistan-U.S. Counterterrorism Cooperation
According to the U.S. Departments of State and Defense, Pakistan has afforded
the United States unprecedented levels of cooperation by allowing the U.S. military
to use bases within the country, helping to identify and detain extremists, and
deploying tens of thousands of its own security forces to secure the Pakistan-
Afghanistan border. Top U.S. officials regularly praise Pakistani anti-terrorism
efforts.31 In the spring of 2002, U.S. military and law enforcement personnel
reportedly began engaging in direct, low-profile efforts to assist Pakistani security
forces in tracking and apprehending fugitive Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters on
Pakistani territory. The State Department reports that Islamabad has captured 550
alleged terrorists and their supporters, and has transferred more than 400 of these to
U.S. custody, including several top suspected Al Qaeda leaders.32 Pakistan also ranks
fourth in the world in seizing terrorist assets.33
Obstacles
Despite Pakistan’s “crucial” cooperation, there have been doubts about
Islamabad’s commitment to core U.S. concerns in the vast “lawless zones” of the
Afghan-Pakistani border region where Islamic extremists find shelter.34 Especially
worrisome are indications that members of the Taliban receive logistical and other
support inside Pakistan. Senior U.S. Senators reportedly have voiced such worries,
including concern that elements of Pakistan’s intelligence agencies might be helping
members of the Taliban and perhaps even Al Qaeda.35 In August 2003, at least three
Pakistani army officers, including a lieutenant colonel, were arrested on suspicion of
having ties to Islamic extremists. In late September, Deputy Secretary of State
Armitage was quoted as saying he does “not think that affection for working with us
extends up and down the rank and file of the Pakistani security community.” In
testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Assistant Secretary of
Defense Peter Rodman said, “There are elements in the Pakistani government who
we suspect are sympathetic to the old policy of before 9/11,” adding that there still
31 In January 2004, the Commander of the U.S. Central Command, Gen. Abizaid, said,
“Pakistan has done more for the United States in the direct fight against Al Qaeda than any
other country” (Ron Laurenzo, “Abizaid: Pakistan Best Ally in War on Terror,” Defense
Week, February 2, 2004).
32 Among those captured are Abu Zubaydah (March 2002), believed to be Al Qaeda’s field
commander; Ramzi bin al-Shibh (September 2002), said to be a key figure in the planning
of the September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States; and Khalid Mohammed (March
2003), alleged mastermind of the September 2001 attacks and close associate of Osama bin
Laden.
33 U.S. Department of State, Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002, April 30, 2003.
34 Statement of George Tenet Before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence,
“Worldwide Threats to National Security,” February 6, 2002.
35 James Dao, “Terror Aid From Pakistan Concerns Senators,” New York Times, February
13, 2003. See also Testimony of Timothy Hoyt Before the Joint Hearing of the
Subcommittees on Asia and the Pacific and International Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and
Human Rights, October 29, 2003.

---

CRS-8
exists in northwestern Pakistan a radical Islamic infrastructure that “spews out
fighters that go into Kashmir as well as into Afghanistan.”36 For some time now, the
number of Al Qaeda figures arrested in Pakistan has remained fairly static, causing
some U.S. officials to wonder anew about the extent of Islamabad’s commitment to
this aspect of U.S.-led counterterrorism efforts.37
Military Operations
In an effort to block infiltration along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border,
Islamabad had by the end of 2002 deployed some 70,000 troops to the region. In
April 2003, the United States, Pakistan, and Afghanistan formed a Tripartite
Commission to coordinate their efforts to stabilize the border areas. In June, in what
may have been a response to increased U.S. pressure, Islamabad for the first time sent
its armed forces into the traditionally autonomous western Federally Administered
Tribal Areas (FATA) in search of Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters who have eluded the
U.S.-led campaign in Afghanistan. By September, Islamabad had up to 25,000
troops in the tribal areas, and a major border operation reportedly took place in
coordination with U.S.-led forces on the Afghan side of the border. A firefight in
early October saw Pakistani security forces engage suspected Al Qaeda fugitives in
the South Waziristan district; 8 were killed and another 18 captured.38 Pakistan has
lost about 40 of its own security personnel in gun battles with Al Qaeda and Taliban
fighters. The October operations encouraged U.S. officials, who saw in them a
positive trend in Islamabad’s commitment to tracking and capturing wanted
extremists on Pakistani territory. Still, these officials admitted that the Pakistani
government finds it more difficult politically to pursue Taliban members who enjoy
ethnic and familial ties with Pakistani Pashtuns.39
After the two December 2003 attempts on President Musharraf’s life, the
Pakistan military increased its efforts in the FATA. Many analysts speculated that
the harrowing experiences brought a significant shift in Musharraf’s attitude and
caused him to recognize the dire threat posed by radical groups based in his country.40
By February 2004, Musharraf made his most explicit admission to date that Muslim
militants were crossing from Pakistan into Afghanistan to battle coalition troops
36 Zaffar Abbas, “Pakistan Arrests Army Officers,” BBC News, August 31, 2003;
“Armitage: Some Pakistanis Reluctant to Work With US,” Reuters News, September 30,
2003; “Transcript: Senate Foreign Relations Committee Holds Hearing on Security and
Democracy in Afghanistan,” Federal Documents Clearing House, October 16, 2003.
37 Munir Ahmad, “Pakistan Claims 402 Al Qaeda Arrests,”Associated Press Newswire,
September 10, 2002; author interviews with U.S. officials, Islamabad, January 22-23, 2004.
38 John Lancaster, “Pakistan Touts Control of Border,” Washington Post, September 2,
2003; “Pakistan Army Launches Border Operation,” BBC News, September 4, 2003;
“Pakistan’s Army Kills 12 in Attacks Against Qaeda,” New York Times, October 2, 2003.
39 See the testimony of both William Taylor and Brig. Gen. Gary North in “Transcript:
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Holds Hearing on Security and Democracy in
Afghanistan,” Federal Documents Clearing House, October 16, 2003.
40 David Rhode and Carlotta Gall, “Pakistani Offensive Aims to Drive Out Taliban and Al
Qaeda,” New York Times, February 23, 2004.

---

CRS-9
there. In the same month, the Vice Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff
testified before Congress that the Islamabad government had “taken some initiatives
to increase their military presence on the border, such as manned outposts, regular
patrols, and security barriers,” and the Pakistani Army reportedly was preparing to
launch major operations along the frontier, some in tandem with tribal militias.41
Islamabad’s more energetic operations in the western tribal regions have brought
vocal criticism from Musharraf’s detractors among Islamist groups, many of whom
accuse him of taking orders from the United States.42
The Islamabad government also has made progress in persuading Pashtun tribal
leaders to undertake their own efforts by organizing tribal “lashkars,” or militias, for
the express purpose of detaining — or at least expelling — wanted fugitives.43 After
being presented with a list of several dozen such fugitives, tribal leaders in South
Waziristan formed two lashkars and succeeded in capturing and handing over more
than half by the end of January 2004. In February, dozens of suspected Al Qaeda
sympathizers reportedly were handed over to authorities. Yet political administrators
in the district, impatient with the slow pace of progress, have issued an “ultimatum”
that included threats of steep monetary fines for the entire tribe, as well as for any
individuals who provide shelter to “unwanted foreigners.”44 Some observers worry
that increased government pressure on tribal communities and military operations in
the FATA may create a backlash, sparking unrest and strengthening pro-Al Qaeda
sentiments there.45
In December 2003, nearly one-fifth of the 11,000 American troops still in
Afghanistan were involved in Operation Avalanche, an effort to sweep Taliban forces
41 “Pakistan Says That Afghan Rebels May Be Using Its Soil,” Reuters News, February 12,
2004; Statement of Gen. Peter Pace Before the House Committee on Armed Services,
February 4, 2004; John Lancaster and Kamran Khan, “Pakistan to Step Up border
Operations,” Washington Post, February 23, 2004; Ismail Khan, “Operation in North
Waziristan Planned,” Dawn (Karachi), February 8, 2004; “North Waziristan Militias Will
Hunt Wanted Men,” Daily Times (Lahore), February 12, 2004; “Pakistan Arrests 20 in Hunt
for Bin Laden,” New York Times, February 24, 2004.
42 “Fazl Accuses Govt for Taking Dictation From US for Tribal Operation,” Pakistan Press
International, January 14, 2004; “US Provoking Tribesmen Against Army, Says Qazi,”
Dawn (Karachi), February 24, 2004.
43 There are indications that such progress has come through outright coercion. The top U.S.
commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Barno, said that Pakistani government and military
officials have threatened tribal leaders with “destruction of homes and things of that nature”
unless they cooperate (“U.S. Says Pakistan is Confronting Tribal Leaders,” New York Times,
February 17, 2004).
44 David Rhode and Ismail Khan, “Pakistan Adopting a Tough Old Tactic to Flush Out
Qaeda,” New York Times, January 31, 2004; Ismail Khan, “Operation in S. Waziristan,”
Dawn (Karachi), February 18, 2004; Rasool Wazir, “Tribals Hand Over Qaeda
Sympathizers, Daily Times (Lahore), February24, 2004; Iqbal Khattak, “Army Ready to
Search South Waziristan,” Daily Times (Lahore), February 18, 2004.
45 Iqbal Khattak, “Military Operation in Waziristan May Backfire,” Friday Times (Lahore),
February 20, 2004; Scott Baldauf, “New Thrust in Hunt for bin Laden,” Christian Science
Monitor, March 4, 2004.

---

CRS-10
from the country’s south and east. In 2004, U.S. and Aghan forces appear to be
preparing a major spring 2004 operation in eastern Afghanistan, employing new
tactics and in coordination with Pakistani troops across the international border.46 A
press report in January 2004 suggested that the U.S. military in Afghanistan had
plans for an offensive that would “go into Pakistan with Musharraf’s help” to
neutralize Al Qaeda forces. President Musharraf’s said, “This is not a possibility at
all.” Two days later, the Commander of U.S. Central Command Gen. Abizaid stated
that he had no plans to put U.S. troops in Pakistan against Islamabad’s wishes. A
February report indicated that a coming offensive would involve coordination
between U.S., Afghan, and Pakistani troops who could “cross into the other’s side
if necessary.” U.S. military officials in Kabul say that Pakistan has agreed to allow
“hot pursuit” up to ten kilometers into Pakistani territory, although this is denied by
the Islamabad government.47
The opening months of 2004 have seen increasing indications that both the
United States and Pakistan intend to re-invigorate their efforts to find and capture
those terrorists and their supporters remaining in Pashtun-majority areas of
Afghanistan and Pakistan. Moreover, President Musharraf has taken steps to crack
down on indigenous Pakistani extremist groups. Many of these groups have links not
only to individuals and organizations actively fighting in Afghanistan and Pakistan,
but also with groups that continue to pursue a violent separatist campaign in the
disputed Kashmir region along Pakistan’s northeast frontier. A November 2003
cease-fire agreement between Pakistan and India holds at the time of this writing, and
appears to have contributed to what New Delhi officials acknowledge is a significant
decrease in the number of “terrorist” infiltrations.48 However, separatist militants
vowed in January 2004 to continue their struggle regardless of the status of the
nascent Pakistan-India dialogue.
46 David Sanger and Eric Schmitt, “New U.S. Effort Steps Up Hunt for bin Laden,” New
York Times, February 29, 2004.
47 Christine Spolar, “U.S. Plans AL Qaeda Offensive That Would Reach Inside Pakistan,”
Chicago Tribune, January 27, 2004; Stephan Graham, “U.S. Military ‘Sure’ to Catch Bin
Laden,” Chicago Tribune, January 29, 2004; Amir Rana and Iqbal Khattrak, “Afghan,
Pakistani, US Forces Set for Spring Offensive,” Daily Times (Lahore), February 21, 2004;
author interviews with U.S. military officials, Kabul, January 16, 2004. Pakistan also
denied a February report claiming that the it had agreed to allow U.S. Special Forces
soldiers on its territory in return for a softened U.S. policy toward Pakistan’s apparent role
in nuclear proliferation activities (“Seymour Hersh, “The Deal,” New Yorker, March 8,
2004; “Pakistan Denies US Bin Laden Deal,” BBC News, March 1, 2004).
48 In January 2004, the Indian Defense Minister said that infiltration across the Kashmir
LOC was at an “all-time low” (“No Plans for Ceasefire Against Militants in J&K,” Times
of India (Delhi), January 30, 2004).

---

CRS-11
Terrorism in Kashmir and India
Kashmiri Separatism
Separatist violence in India’s Jammu and Kashmir state has continued unabated
since 1989. New Delhi has long blamed Pakistan-based militant groups for lethal
attacks on Indian civilians, as well as on government security forces, in both Kashmir
and in major Indian cities.49 India holds Pakistan responsible for providing material
support and training facilities to Kashmiri militants. According to the U.S.
government, several anti-India militant groups fighting in Kashmir are based in
Pakistan and are closely linked to Islamist groups there. Many also are said to
maintain ties with international jihadi organizations, including Al Qaeda:
! Harakat ul-Mujahideen (an FTO-designate), based in Muzaffarabad
(Azad Kashmir) and Rawalpindi, is aligned with the Jamiat-i Ulema-
i Islam Fazlur Rehman party (JUI-F), itself a main constituent of the
MMA Islamist coalition in Pakistan’s National Assembly;
! Hizbul Mujahideen (on the State Department’s list of “other terrorist
groups”), believed to have bases in Pakistan, is the militant wing of
Pakistan’s largest Islamic political party and leading MMA member,
the Jamaat-i-Islami;
! Jaish-e-Mohammed (an FTO-designate), based in both Peshawar and
Muzaffarabad, also is aligned with JUI-F; and
! Lashkar-e-Taiba (an FTO-designate), based in Muzaffarabad and
near Lahore, is the armed wing of a Pakistan-based, anti-U.S. Sunni
religious organization formed in 1989.50
JeM claimed responsibility for an October 2001 suicide bomb attack on the Jammu
and Kashmir state assembly building in Srinagar that killed 31 (they later denied the
claim). In December 2001, the United States designated both LeT and JeM as
49 Grenade and bomb attacks against civilians have been a regular occurrence in India and
Indian Kashmir for many years. Among the notable terrorist incidents in recent times were
a May 2002 attack on an Indian army base in Kaluchak, Kashmir that killed 37, many of
them women and children (New Delhi identified the attackers as Pakistani nationals); a July
2002 attack on a Jammu village that killed 27; an August 2002 grenade attack in Kashmir
that killed nine Hindu pilgrims and injured 32 others; a September 2002 attack on a Gujarat
mosque that left 32 dead; a March 2003 massacre of 24 Hindu villagers in Nadimarg,
Jammu; a July 2003 attack on a Jammu village that killed seven and injured more than 20;
a July 2003 bus bombing in a Bombay suburb that left four dead and 42 injured; and a pair
of August 2003 car bombings in a crowded Bombay district that killed 52 and injured some
150 more. Indian authorities linked each of these attacks to the LeT, although the last may
have been planned by indigenous elements (John Lancaster, “India Shocked by Bombay
Bombings, and Suspects,” Washington Post, September 12, 2003).
50 U.S. Department of State, Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002, April 30, 2003. Among the
State Department’s “other terrorist groups” active in Kashmir are the Al Badhr Mujahideen,
the Harakat ul-Jihad-e-Islami, and the Jamiat ul-Mujahideen. All are said to have bases in
Pakistan, and all are designated by the Indian government as being terrorist organizations
(Indian Ministry of Home Affairs, “The Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002,” available at
[http://mha.nic.in/poto-02.htm#schdule]).

---

CRS-12
Foreign Terrorist Organizations shortly after they were publically implicated by New
Delhi for an attack on the Indian Parliament complex that killed nine and injured 18.
This assault spurred India to fully mobilize its military along the India-Pakistan
frontier. An ensuing 10-month-long standoff in 2002 involved one million Indian
and Pakistani soldiers and was viewed as the closest the two countries had come to
full-scale war since 1971, causing the U.S. government to become “deeply concerned
... that a conventional war ... could escalate into a nuclear confrontation.”51
Pakistan’s powerful and largely autonomous ISI is widely believed to have
provided significant support for militant Kashmiri separatists over the past decade
in what is perceived as a proxy war against India.52 In March 2003, the chief of
India’s Defense Intelligence Agency reported providing the United States with “solid
documentary proof” that 70 Islamic militant camps are operating in Pakistani
Kashmir. In May, the Indian Defense Minister claimed that about 3,000 “terrorists”
were being trained in camps on the Pakistani side of the LOC. Some Indian officials
have suggested that Al Qaeda may be active in Kashmir.53 Deputy Secretary of State
Armitage reportedly received a June 2002 pledge from Pakistani President
Musharraf that all “cross-border terrorism” would cease, followed by a May 2003
pledge that any terrorist training camps in Pakistani-controlled areas would be closed.
Yet, in September 2003, Indian PM Vajpayee reportedly told President Bush that
continued cross-border terrorism from Pakistan was making it difficult for India to
maintain its peace initiative, and a series of bloody attacks seemed to indicate that
infiltration rates were on the rise.54
President Musharraf adamantly insists that his government is doing all it can to
stem infiltration at the LOC and calls for a joint Pakistan-India monitoring effort
51 Statement of Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet Before the Senate Armed
Services Committee, “Worldwide Threat: Converging Dangers in a Post-9/11 World,”
March 19, 2002.
52 “Although Pakistan did not begin the [1989] uprising in Kashmir, the temptation to fan
the flames was too great for Islamabad to resist. Using guerrilla warfare expertise gained
during the Afghan war, Pakistan’s ISI began to provide active backing for Kashmiri Muslim
insurgents” Dennis Kux, The United States and Pakistan 1947-2000: Disenchanted Allies
(Washington: Woodrow Wilson Center Press), 2001, p. 305. Many Indian analysts
emphasize evidence of a direct link between Pakistan-sponsored militancy in Kashmir and
the wider assortment of radical Islamic groups active in Pakistan after 2001. One observer
has gone so far as to call Lashkar-e-Taiba a “wholly owned subsidiary of the ISI,” although
others have doubts (Indrani Bagchi, “Beyond Control,” India Today (New Delhi), December
8, 2003).
53 “India Says It Has Given Proof of 70 Islamic Militant Camps in Pakistan-Controlled
Kashmir,” Associated Press Newswires, March 14, 2003; “3,000 ‘Terrorists’ Being Trained
in Pakistani Kashmir: India,” Agence France Presse, July 30, 2003. In October 2003, the
Indian Chief of Army Staff raised the possibility of an Al Qaeda presence, as “most of the
terrorists killed in [Jammu and Kashmir] are foreign nationals these days” (“Al Qaeda
Presence Not Ruled Out in J&K,” Hindu (Madras), October 12, 2003).
54 Chidanand Rajghatta, “Cross-Border Terror Continues, Vajpayee Tells Bush,” Times of
India (Delhi), September 25, 2003; Scott Baldauf, “Insurgents Push Into Kashmir,”
Christian Science Monitor, October 7, 2003.

---

CRS-13
there. Positive signs have come with a November 2003 cease-fire agreement
between Pakistan and India along the entire LOC and their shared international
border (holding at the time of this writing) and a January 2004 pledge by Musharraf
reassuring the Indian Prime Minister that no territory under Pakistan’s control could
be used to support terrorism. Ensuing statements from Indian government officials
confirmed that infiltration rates were down significantly.55
The United States signaled increased pressure on Islamabad in October 2003
when the Treasury Department designated the Pakistan-based Al Akhtar Trust as a
terrorist support organization under Executive Order 13224. Al Akhtar is said to be
carrying on support for Al Qaeda and Taliban terrorist activities funded by the
previously-designated Al Rashid Trust. The United States also that month identified
Indian crime figure Dawood Ibrahim as a “global terrorist” with links to both Al
Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba. Ibrahim, wanted by the Indian government for 1993
Bombay bombings that killed and injured thousands, is believed to be in Pakistan.56
These moves by the U.S. government were welcomed in New Delhi, where officials
continuously are urging greater U.S. attention to anti-India terrorism emanating from
Pakistan.
Indigenous Indian-Designated Terrorist Groups
The United States does not designate as terrorist organizations those groups that
continue violent separatist struggles in India’s northeastern states. Some of the
groups have, however, been implicated in lethal attacks on civilians and have been
designated as terrorist groups by New Delhi under the 2002 Prevention of Terrorism
Act.57 Among the dozens of insurgent groups active in the northeast are:
! the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB);
! the National Liberation Front of Tripura;
! the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA); and
! the United National Liberation Front (seeking an independent
Manipur)
The Indian government has at times blamed Bangladesh, Burma, Nepal, and Bhutan
for “sheltering” one or more of these groups beyond the reach of Indian security
forces, and accuses Pakistan’s intelligence agency of training members and providing
them with material support. In December 2003, after considerable prodding by New
Delhi, Bhutan launched military operations against NDFB and ULFA rebels based
in border areas near India’s Assam state. The leader and founder of the ULFA was
captured and, by February 2004, India’s Army Chief declared that nearly 1,000
55 “India and Pakistan Set Talks Date,” BBC News, January 27, 2004.
56 “U.S. Designates Al Akhtar,” U.S. Treasury Department Press Release, October 14, 2003;
“U.S. Designates Dawood Ibrahim,” U.S. Treasury Department Press Release, October 16,
2003.
57 Indian Ministry of Home Affairs, “The Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002,” available at
[http://mha.nic.in/poto-02.htm#schdule].

---

CRS-14
militants in Bhutan had been “neutralized” — killed or captured. Both Burma and
Bangladesh may move to increase pressure on Indian rebels based on their territory.58
Also operating in India are Naxalites — communist insurgents engaged in
violent struggle on behalf of landless laborers and tribals. These groups, most active
in inland areas of east-central India, claim to be battling oppression and exploitation
in order to create a classless society. Their opponents call them terrorists and
extortionists. Most notable are the People’s War Group (PWG), mainly active in the
southern Andhra Pradesh state, and the Maoist Communist Center of West Bengal
and Bihar. Both are designated as terrorist groups; each is believed to have about
2,000 cadres. PWG fighters were behind an October 2003 landmine attack that
nearly killed the Chief Minster of Andhra Pradesh.59
India-U.S. Counterterrorism Cooperation
One facet of the emerging “strategic partnership” between the United States and
India is increased counterterrorism cooperation. The U.S.-India Joint Working
Group on Counterterrorism was established in January 2000 to intensify bilateral
cooperation. In November 2001, President Bush and Indian Prime Minster Vajpayee
agreed that “terrorism threatens not only the security of the United States and India,
but also our efforts to build freedom, democracy and international security and
stability around the world.”60 In May 2002, India and the United States launched the
Indo-US Cyber Security Forum to safeguard critical infrastructures from cyber attack.
The State Department believes that continued engagement with New Delhi will lead
to India’s playing a constructive role in resolving terrorist insurgencies in Nepal and
Sri Lanka. Calling New Delhi a “close ally of the United States in the global war on
terrorism,” the Bush Administration has undertaken to provide India with better
border security systems and training, and better intelligence in an effort to prevent
future terrorist attacks. Moreover, the two countries’ militaries have continued to
work together to enhance their capabilities to combat terrorism and increase
interoperability.61
58 Wasbir Hussain, “Going for the Kill,” Outlook India (Delhi), December 22, 2003; Nirmal
Banerjee, “N-Proliferation From Pak Dangerous: Vij,” Times of India (Delhi), February 5,
2004; “Screws Tighten on Indian Rebels,” BBC News, January 2, 2004.
59 See “The 14 Spokes of a Revolution,” Outlook India (Delhi), October 20, 2003; “India:
Terrorist Groups,” South Asia Terrorism Portal, available at
[http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/terroristoutfits/index.html].
60 “Joint Statement of U.S., India on Terrorism, Bilateral Ties,” U.S. Department of State
Washington File, November 9, 2001.
61 U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Resource Management, “FY2004 Performance Plan,”
March 2003. Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca, “U.S., Regional Governments
Cooperating Against South Asian Terrorism,” U.S. Department of State Washington File,
October 29, 2003; U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Press Secretary, “Joint
Statement on U.S.-India Defense Policy Group,” August 8, 2003.

---

CRS-15
Other South Asian Countries
Bangladesh
There is increasing concern among analysts that Bangladesh might serve as a
base from which both South and Southeast Asian terrorists could regroup. There have
been reports that up to 150 Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters fled to Bangladesh from
Afghanistan in December 2001 aboard the MV Mecca, which reportedly sailed from
Karachi to Chittagong.62 This was evidently not the beginning of Al Qaeda
connections with Bangladesh. Al Qaeda had reportedly recruited Burmese Muslims,
known as the Rohingya, from refugee camps in southeastern Bangladesh to fight in
Afghanistan, Kashmir and Chechnya.63 An Al Qaeda affiliate, Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-
Islami (HuJI) was founded by Osama bin Laden associate Fazlul Rahman.64 HuJI is
also on the State Department’s list of other terrorist organizations.65 Rahman joined
bin Laden’s World Islamic Front for the Jihad Against the Jews and the Crusaders
in 1998.66 It has the objective of establishing Islamic rule in Bangladesh. HuJI has
recruited its members, thought to number from several thousand to15,000, from the
tens of thousands of madrassas in Bangladesh, many of which are led by veterans of
the “jihad” against the Soviets in Afghanistan. The organization is thought to have
at least six camps in Bangladesh as well as ties to militants in Pakistan.67 The
Bangladesh National Party coalition government includes the small Islamic Oikya
Jote party which has connections to HuJI. 68 It was reported that French intelligence
led to the arrest of 16 Bangladeshis on December 4, 2003 in Bolivia for allegedly
planning to hijack a plane to attack the United States. According to reports, they were
later released for lack of evidence. 11 Bangladeshis were arrested in Saudi Arabia on
August 14, 2003 on suspicion of planning a terrorist act.69
62 Alex Perry, “Deadly Cargo, “ Time Asia, October 21, 2003.
63 Zachary Abuza, Militant Islam in Southeast Asia, (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers,
2003), p. 174.
64 Zachary Abuza, Militant Islam in Southeast Asia, (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers,
2003), p. 174.
65 Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002, United States Department of State, Office of the
Coordinator of Counter-terrorism, April, 2003.
66 Rohan Gunaratna, Inside Al Qaeda (New York: Berkeley Books, 2003), p.60.
67 Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2002, United States Department of State, Office of the
Coordinator of Counter-terrorism, April, 2003, p.133-4.
68 Bertil Lintner, “Bangladesh: Breeding Ground for Muslim Terror,” www.atimes.com See
also Bertil Lintner, “Religious Extremism and Nationalism in Bangladesh,” Paper presented
at the Center for Security Studies, Honolulu, August 19, 2002.
69 Anand Kumar, “Bangladesh Weak Link in War on Terror,” The Straits Times, December
16, 2003.

---

CRS-16
The Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) is the largest organization
representing the over 120,000 Rohingyas in Bangladesh.70 The number of Rohingyas
varies depending on the level of pressure they are under in their homelands in Burma.
The Rohingya also speak the same language as Bangladeshis from the Chittagong
area. These “destitute and stateless people” have proved to be a “fertile ground” for
recruitment to various militant Islamist groups.71 The RSO has reportedly received
support from the Jamaat-e-Islami in Bangladesh. Afghan instructors are reported to
have been seen in RSO camps.
There are also reports, based on information derived from the interrogation of
Jemaah Islamiya (JI) leader Hambali, who was arrested in Thailand in August 2003,
that indicate that he had made a decision to shift JI elements to Bangladesh in
response to recent counter-terrorist activity in Southeast Asia. It is also thought that
key JI operative Zulkifi Marzuki may already be in Bangladesh.72 The decision to
move operations west may also be evident in the arrest of 13 Malaysians and six
Indonesians, including Hambali’s brother Rusman Gunawan, in Pakistan in
September 2003. Bangladeshis have been among those arrested in Pakistan on
suspicion of being linked to terrorist organizations.73 Some have speculated that JI
militants, thought to be from Malaysia and Singapore, would not have made it to
southeastern Bangladesh without some degree of tacit agreement from the Directorate
General of Forces Intelligence of Bangladesh which is thought, by some, to have
close ties with ISI.74 It is also thought that Fazlul Rahman’s Rohingya Solidarity
Organization, which is based in southeast Bangladesh, has also established ties with
JI.75 These reports are difficult to confirm.
Despite these apparent developments within Bangladesh, visiting Secretary of
State Colin Powell told his Dhaka audience in June 2003 that “Bangladesh has been
a strong supporter in the war against terrorism because their enlightened policy is that
terrorism ... effects us all.”76 The Government of Bangladesh has also denied that
Bangladesh has become a haven for Islamic militants, such as the Taliban or Al
Qaeda.77 The Bangladesh government has also denied allegations made by Indian
Deputy Prime Minister Advani that Bangladesh had aided Pakistan’s Inter-Services
70 Bertil Lintner, “Bangladesh: Breeding Ground for Muslim Terror,” www.atimes.com
71 Ibid.
72 Kimina Lyall, “Hambali Moved JI Front Line to Bangladesh, Pakistan,” The Australian,
September 27, 2003.
73 “Pakistan Nabs Six More Terror Suspects,” Xinhua News Agency, September 26, 2003.
74 Bertil Lintner, “Bangladesh: Celebrations and Bombs,” www.atimes.com
75 Statement of Dr. Zachary Abuza, House International Relations Subcommittee on
International Terrorism, Non-proliferation and Human Rights, October 29, 2003.
76 Secretary of State Colin Powell, “Press Briefing,” Dhaka, Bangladesh, June 19, 2003.
77 “Bangladesh Calls Time Article on Militant Fictitious,” Associated Press, October 16,
2002.

---

CRS-17
Intelligence and Al Qaeda elements.78 It has also been reported that the Bangladesh
Rifles and police have captured weapons during anti-terrorist operations in the
southeastern border region with Burma in August and September 2003.79 (For further
information on Bangladesh see CRS Report RL20489, Bangladesh: Background and
U.S. Relations, by Bruce Vaughn.)
Nepal
The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)/ United Peoples Front has been
identified as an Other Terrorist Group by the U.S. Department of State.80 On October
31st 2003, the United States Government went further and announced that for national
security reasons it was freezing Maoist terrorist assets. The security situation in
Nepal has deteriorated since the collapse of the cease fire between the Maoists and
the government on August 27, 2003. By some estimates, the numbers of Nepalese
killed since August has risen significantly. This brings the total number killed since
1996 as high as 9,100 by some accounts. It has also been reported that the Maoists’
anti-United States rhetoric has grown and that there is a “potential threat to U.S. staff
and facilities in Nepal, including aid programs.”81 Currently, an estimated 32,000
Maoist fighters are opposed by 120,00 Nepalese soldiers and police.82 India has
acknowledged a link between the Maoists and leftist extremists in India.83
The Maoists’ message frequently calls for the end of “American imperialism”
and for the “dirty Yankee” to “go home.” The Maoists’ Chief Negotiator and
Chairman of the “People’s Government,” Baburam Bhattarai, reportedly threatened
the United States with “another Vietnam” if the United States expands its aid to
Nepal.84 In September, Bhattarai sent a letter to the U.S. Ambassador in Kathmandu
which called on the United States to stop “interfering” in the internal affairs of
Nepal.85 Maoists claimed responsibility for killing two off-duty Nepalese security
guards at the American Embassy in 2002,86 and the Maoists have made it known that
78 “India’s Remarks on Bangladesh Aiding Terrorists Rejected,” Xinhua News Agency,
November 8, 2002.
79 “Bangladesh Country Report,” Economist Intelligence Unit, October, 2003.
80 Patterns of Global Terrorism, United States Department of State, Office of the
Coordinator of Counter-terrorism, April, 2003.
81 “Nepal’s Forgotten Rebellion,” Jane’s Foreign Report, October 23, 2003.
82 Chitra Tiwari, “Violence Soars After Peace Talks Fail,” The Washington Times,
November 1, 2003.
83 “New CRPF Unit to Fight Naxals Likely,” Business Standard, November 5, 2003.
84 Thomas Bell, “Maoist Army Wins Hearts and Minds in West Nepal,” The Globe and
Mail, September 18, 2003.
85 Binaj Gurubacharya, “Maoist Rebel Leader Asks U.S., China, India to Stop Interfering
in Nepal,” Associated Press, September 25, 2003.
86 Binaj Gurubacharya, “Nepal Rebels Threaten U.S.-Funded Groups,” Associated Press,
October, 22, 2003.

---

CRS-18
American trekkers are not welcome in Maoist-controlled Nepal.87 Further, the
Maoists stated on October 22nd that American-backed organizations would be
targeted. Rebel leader Prachanda is reported to have stated that groups funded by
“American imperialists” would not be allowed to operate in Nepal.88
After the cease fire, the Maoists appeared to be shifting from large-scale attacks
on police and army headquarters to adopting new tactics that focused on attacks by
smaller cells conducting widespread assassinations of military, police and party
officials.89 The unpopularity of this policy appears to have led the Maoists to shift
policy again in October and declare that they would not carry out further political
killings or further destroy government infrastructure. Despite this guarantee, attacks
continue. Regional leader of the Maoists, Ram Prasad Lamichhane of the Gandak
region, renounced the party for using terrorism in November 2003.90 The Maoists’
guarantee against terrorist attacks did not extend to projects “run directly by the
United States.”91 The United States Agency for International Development and Save
the Children both operate in Nepal. On October 27, Maoist leader Prachanda stated
that “we will ensure that no American citizens — tourists or officials — except those
who come to the battlefield with the Nepal Army would be caused any harm by the
Maoist militia.”92 (For further details on the Maoists and Nepal see CRS Report
RL31599, Nepal: Background and U.S. Relations, by Bruce Vaughn.)
Sri Lanka
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) of Sri Lanka have been identified
as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States Department of State.93 More
than 64,000 people have died in Sri Lanka’s unresolved civil war over the past 20
years. The LTTE is reportedly responsible for more suicide attacks than any other
terrorist organization worldwide.94 Hopes for a peace agreement with the LTTE, that
would grant the Tamils a degree of autonomy in the northeast, have been put into
doubt by recent moves by President Kumaratunga. Kumaratunga, who was wounded
in a LTTE attack, reportedly believes that her political rival, Prime Minister
Wickremesinghe, has been too ready to make concessions in negotiations with the
LTTE. Their differences highlight debate in Sri Lanka and elsewhere, on the best
87 Amy Waldman, “Chance for Peace Fades in Nepal as Deaths Rise,” The New York Times,
October 13, 2003.
88 Binaj Gurubacharya, “Nepal Rebels Threaten U.S.-Funded Groups,” Associated Press,
October 22, 2003.
89 “Nepal: Back to the Gun,” International Crisis Group, October 22, 2003.
90 “Regional Leader of Nepali Maoists Quits Party,” BBC News, November 10, 2003.
91 Kedar Man Singh, “Nepal’s Maoist Rebels Say They Will Not Carry Out Political
Killings,” Agence France Presse, October 22, 2003.
92 Kedar Man Singh, “Nepal Maoists Say Americans Safe,” Agence France Presse, October
27, 2003.
93 “Foreign Terrorist Organizations,” United States Department of State, Office of Counter-
terrorism, May 23, 2003.
94 “Sri Lanka’s Crisis,” International Herald Tribune, November 13, 2003.

---

CRS-19
means for addressing terrorism and the best mix of a military and political solution.95
The LTTE has thus far stated that they remain committed to the peace process despite
recent political turmoil and infighting inside the Sri Lankan government.96 LTTE
“Supremo” Velupillai Prabakaran has sought guarantee that the government will
honor the cease fire during the period of internal turmoil within the Sri Lankan
government. The Norwegian government has played an active role in trying to broker
a lasting peace between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government. Hardliners,
represented by the President, have accused the Norwegians of exceeding their
authority in trying to broker a peace agreement.97 There is concern among some
analysts that the rivalry between the president and the prime minister could lead the
LTTE to relaunch a terrorist campaign to force the president back to the negotiating
table. Others feel that the LTTE will be hesitant to do so because it would thereby
loose the political legitimacy that they have been gaining.98 The United States has
recognized that the LTTE is engaged in a peace process and holds the hope that the
LTTE will renounce terrorism and cease terrorist acts. Until such time, the United
States Government has stated that it will not remove the LTTE from the Foreign
Terrorist Organization list.99 (For further details on the LTTE and Sri Lanka see CRS
Report RL31707, Sri Lanka: Background and U.S. Relations, by Bruce Vaughn.)
95 Elizabeth Sullivan, “Taming Terror Takes Toughness and Persuasion,.” The Plain Dealer,
November 6, 2003.
96 “Turmoil May Stall Tamil Peace Talks,” Irish Times, November 6, 2003.
97 “Norwegian Envoys Head for Talks with Tamil Tiger Supremo,” Channelnewsasia,
November 13, 2003.
98 “Sri Lanka Likely to Remain a Simmering Political Risk,” Dow Jones International News,
November 9, 2003.
99 Richard Boucher,”Status of LTTE, Press Statement,” Presswire, October 3, 2003.

---

CRS-20
Figure 1. Map of South Asia
Adapted by CRS from Magellan Geographix. Boundary representations not authoritative.

---