New Delhi, May 3 (IANS) The deadly alliance between Hamas and Pakistan-based terror groups Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) could be “very disturbing”, Former US National Security Advisor (NSA) John Bolton told IANS in an exclusive interview on Saturday.
Following the heinous April 22 Pahalgam terror attack in which 26 innocent civilians were gunned down by four terrorists, two of them from Pakistan, the intelligence officials have found several striking similarities between the tactics used by attackers in Kashmir and the brutal murders carried out by the Hamas terrorists in Israel in October 2023. Several reports have cited all four terrorists were trained in PoK where Hamas has set up a training module in camps operated by terror groups.
“Well, if there is evidence to that, I think that would be very disturbing. This is one reason Israel has entered the Gaza Strip after the October 7 attack and is systematically dismantling Hamas. It is clearly a terrorist organisation and any involvement by Hamas or Hezbollah or the Houthis or other terrorist groups from the Middle East, in Kashmir or across the Indian border, is a very serious matter,” Bolton told IANS.
Bolton, who served as the US NSA during the Pulwama attack in February 2019 – also conducted by Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammad resulting in the death of 40 CRPF personnel – also spoke in detail about the need for India and the United States cooperating more closely on counterterrorism issues, calling the bilateral relationship the most important one for Washington in in this century.
Excerpts:
IANS: You were the US NSA when Pulwama happened, now Pahalgam has taken place. Nothing seems to have changed, and India remains a victim of terror acts induced by Pakistan…
John Bolton: This is one of a string of terrorist attacks in Kashmir over recent years. It’s obviously tragic for the victims and for the people in Kashmir generally that can’t live in a stable environment. The tourists are deterred from coming because of terrorist activity like this. I think it’s very important to continue the work to find exactly what the circumstances of this were. But, when I was National Security Advisor, we faced a comparable situation in 2019 with a terrorist attack that emanated from Pakistani soil. We consulted closely with senior government officials. I spoke and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo spoke with Ajit Doval, the Prime Minister’s National Security Advisor. Our view at the time was that if the government felt that they were confident that this had emanated from Pakistani soil and that the government of Pakistan had failed to prevent the attack from taking place or had actually assisted it, that India had every right to act in self-defence. And I think the same principle applies here. I do think it’s in India’s interest to be able to demonstrate, as convincingly as possible, what the circumstances were to justify a military response, if that’s what they decide to do. Nobody wants to see a wider conflict in South Asia but the threat from terrorist attacks is something that nobody has to live with. That’s why, response and self-defence is fully permissible.
IANS: Will India get US assistance in war against terror?
John Bolton: The United States has been dealing with the question of Pakistan for quite some time and in very difficult circumstances, over a long period of time, especially, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. And, we have said in both Republican and Democratic administrations that state sponsorship of terrorism, is not something we can accept. And the terrorist activities that come from Pakistani territory, ultimately are going to find themselves attributed to the government if they don’t take action against them. It’s a difficult process but I am concerned about potential threats from terrorist groups inside Pakistan or across the border in Afghanistan, I’m also concerned about the growing influence that China has over the government of Pakistan, which really is a threat to peace and security in that region. So, there’s a lot at stake here. And I think that the US role should be to cooperate closely with India, as we have in the past on counterterrorism measures and perhaps cooperate more closely. And to continue to talk to the government of Pakistan about why this situation needs to come to an acceptable conclusion.
IANS: Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif admitted recently that the country has been doing “dirty work” for the US for the past three decades…
John Bolton: I don’t know what he means by that. There’s no doubt that, during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, elements of the Pakistani military like ISI contributed support to the Mujahideen fighting against the Soviet Union. Now, if that’s what he means, I don’t consider that illicit activity. I consider it trying to help the Afghan people get their country back. That is about the extent I am aware that we’ve cooperated with Pakistan on issues like that. Quite the contrary, we have worked with them inside the country against terrorist activity, particularly in the Northwest Frontier Province or what used to be the Northwest Frontier Province where terrorists had retreated from Afghanistan to seek refuge across the border. So, it’s not helpful to the government of Pakistan, obviously, when it’s actually admitting to this kind of conduct because that triggers international reactions and why it’s conducive not only to general peace and security in the region but to the safety of Pakistan itself, not to have terrorist groups scattered across the country.
IANS: Isn’t it high time to declare Pakistan as a terrorist State?
John Bolton: I think if their activity warrants it, they should be. The United States has never hesitated to do that. I think in this case, it’s more a question of the Pakistani government not exercising effective control over its own territory, which is a legitimate reason for India, to act militarily if it so decides and also a way to limit possible escalation, because it would not be considered an attack on Pakistan itself, but on lawless groups in, in their territory. I think this terrorist problem is growing more acute. I mean, obviously in the context of Kashmir, it’s been a serious issue since partition. And, other terrorist attacks that India has endured in more recent years, across the country. So, it’s one reason why I think US Indian cooperation on counterterrorism activities has been amply justified in the past and, certainly could benefit from, more extensive cooperation.
IANS: What is your take on India’s decision to put the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance after the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack?
John Bolton: It’s something that, I hope, can be resolved between India and Pakistan. This question of riparian rights in countries that are obviously critically dependent for irrigation and other uses on this water supply. If arrangements that have been worked out in the past are no longer workable, I think everybody is going to suffer, particularly in the downstream areas. So, it should be a message to Pakistan that engaging in activities that threaten their neighbours do lead to consequences.
IANS: Lots of provocative statements being issued by Islamabad, Pakistan’s Railway Minister Hanif Abbasi even said that the country’s nukes are not just for show but “for India”…
John Bolton: I don’t think that’s helpful at all. You know, look, it’s, I don’t think Pakistan really wants a full-scale military confrontation with India. They know it. They know what the relative size of their conventional military is. And, how dangerous it would be to try and increase, to try and escalate the conflict, that could threaten even something even more than that. And obviously, the idea that India and Pakistan would resort to nuclear weapons, perhaps Pakistan first, because of the imbalance in the forces, is something that nobody should be contemplating. So, you know, provocative statements by anybody don’t help to resolve the crisis. Whatever India decides to do in self-defence, I think it’s got a legitimate right to do it. But I hope that both sides here look to address the real problem, which is these terrorist attacks, that India shouldn’t be subjected to and Pakistan shouldn’t allow to happen.
IANS: Pakistan is still giving refuge to terror masterminds, including Maulana Masood Azhar and Hafiz Saeed, and not held accountable for that…
John Bolton: This is the kind of thing we have talked to the Pakistanis about for many, many years. Obviously, the government of India has done the same. And its lack of success is frustrating, obviously. And I think that, that is why India is justified if it can demonstrate the background for this attack in its own self-defence to use military force, it ought to be subject to negotiation between India and Pakistan. I’m not suggesting the US get involved in it. I’m not sure either side would want that to happen in any event. But ultimately, you know, these political questions ought to be addressed by political means and not through terrorism
IANS: Isn’t it high time for Pakistan to return to the grey list of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)?
John Bolton: Steps have been taken. Pakistan’s been on the watch list several times, and it should be subject to continue review. And if there are new facts that warrant stronger steps, the US feels very strongly about state support for terrorism. We’ve been subjected to it ourselves. And, you know, it’s been a consistent position.
IANS: Many say that the US is no longer interested in the region after leaving Afghanistan?
John Bolton: I think we’re still very interested for eminently good reasons. You know, just speaking of Afghanistan, even the Biden administration testified in open Congressional hearings that the return of foreign terrorist fighters to Afghanistan probably meant that ISIS-K by this point could once again mount terrorist attacks around the world. They plan and are based in Afghanistan. So that terrorist threat unfortunately, since our withdrawal has returned. But of course, the bigger problem is China, which I think continues to pursue a policy of hegemony. All along its Indo-Pacific, periphery, and, in the disputed areas, in, all along the line of actual control between China and India, but particularly, up near Kashmir. It’s a very delicate situation that we’ve seen a lot of Chinese provocations over the years. I am, as I said a moment ago, I am very worried about increased Chinese influence on Pakistan. I don’t think that’s in the U.S interest or India’s interest or the interest in peace and security in South Asia. And yet that continues to happen. And having that in mind, as well as dealing with the threat of terrorist attacks, emanating from Pakistani territory are very important priorities for the United States.
IANS: There have been several reports, including by Israelis, of Hamas joining hands with Pakistan-based terror groups in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK)…
John Bolton: If there’s evidence to that, I think that would be very disturbing. I mean, this is one reason Israel has entered the Gaza Strip after the October 7 attack and is systematically dismantling Hamas. It’s clearly a terrorist organisation. And any involvement by Hamas or Hezbollah or the Houthis or other terrorist groups from the Middle East, in Kashmir or across the Indian border is a very serious matter.
IANS: You’ve interacted closely with NSA Doval and seen PM Modi’s strong response to terrorism in 2019. What kind of action are you expecting from them after Pahalgam?
John Bolton: It’ll be a very considered response. I don’t think either man is going to react without carefully thinking through the implications of it and what they think they need to do to act, in its defence. I have confidence, as in the case in 2019, that they will be strongly protective of India and its citizens and all the rights that they have as a sovereign power but will not do so in a way that can’t be fully justified.
IANS: What was your first reaction on removal of Mike Waltz from the post of National Security Advisor?
John Bolton: I think the second Trump term is just about as chaotic as the first was. With Waltz’s removal, he now had five National Security Advisors in less than four and a half years in office. I just will say, for the record, I am his longest-serving National Security Advisor. I may not have that title at the end of the second term, but, you know, it’s untenable to have the kind of job turnover, whether by resignation or otherwise, that we saw during the first term. You can’t have a stable, decision-making team if people keep leaving. So, Waltz will go on, presumably, to be nominated to be Ambassador to the UN, which is another job I’ve had. It’s a nice job. It’s not like being National Security Advisor, but I think he was given a soft landing. I think it’s unsustainable for very long to have Secretary of State Marco Rubio also be National Security Advisor. So, for Trump’s own benefit, he ought to name a, I won’t say a permanent replacement, but a full-time replacement for Waltz as soon as he can.
IANS: Your views on President Trump’s first 100 days in office…
John Bolton: He accomplished some things domestically, but I think internationally there were a series of mistakes and failures. In Ukraine, I think we’re mistaken now to be negotiating with Iran over their nuclear weapons programme which I don’t think the Ayatollahs have any intention whatsoever of giving up. And I think the entire plan of tariffs is going to be very unhelpful and perhaps lead to real economic difficulties for everybody involved in it.
IANS: Despite the tariff issues, do you see India-US ties progressing under PM Modi and President Trump?
John Bolton: Well, I think from the US perspective, the bilateral relationship with India is probably the most important one we have in this century. Given the nature of the threats we face around the world, I think it is an advantage that Trump and Modi have a good personal relationship. And I think there’s a lot of work to do on political issues, on military issues, to try and draw closer together. And that is made more difficult by trade disputes. So, I wouldn’t have launched this trade war with every country in the world. I think the principal bad actor is China. I think we’ve all been harmed by Chinese practices like stealing intellectual property and subsidising their companies in competition with ours and not really opening their domestic market as they’ve promised to do. That’s obviously not the way Trump is proceeding, but that is still the biggest problem.
–IANS
int/as
