Zahid Hussain, Mathew Rosenberg and Peter Wonacott have reported in the Wall Street Journal today that Pakistan’s own investigation has established “substantive links” between the 10 Mumbai terror attackers and the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT).
Zarar Shah, a top LeT commander arrested by Pakistan, has reportedly confessed to his group’s involvement in the attack. “He is singing,” is how a security official quoted by the WSJ describes Shah’s confession. (I love taking such remarks literally—imagine Zarar Shah actually singing his confession in a police lock-up with his interrogators providing the chorus. But I digress.)
Shah’s confession seems to bear out broadly everything that Indian interrogators have attributed to the lone surviving attacker Mohammad Ajmal Amir Qasab’s account of the events.
Is it still possible for Pakistan to officially deny that the attack was planned and mounted from Pakistani soil and by a Pakistani group? It is always possible to deny anything even in the face of undeniable evidence. In the past couple of days there has been a clearly perceptible shift in Pakistan’s approach to the crisis. From complete stonewalling to the disclosure about Shah’s confession represents an extraordinary turnaround. I am curious to know what has caused this shift and, more crucially, for what tactical purpose the interregnum was used behind the curtain of denials.
It is a highly encouraging sign that bits and pieces are coming out in the media suggesting that not everyone in the Pakistani establishment is afflicted by denial. The Mumbai attacks offered Pakistan a great opportunity to purge its security and intelligence institutions of those sympathetic to the cause espoused by the jihadists. The only way an enduring democratic society in Pakistan can strike roots is by sharply demarcating boundaries between the civil society and the military with a clear definition of who is subservient to whom.