Why US wouldn’t Act

A report in The New York Times says that electronic surveillance and trusted informants have provided the US with proof of direct ISI support for the Taliban’s widening campaign in Afghanistan, while American officials believe that the Pakistani spy agency also shares intelligence with Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT), the terror outfit responsible for the 26/11 Mumbai carnage. The irony of the situation is that while the US fights the ‘‘war on terror’’ on the Afghan front against the Al-Qaeda-Taliban formation and is backed by the Pakistan Army, the ISI itself — the quintessential part of the Pakistan Army — is supporting the jihadis who live in a medieval era and are against the norms of modern civilization. The US cannot do anything against the ISI’s machinations and patronage of terrorism even after being provided with sufficient proof as to its direct involvement in such sinister operations. But why? This is because the past cannot be disowned: during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the US had itself used the ISI to finance the Afghan mujahideen against the Soviet forces to win the Cold War; without the ISI’s support the US would not have driven away the Soviet forces. Therefore, the ISI is free to support the Taliban — and its jihadi siblings. So why should the US act when the ISI promotes LeT’s jihadi ventures against India? THE SENTINEL