Narendra Modi’s fictitious narrative of victimhood and relentless campaign to tarnish Pakistan’s image through baseless accusations of terrorism has been a focal point of India’s foreign policy. Indian Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar had tried hard to demonize Pakistan’s position on both national and international platforms by labeling it directly and indirectly as a terrorist state, such as when he used the words “epicenter of terrorism” and called its foreign minister a “spokesperson for the terror Industry.”
At the 2024 SCO Summit in Islamabad, he addressed issues such as terrorism, extremism, and separatism as evils hindering regional connectivity while also expressing dissatisfaction over the “absence of good neighborliness.” However, Indian history is rife with brazen involvement in illegal and aggressive activities to sponsor terrorism and armed separatist groups on surrounding countries’ soils to fuel insurgencies. Let’s delve deeper and reveal its duplicity in claiming to live peacefully with neighboring countries.
Indian Involvement in Other Countries
China
After a humiliating defeat at the hands of the Chinese army in the 1962 war, India created “Establishment-22, also known as Special Frontier Force (SFF)”—a covert group of Tibetan refugees in India for “deep-penetration terror operations” in China. Mostly refugees were from Khampas, the Kham region of Tibet, and trained under the joint leadership of Indian commandos and the CIA at a lesser-known location of Chakrata in Uttarakhand.
The primary function of the SFF was to conduct clandestine operations, guerrilla warfare, and carry out terrorist activities in China. In recent clashes against China, such as at Pangong Tso, Ladakh in 2020, and Doklam in 2017, the SFF also fought on the Indian side. Apart from China, India has also used them in numerous internal and external operations. For example, “Operation Eagle” (Chittagong Hills in the 1971 Indo-Pak War), “Operation Bluestar” (Golden Temple, 1984), “Operation Meghdoot” (Siachen Glacier, 1984), and “Operation Vijay” (Kargil, 1999).
Due to the secrecy of this covert group, very little information about it and its activities is available. According to an Indian retired lieutenant general, “We know about them… But their existence has been off the books. The few of us who get to serve with them are under oath.
Bangladesh
Many know about the Mukti Bahini, insurgents in East Pakistan, but few have knowledge of the Shanti Bahini, separatist fighters in Bangladesh. Most of the rebels of the Shanti Bahini, formed in 1972, were Buddhists from the Chakma and other tribes in the Chittagong Hills. They were trained and armed by the Indian army at the same place, Agartala, to create an autonomous state in Bangladesh.
In a New York Times interview in 1986, an Indian senior security official said:
“The Government of India had been helping them (Shanti Bahini) secretly for over a decade, and these rebel fighters had stayed along the border near camps of Indian paramilitary forces.”
Subir Bhaumik, a senior researcher and journalist, in his book Troubled Periphery: Crisis of India’s Northeast revealed:
“Shanti Bahini got an order to prepare for a big and surprise attack on Bangladesh, and they were also promised the support of 15000 guerrillas from India.”
This plan of RAW to intensify the guerrilla war in the Chittagong Hill Tracts was put on hold due to Indira Gandhi’s election defeat in 1977. According to Bhaumik, the support for Shanti Bahini was resumed when Mrs. Gandhi regained power. But by then, the Bahini was embroiled in a destructive intra-group war. India’s support for Tibetan rebel groups was not very private, while its support for the Shanti Bahini was very secretive. This strategy, known as deniability, allows India to distance itself from Bangladeshi insurgents if they are caught, claiming there was no Indian involvement.
Myanmar
Indian intelligence agencies have also been involved in providing weapons and military training to insurgent groups in Myanmar beyond the gaze of the Myanmar military intelligence. India’s main motive was to spy on China by using Myanmar’s territory, particularly Kachin, which shares a border with China, and Rakhine, a coastal state, to monitor Chinese naval activities. In return, India provided weapons, financial support, and safe havens to separatist fighters fighting against Myanmar’s central authority.
From 1988 to 1994, the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), Myanmar’s most powerful rebel group fighting for a sovereign Kachin state, developed close ties with RAW. The KIO’s chief, Maran Brang Seng, met with Indian officials multiple times in Delhi. In 1990, this group of separatist fighters, KIO, established a representative office in New Delhi. India provided the KIO with logistical support, financial aid, and weapons. Notably, in January 1991 in New Delhi, KIO’s chief met with Indian Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar. In this 30-minute-long meeting, the Indian prime minister promised to supply “more arms” to the KIO.
In addition to aiding the KIO, Indian intelligence agencies also supported rebels (the Arakan Army) in Rakhine, a region on Myanmar’s western coast. In 1991, Indian secret agencies established good relations with the leader of the Arakan Army, Khaing Raza, who was fighting for the independence of the Rakhine region. These relations beefed up in 1994 and Khaing Raza was introduced by RAW officers to various Indian military commanders and intelligence officials.
In 1997, the Indian military even permitted these rebels to set up a base on Landfall Island, part of the Andaman Islands chain, around 300 kilometers from Myanmar’s coast. However, in 1998, upon their arrival on the island, Indian military forces killed the leaders of the rebel group under “Operation Leech,” labeling them as “gunrunners” who fueled insurgency in India. Khaing Raza was among those killed. According to Kyaw Khaing, one of the former founding commanders of the Arakan Army, “The leaders aimed to fight the military regime in Myanmar, and went to Landfall Island trusting India’s promise that it would allow them a safe haven there.”
As a result of Operation Leech, India was accused of violating human rights. In her book Rogue Agent, renowned Indian human rights lawyer Nandita Haksar describes the incident as “infamous.” B.B. Nandi, a former Indian intelligence officer who worked in Burma, said, “These people were not prejudicial to the security interests of India. But they were butchered and imprisoned.”
Pakistan
India’s efforts to destabilize Pakistan by fomenting insurgencies and terrorist activities are fully transparent. Examples include constant threats to CPEC, the attack on the Pakistan Stock Exchange, the blast in Lahore’s Johar Town, funding the TTP and BLA, training and arming the Mukti Bahini, terrorist operations and targeted killings in Pakistan by “CIT-X” and “CIT-J” in the mid-1980s, the network operated by Indian spy Kulbhushan Yadev for terrorist activities, etc. These examples are irrefutable shreds of evidence of India’s attempts to destabilize Pakistan.
Sri Lanka
India’s support for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)—a group of separatist fighters during Sri Lanka’s ethnic conflict—reveals its double-dealing nature. India played a crucial role on both occasions, i.e., bringing the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government to the table for talks to resolve the conflict and also fueling the civil war in Sri Lanka. These LTTE rebels not only received weapons and funding from New Delhi but also had covert camps in Tamil Nadu, an Indian coastal state.
According to the LTTE leader, Kumaran Pathmanathan, “LTTE also received aid from RAW during Indira’s time. And Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, supplied the terror outfit with money.” RAW’s support for Tamil militants was not only claimed by LTTE leaders and Sri Lankan officials but also confirmed by Indian officials. JN Dixit, the Indian Ambassador to Sri Lanka at the time of the civil war, said, “These (Tamil armed groups) are boys who were trained by us (Indian intelligence agencies) from 1977. These are our boys; we know them very well, and they owe so much to us.”
Conclusion
Owing to its subversive behavior, India is experiencing strained relations with all its neighboring countries. It is also facing serious allegations from both Canada and the USA over state-sponsored targeted killings in North America. Additionally, the alleged Indian involvement in a failed attempt to oust Maldivian President Muizzu through illegal means has grabbed headlines. Picture this: behind India’s Nehruvian façade of “peaceful coexistence” lies a paradoxical tale of regional dominance. In spite of India’s efforts to project itself as a symbol of regional harmony, its subversive actions should be meticulously scrutinized by both regional and global powers to expose the stark realities behind the façade.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please check the Submissions page.
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
Saqlain Haider Cheema is a columnist with a keen interest in global and political affairs