lodged in Guantanamo Bay. Sources said that despite India’s growing counter terror and intelligence cooperation with the US in the post 9/ 11 years, the later keep it in the dark on crucial details relating anti India activities in Pakistan.
After Wikileaks latest revelations, It has come to light that the US did not share with New Delhi details and specifics of ISI- run anti- India terror camps on Pakistani soil.
Revelations made by Guantanamo Bay captives, disclosed by Wikileaks, have proved that US was conscious of the location and size of ISI and Pakistan Army run anti- India terror camps.
Documents show that US officials were aware that terrorists in India were guided by Pakistani officials and one Lashkar- e- Tayyeba ( LeT) inmate at Guantanamo Bay may have been an ISI agent. Badr Awad Bakri al- Sumayri, a LeT member of Saudi Arabian origin, the terrorist is recorded as being recruited in his home country to travel to Pakistan for training in an ISI run camp in Muzaffarabad, Pakistan- occupied Kashmir.
Mohammed Anwar, a Pakistani citizen, is believed to be LeT member who is also an ISI agent. Wikileaks also revealed that AL-Qaeda operatives used a New Delhi-based organisation, Tablighi Jamaat, as a cover to obtain travel documents and shelter. As per disclosures of Guantanamo Bay detainees, released by WikiLeaks, the affiliation with the organisation was “identified as an al-Qaeda cover story”.
Furthermore, say the papers, at least three of the hardcore inmates at the prison had stayed at the organisation’s facilities in Delhi and around. But according to reports these information was not shared with India.
The latest revelations has also put a question mark on the enhanced counter terrorism cooperation in the wake of 26/ 11, and Headley role in the attack .
Days before Obama landed in India, Home secretary G. K. Pillai had pointed out that India was “ disappointed” that US never shared Headley’s name with India, something which could have led to his arrest during any of his nine visits to India from 2006 to 2009.
“The issue here is that the name ( of Headley) was not shared with us by the US, either before 26/ 11 or after 26/ 11 when Headley subsequently visited India in March 2009”. “ We are disappointed that Headley’s name was not provided to us. If that had been done, India could have nabbed Headley,” Pillai had then said.