There was a suicide bomber attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul on Monday, July 7, in which 42 persons were killed. The victims included the Indian Defence Attach, Brigadier R Mehta, and Press Attach V.V. Rao. President Hamid Karzai and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (of India) pointed the accusing finger at the ISI of Pakistan. Even The Times of London could not restrain itself from editorially commenting that "rogue elements" of the ISI are un-reconciled to the break with the Taliban. That is utter nonsense. No intelligence organisation acts overseas without explicit government authorisation. There is no possibility that a segment of the military, which is under the discipline of military law, can tolerate let alone operate a "rogue" within. The ISI surely keeps a close eye on the Taliban, as it must. But other intelligence organisations including those from India, USA, UK and Israel maintain contacts with them too. How else can they infiltrate them? How else could they have used them to target the Chinese in Pakistan and Xinjiang? In Pakistan, such comments by the foreign press and politicians are seen to be a proof of the deep hostility of India towards Pakistan and West's habitual support to India's line in politics. The truth is that all the parties in the ruling coalition in Pakistan are seen by the public to be in the "pocket of India" to a varying degree. That does not merely discredit politicians and politics but also democracy. The majority in Pakistan wants their government to play an active role in liberating Afghanistan and Kashmir from US and Indian occupation whereas they see the Zardari-led administration to be visibly appeasing them. Most politicians privately admit that they are unpopular because they fail to espouse the cause dear to the people. But they say that the cost of supporting Afghan and Kashmir liberation struggle is too high. They point towards the ruthless bombing of Taliban ruled Afghanistan and Saddam ruled Iraq for "one time defiance" after a long history of friendly cooperation. The Taliban are the product of the failure of the rulers. The Taliban are willing, and now they have shown to be able, to deliver where the governments failed. That is why the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan are perceived as "illegitimate" even though the elections that led to their formation were largely free and fair. The Taliban is not merely an organisation, it is a phenomenon. All of them are angry - furious with their government who they see as inept, weak and unpatriotic. The disenchanted young have been recruited by the ethnic minorities just as vigorously as by the militants. Musharraf has used both to his advantage to perpetuate himself in power. That is why I have been saying it for nearly two years that if Musharraf remains in power in 2008, the war for the liberation of Afghanistan would be fought on the Pakistani soil. He is still in power and the war has widened. He is still using the same methods that he employed on May 12 last year to prevent Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry from leaving the Karachi airport to address the bar council. After the visit of Richard Boucher, US Under Secretary of State for South Asia, Musharraf felt secure enough to venture out of Islamabad to Karachi. Seven bombs exploded in Pathan colonies in Karachi on the same day as the suicide bomb blast in Kabul. It could not have been a counter attack to the Kabul incident as it occurred later. But it clearly sent a message: India has intelligence assets in Karachi to counter the Taliban. It is more likely to be a response to the suicide bomber, who killed 21 including 11 policemen in Islamabad close to the Lal Masjid. That attack coincided with the large protest meeting to commemorate the first anniversary of the military attack on Lal Masjid. That message was for Federal Interior Adviser Rehman Malik, who is also in charge of the operations against the Pakistani Taliban. It has been just over a hundred days since Asif Zardari became the ruler of Pakistan. These have been the days of "confusion and inaction" while the party hacks continue to hide their panic by display of supreme self-confidence that every thing is going according to plan. Fareed Zakria of the Newsweek has rightly pointed out that in the survival game, it is Musharraf who is calling the tune. Musharraf has made himself so useful to the US and the Zardari camp that they fear replacing him. The result is that everybody is mesmerised into inaction. With everyone frozen or neutralised, it is only the Taliban who are winning. If we look upon the Taliban as a phenomenon rather than an organisation, it is not hard to understand what is happening. The Taliban were the acceptable face of the Afghan mujahideen who triumphed over all the other groups not because they were more numerous, better fighters, or better equipped. They won because this young and idealistic lot was like a breath of fresh air desperately needed by the Afghans tired of the civil war. Their excesses and fanaticism lost them support that ended in their losing the war and power. Like they became the darling of the Pakistanis who had miserably failed to liberate the Kashmiris against much lesser odds, they have been able to regain power in Afghanistan emerging as the core of the effective resistance to American occupation. It is pointless trying to find the group who'd done it? The resistance has done it The bombs in Kabul or Islamabad are the work of Revolutionary Resistance. The bombs in Karachi are the work of Reactionary Resistance. Pakistan is becoming polarised on the same lines as Afghanistan. The War in Afghanistan has spread to Pakistan already. It was the entry of Americans that made the war in Afghanistan so bloody. Americans would not enter Pakistan uninvited. But Musharraf and his cronies are all eager to invite them. If they did invite the Americans, much more blood would be shed. The US stands to gain little from escalating a war it has already lost militarily. It can maintain a presence in Central Asia only if it has Pakistan on its side. America can still salvage its reputation by addressing the aspirations of the majority. That would be bowing to democracy. At the present time, they are bowing to Indian imperialism and to Pakistani dictatorship - two sides of the same coin. The writer is director LISA